← Back to City Council Digest

City Council Services, Safety & Parks Committee Auto captions

Monday, September 30, 2024

6:30 PM · Council Chambers, 135 E. Sunset Way, Issaquah WA
Topic tracked across meetings:
School Zone Speed Camera AB 8894 1/3
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3a
Minutes of July 23, 2024
packet pp.5–6
Staff report:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 07-23-24 City Council Services, Safety & Parks Page (1) Committee Minutes CITY OF ISSAQUAH City Council Services, Safety & Parks Committee 6:30 PM Council Chambers, 135 E. July 23, 2024 MINUTES Sunset Way, Issaquah WA
4. AGENDA ITEMS
4a
School Zone Speed Camera COM 0069
45 min · Dale Markey-Crimp, Assistant to the City Administrator · packet pp.7–57
Topics: Public SafetySchools
Staff report:
The Administration is recommending that the Services, Safety, and Parks Committee recommend the addition of one school zone safety location and that the Mayor sign an amendment to the agreement with Verra Mobility to add two cameras at this location at Newport Way NW.
0:06 welcome everyone I council member toam
0:09 Mars call the services safety and Parks
0:12 uh September 30th city council meeting
0:15 to order public comment there are
0:17 multiple public comment opportunities at
0:19 tonight's meeting there's a general
0:21 public comment opportunity at the
0:22 beginning of the meeting or you can make
0:24 comments after the presentation and
0:26 Council question and answer period on
0:28 tonight's agenda item members of the
0:30 public May address council at this time
0:33 uh we don't we have no members of the
0:34 public in person but they can certainly
0:36 join us virtually uh those who have
0:38 signed up in advance to make comments
0:40 will be called on first if you're
0:41 joining us virtually and would like to
0:43 make comments please raise your virtual
0:45 hand if you're on the phone press star
0:47 three if you have joined by computer or
0:49 smartphone look for a hand icon this
0:51 varies by device one option maybe to go
0:54 to the participant panel and choose the
0:56 raise hand icon in the lower right hand
0:58 corner
1:00 I will wait for a moment to see if
1:01 anyone wishes to raise their virtual
1:06 hand cler chair marks we have no virtual
1:09 attendees what as a reminder written
1:12 comments can be submitted at any time to
1:14 city council isqua
1:17 w.gov uh next up uh let me go to my uh
1:24 meeting uh next up we have approval of
1:27 minutes Mr chairman move to adopted July
1:29 five minutes second moved by council
1:33 member Joe seconded by council member D
1:35 Michelle uh any discussion hearing none
1:39 all those in favor say I I I opposed
1:42 extensions motion carries 3 to
1:45 zero uh uh agenda items we have one
1:49 agenda item this evening Co
1:52 0069 ghoul zone speed camera with Dale
1:55 Mary KMP assistant to the CD
1:57 administrator Dale take it away thank
2:00 you council member
2:10 Mars good evening Council committee
2:13 members uh my name is Dale Mary crimp
2:15 I'm the assistant the city administrator
2:17 and I am glad to be here this evening
2:19 with
2:20 you the purpose of tonight's meeting um
2:24 is to return here to the services safety
2:27 and Parks committee to present the
2:29 findings of the vendor analysis for
2:32 potential new school zone speed camera
2:34 locations to present the
2:36 administration's analysis proposal and
2:40 rationale for a new location at isqua
2:42 Valley Elementary School and to obtain
2:45 Council committe recommendation on the
2:47 administration's
2:49 proposal specifically the administration
2:52 is requesting that the members of the
2:54 services safety and Parks committee
2:57 provide the following Direction review
3:00 the administration's proposal to add a
3:01 new school zone safety camera location
3:04 at isqua Valley Elementary School on
3:06 Newport Way Northwest and provide
3:09 Direction on the administration's
3:10 proposal to sign a contract Amendment
3:13 with our current vendor ver Mobility to
3:15 install and operate two cameras on
3:17 Newport Way
3:19 Northwest a little bit of background
3:21 before we get to that direction though
3:24 uh the city's first School Zone location
3:27 was uh launched in 2008 on Second Avenue
3:30 near isqua high school and isqua middle
3:33 school the city has considered
3:35 additional locations in the past but
3:38 lacked at the time lacked evidence to
3:41 demonstrate either a true safety concern
3:43 or the financial viability of those
3:45 potential
3:46 locations in May of this year at the uh
3:50 committee meeting the police chief
3:52 paulan presented information about red
3:55 light photo enforcement cameras and uh
3:58 the administration recommended a new
4:00 school zone location on Newport Way
