Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002.0122.TCSEM.Packeto � 3 0 4 �• FSc 1919 46at is A4 Councilman McNeill Councilman Wyman Councilwoman Fraverd NOTICE OF SPECIAL AND EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL Mayor Morgan Councilwoman Hutcheson Vice Mayor Kavanagh Councilwoman Ralphe WHEN: TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2002 TIME: 5:30 P.M. (The Council will meet in executive session at 5:30 — the special session will start promptly at 6:30 p.m.) WHERE: COMMUNITY CENTER 13001 NORTH LA MONTANA DRIVE RULES FOR ADDRESSING THE COUNCIL — ADOPTED 1118190 1.) It is the Council's desire to hear public comment on agenda items. As it is important to maintain order during the meeting, please adhere to the following rules of order if you wish to speak: 2.) All citizens wishing to speak must first be recognized by the Mayor. 3.) The Mayor will not call for public comment on an item until after a motion has been made and seconded and the Council has had adequate opportunity to discuss the item. 4.) Please stand, approach the microphone and state your name and address after being called on to speak. 5.) All comments must be directed to the Mayor. 6.) TIME LIMIT — THREE (3) MINUTES PER PERSON PER ITEM. 7.) Statements should not be repetitive. 8.) Persons or groups wishing to make longer presentations should see the Town Clerk prior to the meeting. • CALL TO ORDER — Mayor Morgan • ROLL CALL 1.) Pursuant to A.R.S. 38-431.03.A.1; VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION for discussion or consideration of employment, assignment, appointment, promotion, demotion, dismissal, salaries, disciplining or resignation of a public officer, appointee or employee of any public body, except that with the exception of salary discussions, an officer, appointee or employee may demand that such discussion or consideration occur at a public meeting. The public body must provide the officer, appointee or employee with such personal notice of the executive session as is appropriate but not less than 24 hours for the officer, appointee or employee to determine whether such discussion or consideration should occur at a public meeting. The Council will be interviewing an applicant to serve as the interim town manager. 2.) RETURN TO SPECIAL SESSION Town Council Meeting Agenda Regular Session January 22, 2002 • CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE TO THE FLAG — Mayor Morgan • INVOCATION — • ROLL CALL 1.) Consideration of APPOINTING an interim town manager for the remainder of the 2001-2002 fiscal year. 2.) Discussion and possible action on law enforcement options including the implementation of an INTEGRATED LAW ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM between the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office and the Town Marshals Department with specific task assignments and suggested levels of staffing. 3.) CALL TO THE PUBLIC. Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431 -01 (G), public comment is permitted (not required) on matters not listed on the agenda but must be within the jurisdiction of the Council. All comment is "subject to reasonable time, space and manner restrictions" and the Council will not discuss or take legal action on matters raised during call to the public unless the matters are properly noticed for discussion and legal action. At the conclusion of the call to the public, individual Council members may respond to criticism, ask staff to review a matter or ask that a matter be put on a future agenda. 4.) ADJOURNMENT. DATED this 17`l' day of January, 2002, Cassie B. Hansen, Director of Administration/Town Clerk The Town of Fountain Hills endeavors to make all public meetings accessible to persons with disabilities. Please call 837-2003 (voice) or 1-800-367-8939 (TDD) 48 hours prior to the meeting to request a reasonable accommodation to participate in this meeting or to obtain agenda information in large print format. Supporting documentation and staff reports famished the council with this agenda are available for review in the Clerk's office. Town of Fountain Hills Page 2 of 2 Last printed 1/18/2002 4:37 PM 01/04/02 16:18 FAX 480 782 2209 CITY OF CHANDLER 2002 LLOYD V. ELA RRELL 3701 S. Marigold Place (480) 812-9396 Home Chandler, Arizona 85248 EDUCATION AND TRALVING Master of Governmental Administration, Wharton School of Business -- Fels Institute of Local and State Government, University of Pennsylvania, 1968 Recipient of a fellowship and ranked nmnber one in graduating class Bachelor of Arts (Political Science), William Jewell College, 1966 Public Executive Institute, Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, University of Texas, Austin Menninger Foundation Seminar, "Toward Understanding Human Behavior" "Managerial Grid Seminar" "Management of Change," a three-week summer program sponsored by the National Training and Development Service HONORS & AWARDS Editorial Board, Public Integrity, 1999-01 Recipient, Jay Bell Professional Management Award, 1985 (highest honor given by the Missouri City Management Association ui recognition of high standards of accomplishment, professionalism and ethical conduct) Committee of the Future, North Central Texas Council of Governments, 1988-89 Governor's Committee on Productivity for the State of Missouri, 1982-86 Missouri's Outstanding Young Civic Leader and one of Missouri's Ten Outstanding Young Men, Missouri Jaycees, 1978 Nevada, Missouri's Outstanding Young Man, Nevada Jaycees, 1978 Pi. Kappa Delta (National Forensic Honors Fraternity) Phi Alpha Theta (National History Honors