2010030402

$225 Million Police Building Fails In Raleigh Council Vote

By R.Gregg, The Raleigh Telegram

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

RALEIGH - After putting off a final vote for some time, Raleigh City Council members could not reach a consensus at their March 2nd meeting on the proposed Clarence E. Lightner Public Safety Center, essentially putting a hold on the project.

When finished, the new building would have served as the new headquarters for the Raleigh Police Department and other public safety services in the city.

The proposed $225 million building would have been 16 stories tall with approximately 302,000 square feet of office space. The building was to be located at the corner of Hargett and McDowell streets where the present police headquarters is located.

The public safety center would have been named in honor of the late Clarence E. Lightner, who served as mayor of Raleigh from 1973-75.

Raleigh City Council members voted 4-4 on the motion that would have officially funded the project, although some money has already been spent on architectural services and other preparatory measures.

“The proposal failed as at least five votes are needed for approval,” said the City of Raleigh in a statement to the public after the vote.

Council Member Vote

Voting in favor of the project were Mayor Charles Meeker and Council Members Mary-Ann Baldwin, Nancy McFarlane and James West.

Voting against were Council Members Thomas Crowder, Bonner Gaylord, John Odom and Russ Stephenson.

Almost everyone seems to be in agreement that the present headquarters for the Raleigh Police Department is no longer adequate for their needs. However, the price of the replacement and the design are sources of contention.

The towering price tag of the building at over $225 million during a down economy and the high-rise design at over 16 stories have drawn some criticism from some taxpayers and council members.

In addition, it has not been clearly stated by the City of Raleigh how the building would be paid for, although an eventual one cent property tax increase over several years has been proposed.

Despite the costs, the unique design, the stimulus to the economy from the project, and the proposed buildings’ impact on the downtown area have drawn praise from others.

Mayor Charles Meeker has been leading the charge to start work on the Lightner Center.

Meeker has stated that the city needs to start work on the the new building immediately to house the growing needs of the public safety divisions in Raleigh, that the planned location at Hargett Street is a good location, and that the building’s price is justified due to security measures built into the design.

Further, Meeker has warned that if the project is delayed, it could cost taxpayers millions since interest rates are at an all time low right now.

"Who is going to write our taxpayers a check for $20 to $30 million if interest rates go up?" Meeker said at a council meeting in January. "The answer is no one."

One of the more vocal opponents to the building has been newly elected Raleigh City Council member Bonner Gaylord.

Gaylord has stated that the project has been ill-advised from the start and says that the city cannot afford such a large bill at this time for only one construction project.

Opponents have also said that for safety reasons, not all of the public safety divisions should be located in one tall building, as that may invite disaster if something happens to the structure, such as a terrorist attack.

“If such an attack were carried out, the potential exists for casualties in the immediate vicinity of the event, as well as an increased potential for progressive collapse of the structure if an explosive device was placed near a structural column,” said opponents in a memo.

“We have exposed an Achilles heel and then placed a cafe in it and invited anyone who may have ill intent to come and visit without search,” said Gaylord.

Public Divided On Building

Members of the public have been divided as well, with comments on local websites supporting both sides of the argument.

“When are politicians going to realize that there are only so many taxpayers available and you can only tax them so much before the pool dries up,” said commenter Vietnam Vet on WRAL.com.

“I've no doubt that Raleigh probably does need new facilities but now is not the time,” they added.

The NewRaleigh.com blog has started an online campaign to send emails to city council members, asking them to reconsider their decision on the building.

“Raleigh cannot be a great city if our public safety force does not have the resources they need to protect us,” says a page on the site.

“Please respect our public safety employees by providing them with the quality building needed to ensure the safety and security of all of our citizens,” added the online site.

Statements From Mayor Meeker

In an open letter to the News & Observer newspaper on Monday February 8th, Mayor Charles Meeker outlined his reasons for supporting the proposed Lightner Center.

“We Need The Safety Center Now”

By Mayor Charles Meeker

“For the past two years, the Raleigh City Council has planned a modern Public Safety Center. As we have become a larger city, our needs have changed since the 1950s, when the current police facilities were built.

The Public Safety Center will house the 911 system, traffic control, information technology and other essential city services.

It also will be the command center for the police and fire departments.

In today's environment, public safety centers need to be secure locations in which to work. This requires different structural elements, redundant utilities and secure telecommunication links.

Raleigh's police chief, fire chief and emergency communications director have repeatedly stated the city's need for the new center. They helped prepare the work program for the center, as well as its design.

The current economic recession has reduced the center's construction costs by an estimated $20 million. If the city can gain an interest rate similar to that achieved by Wake County on its new courthouse, an additional $30 million in interest costs can be saved.

A key challenge is how to pay for the center, since no one wants a tax increase now.

The City Council has requested staff information about deferring any adjustment in the city's tax rate for at least two years, paying for half the cost from sources other than the property tax, and postponing proposed facilities for sanitation and street maintenance.

Public safety is the top priority for every community. Raleigh leaders need to work together to build the center, which we need in order to protect our citizens.”

Statements From Council

Member Bonner Gaylord

In an email letter to the Raleigh Telegram, Raleigh City Council member Bonner Gaylord outlined his specific objections to the proposed facility.

“Robbing Peter To Pay Paul”

By Bonner Gaylord

“An important point that has been missed from my perspective [in the discussion about the Clarence Lightner Center] is priorities and resources.

Unfortunately, the City of Raleigh has limited resources. Despite how passionately we may wish otherwise, our collective dollars are capped.

In case one is still unbelieving, we cut funding for our CAT bus system, cut funding for sidewalk construction across the city, cut funding for bike lanes, and cut Police Officer salaries in real dollars in 2009 and still have not restored those funds.

If we have already stripped these priorities of their funding today, what happens to them if we take on massive debt tomorrow?

Our city needs public transit, bus shelters, road repairs, sidewalks, bike lanes, parks, greenways, sustainable initiatives, cops on the street, promotion of the arts, and economic development.

We do not need $205 million dollars worth of state of the art 17-story high rise.

We can solve our space and technology needs in a more economical and phased approach that is in fact safer for our valued public servants.

There is a saying "Rob Peter to pay Paul." The Clarence E. Lightner Center is Paul.

Although nobly motivated, proponents of this project are advocating our future to consist of a singular monument instead of everything else.”

:: END