4:03 Northwest near isqua Valley Elementary
4:07 School at the time the council committee
4:09 directed the administration to move
4:11 forward with a vendor study so
4:13 specifically to reach out to our current
4:14 vendor of our school zone safety camera
4:17 and look into potential School Zone
4:18 locations to listed here on the screen
4:21 Newport Way Northwest which was
4:23 recommended by the administration and
4:25 also Northeast Park Drive near Grand
4:27 Ridge Elementary School which was at the
4:29 request of the
4:30 committee and also to look into red
4:33 light violation cameras at these six
4:37 intersections listed here um and as you
4:40 can see in the uh packet information ver
4:44 Mobility our vendor looked into not just
4:47 one camera at those locations but it
4:50 possible different directions at each of
4:51 those
4:52 intersections also I think it's valuable
4:54 to reiterate at this meeting that Talis
4:57 Drive was previously considered as a
4:59 potential location for a school zone
5:01 camera but a study that was done by the
5:03 school district indicated that the
5:06 incidence of speeding and the rate of
5:08 speed on Talis Drive did not warrant a
5:11 school zone
5:14 camera I want to first talk about the
5:17 red light photo enforcement C
5:20 study all directions at all six
5:22 intersections in some case those are
5:24 four directions and in some case they
5:26 are two were studied as part of ver
5:29 Mobility
5:30 study they looked the the analysis which
5:33 is in your packet I believe it's
5:34 attachment a indicates that all
5:37 locations would at maturity which is
5:40 about 18 months into a program lead to
5:43 about one at least one violation a day
5:46 and at the most dangerous or the busiest
5:48 intersections up to seven violations per
5:50 day and that's at southbound West Lake
5:53 samamish 56th Street however attachment
5:56 B in your packet in which shares the
5:59 financial analysis that the city did
6:01 indicates that even before considering
6:04 potential Revenue restrictions on a new
6:06 red light photo enforcement
6:08 program those the none of those sites
6:11 net out to positive net revenues so we
6:14 actually would not even be able to cover
6:15 the cost of operating new cameras we
6:18 looked at a number of different options
6:19 we looked at what if we just install at
6:22 the one busiest most dangerous
6:24 intersection that did not net out net
6:27 revenue um we looked at what about
6:28 economy of SC what if we put one in
6:30 everywhere that also doesn't end up with
6:32 net revenues even in the first year of
6:34 the program therefore at this time the
6:37 administration does not recommend a red
6:40 light red light photo enforcement
6:44 program let's however take a look at
6:47 school zone safety vom Mobility
6:50 conducted a second study on two
6:52 potential School Zone locations they did
6:54 this study between September 3rd and 6th
6:57 uh this study was done much later than
6:59 the red light photo enforcement because
7:01 we needed to wait for school to be in
7:02 session and the cameras to be blinking
7:05 um so that we'd have a good and accurate
7:07 idea of who's still speeding potentially
7:09 driving in a dangerous way when the
7:11 lights are
7:13 flashing unlike the red light report and
7:15 as was mentioned in the packet today
7:18 this study did not
7:20 provide traffic violations at maturity
7:24 and it is very difficult for even ver
7:27 which collects a lot of data to pres
7:30 predict travel on stretches of Road and
7:33 so this actually provided a point and
7:35 time count so you saw this was the
7:38 incident of incidents of traffic between
7:40 September 3rd and 6th these are the
7:42 potential violations meaning folks that
7:44 are traveling at 26 miles an hour or
7:47 above during school zone hours but they
7:49 cannot necessarily predict out this is
7:52 what will happen in 18 months if you
7:54 install a u if you install a ticketing
7:58 uh mechanism here
8:00 as you could see from the data and as
8:01 you can see on the screen here both
8:03 locations had a high incidence of
8:05 speeding at 26 mph or above during
8:08 school zone
8:09 hours however we figured we needed
8:11 further analysis to really determine
8:13 what the violations at maturity might
8:15 look like and therefore whether a camera
8:18 enforcement program would be the most
8:21 appropriate intervention to curb
8:23 dangerous
8:25 behavior in order to do this we made
8:28 some assumptions about both revenue and
8:31 expenditures that these programs would
8:35 net the following assumptions are about
8:37 specifically about Revenue so violations
8:42 um in this report are likely inflated
8:44 due to a couple reasons one they are
8:46 violations at the beginning of a school