Society) Pi Gamma Mu (National Social Science Honors Society) 01/04/02 16:18 FAX 480 782 2209 CITY OF CHANDLER Lloyd V. Harrell page 2 PROFESSIONAL AND CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS International City Management Association Midwest Regional Vice President and. Executive Board Member, 1983-85 Professional Conduct Committee Chair, 1984-85 Academic Affairs Committee, 1985-88 Committee on Small Communities, 1983 Committee on Growth and Environment, 1973 Young Professionals Task Force, 1972 Arizona City/County Management Association Board Member, 2001 Maricopa Association of Governments Management Committee, 1995-01; Chair, 2000-01 Highway Enhancement Committee, 1.999-01; Co -Chair, 1999-01 Transportation Advisory Panel Arizona Municipal Water Users Association Management Committee, 1.995-01; Chair, 1998-99 East Valley Partnership Downtown Chandler Community Partnership Board Member, 1997-01 Valley of the Sun United Way Campaign Cabinet, 200I Campaign North Texas City Management Association President, 1992 Texas City Management Association Public Policy Committee, 1990-91 Ethics Committee, 1988-89; 1991-95 Missouri City Management Association President, 1982-83 North Central Texas Council of Governments Government Applications Review Committee, 1986-89; Chair, 1988-89 Committee of the Future Law Enforcement Training Advisory Committee, 1991-93; Vice Chair, 1992-93 Urban Fellowship Advisory Committee, 1993-95 Texas Municipal League Public Safety Legislative Committee, 1992 Fiscal Impact Assessment Team, 1993, 1995 [a 003 01/04/02 16:18 FAX 480 782 2209 CITY OF CHANDLER 0 004 40, Lloyd V. Harrell Page 3 PROFESSIONAL AND CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS CCONTINUED) Missouri Municipal League Nominating Committee Resolution Committee Taxation and Revenue Committee Growth and Environment Committee Denton County Housing Finance Corporation Secretary, 1989-95 Denton County United Way President, 1991 Campaign Chairman, 1989. Board of Directors, 1986-95 Chandler Rotary Club Denton Rotary Club Board of Directors, 1991-95 Liberty Rotary Club President Elect, 1985 Board of Directors, 1.982-85 Nevada Rotary Club Board of Directors, 1977-78 AFFILIATIONS Texas Woman's University Instructor, Law Enforcement Management Institute of Texas, 1988 — Present University of North Texas Graduate School Instructor University of Missouri at Kansas City Graduate School Instructor PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE November 1995-January 2002 City Manager, Chandler, Arizona (population 190,000) Chandler is a rapidly growing, suburban city located in the southeast valley of the Phoenix metropolitan area. It is the home of several high-tech employers such as Intel, Motorola, and Microchip Technologies. In recent years it has experienced tremendous growth, having been designated as the second fastest growing city in the nation several times during the 1990s. The city government employs over 1400 people, occupies a planning area of 71 square miles, and has an annual budget of more than $1 /2 billion. Significant management accomplishments have included a major Downtown redevelopment effort which has involved adopting an overall 01/04/02 16:19 FAX 480 782 2209 CITY OF CHANDLER Z 005 Lloyd V. Harrell Page 4 Downtown Master Plan, promoting the construction of a new 100,000 square -foot office building, attracting several new restaurant and retail establishments, and implementing a new lighting and building facade program. In addition, the city has held two successful capital improvement bond elections totaling over $160 million; received national accreditation of the Police and Fire Departments, thus becoming only the third city nationally to have both departments accredited; received recognition as the safest city in the State and the 17th safest nationally in 1998; improved its financial health through the adoption of the community's first set of impact fees and other measures which were recognized by a total of 14 bond rating upgrades; negotiated numerous development agreements leading to the construction of several billion -dollar industrial facilities and a new regional mall; opened a multitude of new public facilities including three libraries, two aquatic centers, numerous parks, three fire stations and a fire training facility, a Police/Court headquarters, the community's first public golf course, a new wastewater treatment plant, an airport control tower and terminal building, a major expansion of the water treatment plant, and several major road improvements and extensions; and instituted the city's first neighborhood program. While undertaking these activities, the performance of city government received its highest satisfaction rating in history (97%) on the annual citizen survey. February 1986 — November 1995 City Manager, Denton, Texas (population 70,000) Denton is an independent, economically diverse community, on the edge of a large metropolitan area, providing a full range of municipal services. Located at the apex of the "Golden Triangle," approximately 35 miles from both the cities of Fort Worth and Dallas. Denton deals extensively with regional issues while conscientiously and successfully retaining its distinct identity_ The city is the home of two major universities and the county seat of the fastest growing county in Texas. The city government employs more than 1,000 people, occupies an area of 55 square miles, and provides all city services including electrical generation and distribution with an operating budget of $135 million. Several innovative programs have been successfully