Sometime over the next couple of months the City Council is likely to review last April 2nd’s 11-3 vote (by what was then a 14-member City Council) approving the construction of a new police station of roughly 37,000 square feet – four times the size of the current station – with another 12,000 square feet of “secured” (indoor?) parking.  

The estimated cost?  Hard to tell for sure, but the former Council suggested a whopping $19 Million in bonded debt to help pay for it.  And with all that extra space, you can be sure that the cost of operating it year after year will be a heck of a lot more than is being spent on the current station.

Why did this project get the former Council’s approval?  Primarily because it was recommended by hired-gun consultants who make their money – $55,000 from the City so far – by recommending big new police stations to municipalities who want big new police stations.  And in the case of the City’s most recent consultant (Sente Rubel Bosman Lee Architects, Ltd., an architectural firm that specializes in giving local politicians what they want), the potential to make a much bigger bundle as the project’s architect, where fees are often based on a percentage of the project’s cost.

But there was another reason, this one legitimate:  The current 9,000 square foot cop shop is admittedly a dated and poorly laid-out facility that does not make the most efficient use of its space and is sorely in need of modernization.  Unfortunately, instead of starting out by looking at how the current facility might be renovated and reconfigured to optimize its 9,000 square feet of space, the City let the highly-paid, one-trick-pony consultants do a “blue sky” analysis that effectively began with a blank page and no space or cost restrictions.

Before this boondoggle gets pushed into “done deal” territory, however, we would like to try to bring some sanity and fiscal responsibility to what, until now, has been basically an irresponsible, consultant-driven process.  As you will see when you read the account of the public discourse on the police station at pages 8 through 16 of the minutes of that April 2, 2007 Council meeting [pdf] – and we strongly encourage you to do so – you will find no answers to what should be the most important questions about a project such as this:

1. Has the size of the current police station made us less safe in our homes or on the streets of Park Ridge than we deserve to be; and, if so, in what specific ways?

2.  Has the size of the current police station enabled criminals to avoid detection, apprehension and prosecution; and, if so, in what specific ways?

3.  Is a big new police station the absolutely best way for the City to spend $19 Million, especially when it involves digging itself into a $19 Million long-term debt hole?

Maybe one of the reasons those questions weren’t answered by anybody involved in City government is because the honest answer to all of them is a big fat “No!” 

After all, the police department – operating out of that dated, inefficient 9,000 square foot space – keeps on getting accredited and keeps on winning awards.  And the Park Ridge crime rate remains low despite that dated, inefficient 9,000 square foot space.  And any time there is a job opening, we have an abundance of applicants willing to work in, and out of, that dated, inefficient 9,000 square foot space.

So if the current station isn’t jeopardizing or compromising our safety or the enforcement and prosecution of our laws, or the hiring of new personnel, then the bottom line is that the big new $19 Million cop shop really will be far more of a convenience and amenity than a true necessity. 

But if Chief Caudill, Deputy Chief Swoboda, or Mayor Frimark’s designated hitter Cmdr. Lou Jogman want to convince the taxpaying voters of Park Ridge otherwise, let them stand up in an open City Council meeting and answer those three questions – and any other questions the public has about the big new cop shop – fully, honestly and with specifics rather than vague generalities or arbitrary calculations provided by the self-interested consultants.

Meanwhile, our aldermen can gain a much-needed reality check on how much sense it makes to quadruple the size of the police station by going to their bosses and demanding that their workplace be quadrupled in size.  And then they can let us know how long it took, and what kind of tools they needed, to remove their bosses’ boots from their derrieres.