8:47 year we can imagine um over the course
8:50 of the school year as people become more
8:53 familiar with the lights flashing they
8:55 will likely slow down we made the
8:56 assumption that even without ticketing
8:58 we would expect expect to see violations
9:00 go down about 10% over the course of
9:03 this year simply by becoming familiar
9:05 with the flashing light and the fact
9:07 that school is back in
9:08 session we also assumed that drivers
9:11 will be responsive to noticing and
9:14 warning tickets early in the program and
9:16 that violations will probably stabilize
9:19 pretty quickly within the first six to
9:21 eight months and we base that off of
9:24 data we have from our current speed zone
9:27 camera um and knowing that there had
9:29 been a very uh dramatic bump at the
9:32 beginning uh and that bump in tickets
9:35 and violations tapered fairly quickly
9:37 and so we assume that about another 30
9:40 to 40% reduction in actual violations
9:44 due to both warnings and getting those
9:46 first tickets that you pay
9:48 for we also think that although there
9:50 will be some additional uh corrective
9:53 behavior that Newport Way Northwest will
9:56 experience less dramatic reduction due
9:58 to the high volume of pass through
10:00 traffic uh that that road in particular
10:03 experiences and that Grand Ridge
10:06 Elementary so Northwest Northeast Park
10:08 Drive will experience a more dramatic
10:11 drop in violations due to the nature of
10:13 traffic being neighborhood or more
10:15 internal City traffic folks will get
10:18 that first ticket and they will really
10:21 quickly change their behavior whereas on
10:23 Newport Way Northwest someone might get
10:25 a ticket passing through but because
10:27 they're not driving that stretch of road
10:29 every every day it might take longer to
10:31 correct their behavior or they might
10:33 simply forget and then realize again as
10:35 they're driving we still in both
10:38 situations expect that the cameras will
10:41 lead to a change in Behavior it's just
10:43 where will that change happen more
10:44 quickly and then I guess the next
10:46 question becomes then is a camera
10:49 program with a five-year lease the
10:50 appropriate
10:52 intervention and the last assumption
10:54 here that we think is important to name
10:56 we assume that about 50% of tickets will
10:58 be paid uh that might seem low but that
11:00 is given our current program that's
11:03 about the pay rate on tickets
11:05 currently uh I believe um Deputy council
11:08 president has a question absolutely yeah
11:10 and just a quick question that
11:11 assumption was um included in our
11:14 Revenue projections is that correct it
11:17 is that is correct okay
11:20 thanks can I ask the uh this assumption
11:24 about Grand Ridge quicker to change as
11:26 there's no pass through traffic in this
11:28 neighborhood did that hold true for the
11:30 cameras on Second Avenue Second Avenue
11:34 uh experiences still a fair amount of
11:36 pass through traffic not not to the
11:38 extent that uh Newport Way Northwest
11:41 does is that it's a m it's a major pass
11:44 through avoider but there it is a
11:45 through road you can drive all the way
11:48 through um and so we use some of the
11:50 same assumptions on actually on Newport
11:52 Way in terms of drop off um rather than
11:56 on Northeast Park
11:59 okay thank
12:03 you let's talk about expenditure
12:05 assumptions so in order to know whether
12:08 a school zone camera system is a
12:10 financially viable intervention we also
12:12 made the following uh expenditure
12:16 assumptions with this analysis one is
12:18 not an assumption it is a piece of
12:19 knowledge but uh the annual cost of a
12:22 camera lease is
12:24 $57,000 per year the monthly ticket
12:27 overage fee is $5 per TI ticket for any
12:31 tickets over 800 the monthly allowance
12:35 the annual cost of police personel to
12:37 process violations is
12:39 $195,000 in salary and benefits for
12:42 full-time or limited term employee with
12:44 an annual 4% cost of living adjustment
12:48 and the annual cost of a court of a
12:50 court Personnel to administer violation
12:52 payments is 145,000 in salary and
12:55 benefits per full-time or limited term
12:57 employee with again an annual 4% cost of
13:01 living
13:04 adjustment as you can see here um and
13:06 I'll show it in a couple of different
13:07 ways so this is the table but we'll also
13:09 look at it in a chart as well um and
13:11 attachment D in your packet provides a
13:13 much more detailed revenue and
13:15 expenditure analysis this is just sort
13:17 of the net revenue assumption net
13:19 revenue calculus by year uh for each
13:21 potential camera in these two locations