implemented including a nationally recognized Community Oriented Policing Program which has emphasized neighborhood goal setting and resulted in a decreased crime rate and substantially improved police/neighborhood relations; a comprehensive Geographical Information System; and a Towards Excellence training program for city employees which emphasized improved customer service. Other accomplishments have included the upgrading of the city's general obligation bond ratinb from A+ to AA- because of excellent financial performance; the implementation of a major downtown revitalization effort which culminated with the city being named as the first "Urban Main Street" city in the nation; the adoption of several urban planning initiatives designed to improve the cominunity's appearance which resulted in the receipt of two $100,000 Governor's Beautification Achievement Awards; the hiring and successful organizational assimilation of external candidates for the positions of police chief, fire chief, and planning director; the obtaining of voter approval for a 5-year, $22 million capital improvement program; the construction, in partnership with the city of Dallas and the Army Corp of Engineers, of a water supply reservoir for the community; and the adoption of a comprehensive econonlic development program including the establishment of two enterprise zones. 01/04/02 16:19 FAX 480 782 2209 CITY OF CHANDLER MP Lloyd V. Harrell Page 5 January,1979 — February,1986 City Administrator, Liberty, Missouri (population 20,000) The City of Liberty is located fifteen miles north of downtown Kansas City. In recent years, the city has dealt not only with the problems of an older community, but also with major pressures associated with rapid suburban expansion as it grew from a small county seat of 4,700 in 1950 to an economically diverse city of 20,000. Significant management accomplishments included initiating a major downtown revitalization effort utilizing local and privately raised funds; obtaining 77 percent voter approval for bonds to construct a 32,000 square -foot city hall/police facility; successfully undertaking an annexation effort which increased the geographical size of the city by 25 percent; obtaining voter approval of a city sales tax to fund a six -year, $11 million capital improvement program; and initiating numerous cooperative projects with area governmental agencies including Clay Cownty, Liberty School District, Liberty Hospital and neighboring municipalities. Additional accomplishments included stabilizing local taxes while increasing General Fund reserves by 81 percent; doubling the size of the city's water treatment plant; implementing a comprehensive program of elderly services; and stabilizing declining neighborhoods by undertaking housing rehabilitation and public improvement projects funded with Community Development Block Grant Funds (discretionary balance). For its active citizen involvement, Liberty was cited as a finalist in the 1983 All -America City Competition. July,1972 — January,1979 City Manager, Nevada, Missouri (population 10,000) The City of Nevada is an independent city located approximately 90 miles south of Kansas City, offering a full scope of municipal services. Major responsibilities included guiding the community, which lost 25 percent of its operating budget because of a change in state law, through the process of securing voter approval for a 10 sales tax and securing over $7 million in federal and state grants. Additional accomplishments included constructing an EPA -mandated sewer renovation project and instituting a sewer charge; passing two industrial revenue bonds resulting in approximately 200 new jobs; developing the community's First capital improvement program; updating the master plan; constructing 200 units of low-income housing; supervising an $850,000 airport expansion project; doubling the size of the public park land; and employing the city's first Parks and Recreation Director. For its outstanding progress, Nevada, in competition with all Missouri municipalities, received the grand prize award from Missouri Betterment in 1974 and was selected as the first "All Missouri Certified City' in 1976. September, 1970-July, 1972 Assistant City Manager, Stillwater, 01dahoma (population 31,000) Located in central Oklahoma and the home of Oklahoma State University, this commmunity employed approximately 260 people. As the only assistant to the City Manager, responsibilities included directing a comprehensive personnel program; preparing a five-year capital improvement program and a multi -year financial projection; coordinating recreational development of a 3,000 acre lake complex including the acquisition of 50 percent federal funding: promoting a greenbelt acquisition project; and acting as City Manager during the Manager's absences. 