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."