01/04/02 16:19 FAX 480 782 2209 CITY OF CHANDLER Z007 Lloyd V. Harrell Page 6 July, 1967 — September,1970 Administrative Assistant to the City Manager, Boulder, Colorado (population 70,000) Responsibilities included stafrmg two municipal election campaigns; developing a plan for the partial integration of the police and fire department; organizing and directing an "urban corps" program designed to utilize the talent of up to 70 university students to attack a host of municipal problems; and negotiating, as a member of a three -member team, the first labor agreement with Boulder's three employee organizations. E-1 Alternative Law Enforcement Plan For The Town of Fountain Hills Submitted by Councilman John Kavanagh Introduction The Town of Fountain Hills stands at a crossroad in law enforcement planning. The question of whether the Sheriffs Department or the Marshal's Department should provide primary or even total law enforcement services to our town must be addressed now and not pushed off until the indefinite future. Continued procrastination will only serve to heighten growing tensions surrounding the issue among both our residents and law enforcement personnel. In addition, members of the Marshal's Department deserve to know if their department will evolve into a full -service policing agency in the foreseeable future so they can make informed career choice decisions. The Consultant's Report The police consultant hired by the town has recommended that almost all law enforcement responsibilities be handed over to the Sheriff s Department with the Marshal's Department being reduced to a mere handful of officers. The town's own law enforcement advisory citizen group, LEAP, goes further than the consultant by recommending that the remaining handful of officers be civilianized (not be certified police officers). The general public appears to be split with some favoring the Marshal's Department, others the Sheriffs, and still others favoring a shared responsibility system as we now have and have had for a long time. The Current System The current shared responsibility arrangement, in its present form, is dysfunctional because it contains overlapping duties, blurred lines of responsibility, and unnecessary competition between the Marshal's and Sheriffs Departments. These deficiencies have created an inefficient operation permeated with very poor working relationships between the Marshal's and Sheriffs personnel. These are not the ingredients of good community policing or any other type of acceptable policing. While I had long supported having our own police department under the Marshal's Department, I do not believe that this alternative is possible now. Neither do I believe that the opposite alternative of choosing the Sheriff's Department to do all of our policing is feasible. The foundation of effective community policing is broad -based community support for the police. However, the residents of Fountain Hills are so strongly divided between the Sheriffs Department and the Marshal's Department that to choose one exclusively over the other would result in a system severely handicapped by a lack of needed, broad -based community support. In addition, there are other reasons why choosing one agency over the other for exclusive law enforcement service delivery would be a mistake. Issues of civil liability, community control, capital costs, flexibility, and loyalty to our current Marshals all argue against choosing one agency over the other. Cumulatively, the facts favor a workable compromise plan where both agencies possess cooperative roles in providing effective law enforcement services to the people of Fountain Hills. The present mixed system of law enforcement, with duties shared by both the Sheriffs Department and the Marshal's Department personnel, which has been affirmed and continued by previous councils, seems to be the only potentially workable system at this time. However, it needs to be modified to remove its previously mentioned deficiencies that have caused bad feelings, reduced cooperation and, consequently, impaired delivery of law enforcement services to the people of Fountain Hills. Roots of the Problem and A Way Out The root cause of the present dual agency system's problems is unnecessary competition between the Marshal's Department and the Sheriffs Department. Past and present town councils fostered this competition by suggesting that, at any time, the Marshal's Department would take over the delivery of all law enforcement services in Fountain Hills. Consequently, personnel in both agencies perceive themselves to be in a race to see who gets the job each year. The existence of overlapping duties and blurred lines of responsibility created more opportunities to engage in this competition and conflict. In this race, assuming more work and duties scores points and making the other side look bad is seen as a victory. While not all personnel are participants in the competition, enough are to make it a major problem. However, law enforcement agencies can work together productively and cooperatively in the same area. For 20 years I was a police officer, sergeant, and detective sergeant with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Police Department. The Port Authority Police Department is one of the largest police agencies in the country with over 1,200 sworn officers. Its officers work throughout the New York - New Jersey metropolitan area at Port Authority facilities such as Kennedy, La Guardia, and Newark Airports, the PATH Subway, the Times Square Bus Terminal, and more. All Port Authority facilities lie within the jurisdiction of other police agencies. Yet, conflict and competition are rare events that are always resolved, often by the officers themselves. In fact, the relationship is one of cooperation and mutual respect. The dual system works for the Port Authority Police and the police departments it works with because neither feels it will lose its job to the other and, more importantly, responsibilities are clearly divided, delineated, and enforced by supervisory and administrative control. In addition, opportunities for collaboration in work and training are provided and rewarded. Dual systems work elsewhere and they can work in Fountain Hills. The Alternative Plan The alternative plan that I propose and which is presented in Table I is a modified version of the consultant's recommendation. The alternative plan shifts some duties, adds others, and clearly delineates responsibilities to avoid overlapping and blurred lines of responsibility. Implied in the plan is strict ongoing supervisory and administrative review for understanding and compliance by all parties. Table 1: Alternative Law Enforcement Plan Sheriff s Department Marshal's Department Sheriff's and Marshal's Shared Calls for Service* Local Code Enforcement*** Emergency and Non - (Criminal and All Non- Emergency Call Receipt and Marshal's Department Zoning Law Enforcement**** Dispatch of Marshal's and Designated Responsibilities) Sheriff's Units. (Subject to Schools technical and administrative Primary Traffic** (School Resource Officers feasibility.) and Special Programs) Criminal Investigation Special Events Crowd Secondary Traffic** Control and Traffic Direction Schools (Calls for Service, Special Courts Programs such as Midnight Madness, DARE, etc.) Crime Prevention Special Support Services Animal Control (SWAT, Helicopter, etc.) Town Facilities ***** * Marshal's Department officers would continue to be fully certified police officers. While they would not handle calls for police service, they would be expected to take police action in those areas, but only when there is an immediate threat to public safety or when asked to back up a Sheriff's unit. ** With respect to traffic, the Sheriffs officers would have primary responsibility and the Marshal's officers would have a secondary role. Marshals would not enforce traffic laws as part of their work responsibilities. However, they would be able to write summonses for offenses committed in their presence while performing their designated duties. *** Sheriffs personnel would handle time sensitive local ordinance enforcement but only on midnight tours of duty when Marshals are not working such as noise complaints and illegal parking in front of residences. * * * * Shared with the Building Department. ***** Patrol of town -owned buildings, parks, preserves, and washes but not Sheriffs calls for service. N are: The major differences between this plan and the consultant's recommendation The Marshal's Department keeps the School Resource Officer duties, with which the School District is in agreement. 2. Town facilities patrol duties are added to the Marshal's Department, although they will not be handling calls for service at those locations but will be backups for the Sheriffs officers, if on the scene. Assigning Marshals to patrol town facilities is appropriate because many local ordinances are enforced there. 3. Shared call receipt and dispatch responsibilities, subject to administrative and technical feasibility. 4. A very clear delineation of responsibilities and duties to avoid overlap and crossover of duties, which will be strictly monitored by supervisory and administrative oversight. An important part of the administrative oversight will be the creation of various forms and activity reports which will track the activities of both agencies and their personnel to insure compliance with the spirit of this plan. The continued existence of the Marshal's Department at a reduced but reasonable manpower level which would leave open the town's option to create its own police department in the future, if we needed to do so. However, it should be made clear that consideration of the creation of our own department is something that should only be explored 6 or 7 years from now when we reach "build out." At that time, the town's demographics and opinions of law enforcement may have changed. Earlier consideration of creating our own department would only be justified in the unlikely event that the cost of the Sheriff's services dramatically increases, as the County supervisors threatened several years ago, or its terms change dramatically. We cannot be assured that Sheriff Joe Arpaio will be around indefinitely to insure us an equitable contract. It is wise to keep our options open. 6. A commitment to shared training, work activities, and communications to enhance cooperation and the efficiency of both departments. 7. Steps to enhance the visibility of the Sheriff's Department's membership in Fountain Hills law enforcement by such methods as adding decals to Sheriff's cars containing some form of the words "Fountain Hills." Conclusion The decision on how law enforcement services are provided in Fountain Hills is fraught with dangers for our town. If we choose one agency over the other, we risk alienating a large segment of the population, an obstacle to effective law enforcement that no police department could overcome. Likewise, choosing one agency over the other creates problems involving civil liability, community control, capital costs, and flexibility. When confronted with such a great potential for damage, it may be best to follow the physicians' working rule, "First do no harm." It is for this reason that I reject either of the more extreme courses of action that involve giving one agency exclusive or near -exclusive control of law enforcement in Fountain Hills. The Port Authority Police Department example proves that law enforcement with shared responsibilities can work. Also remember that the shared responsibilities system did work in Fountain Hills for many years. I believe that it can still work, if its deficiencies are corrected. This alternative plan can correct the deficiencies and provide the people of Fountain Hills with an effective and affordable law enforcement system. We have much to gain by implementing this plan and everything to lose by rejecting it. Remember, "First do no harm."