13:24 so over its 5-year lease life cameras on
13:26 Newport Way are estimated to net more
13:29 Revenue even while effectively reducing
13:32 dangerous driving from the current
13:33 levels revenues are expected to be
13:36 higher and therefore we can be more
13:38 confident that uh they will not only
13:41 cover the program costs but provide
13:43 revenues that can then be used for
13:45 transportation and traffic improvements
13:48 which is what our additional revenues
13:49 are used for currently in our Second
13:52 Avenue
13:53 camera shown another way uh this is just
13:56 a simple chart of that same data uh
14:00 while we while the current violation
14:02 predictions indicate comparable
14:04 dangerous behavior in both locations we
14:06 believe that speeding on Northeast Park
14:09 will be more quickly impacted by any
14:12 intervention and that intervention while
14:14 it could be a camera could also be a
14:16 patrol officer given the nature of that
14:18 road terminating in a roundabout and
14:20 then circling back
14:24 down so you might be asking what about a
14:27 third location I know I was asking that
14:30 um especially given that speeding is a
14:32 significant issue in both locations as
14:34 demonstrated by the study this past
14:37 legislative session HB 2384 which went
14:40 into effect on June 6th of this year
14:43 provides cities an expanded authority to
14:46 use automated traffic cameras however it
14:49 also uh provides more restrictions on
14:51 how those revenues collected can be used
14:55 specifically I think it's important to
14:56 highlight that in year four and Beyond
14:59 25% of revenues from any third in our
15:02 case third but in other bigger cities
15:05 additional locations after operational
15:08 costs would be diverted into the Cooper
15:10 Jones active Transportation safety
15:12 account an account that is um
15:15 administered by the
15:16 state what this new law does allow is
15:19 that it does allow us here in isqua
15:21 given the fact that we already have a
15:23 school Z safety program established it
15:25 does allow us the addition of one new
15:27 location that's important location
15:30 number of cameras within that is could
15:33 be two could be one but one new location
15:35 to our current program without any new
15:38 Revenue
15:40 restrictions however regardless of new
15:42 cameras that we would off that we would
15:44 add we would need to conduct an equity
15:47 impact assessment on that location as I
15:49 mentioned in the packet um I think we
15:52 have another question great uh can you
15:55 just uh talk a little bit about how uh
15:58 Revenue are distributed out of that
16:00 Cooper Jones active Transportation
16:02 safety account uh if we put money in I'm
16:05 going to presume we don't necessarily
16:06 get money out is that right I'm going to
16:09 follow up on that for you I don't know
16:10 precisely um but my understanding in
16:13 initial reading is that is not money
16:14 that we would touch again right okay
16:16 thank you let me just make a
16:22 note uh I'll add a follow on do we
16:25 understand what putting that money into
16:27 the Cooper Jones active Transportation
16:30 safety account would do to the uh the
16:33 profitability of the uh the additional
16:35 site we do
16:38 absolutely my marks like you knew where
16:41 I was going um so I did do an initial
16:44 additional analysis so looking at what
16:47 would be the impact of we do add this
16:49 third location but in year four and
16:51 Beyond we see a reduction after
16:54 operating of 25% of those revenues and
16:57 so this chart on your screen or in your
16:59 packet shows you a comparison
17:02 between Grand Ridge as a site as a
17:05 location for a school zone without uh it
17:08 being a third location so that
17:09 assumption could be made it's a second
17:11 location um and then you see in you see
17:15 also the scenario where it is a third
17:17 location so you see in 2028 a steep
17:20 decline in revenues it was already a
17:22 tight net revenue scenario becomes even
17:24 tighter um and so I think an important
17:27 thing to see that it becomes it's still
17:30 just viable financially becomes much
17:33 potentially less
17:37 viable so the options that the
17:39 administration considered one was to
17:41 maintain the current program we have one
17:44 school zone safety site um on Second
17:47 Avenue continue to operate that program
17:49 The Challenge with with this is that it
17:50 does fail to address the confirmed
17:53 dangerous driving that we now know for
17:55 certain um patrol Pursuit is also quite
17:59 dangerous I believe Chief Schwan
18:00 emphasized that when she presented in
18:02 May specifically in school areas
18:05 specifically um on straightaways where
18:07 people can speed quickly um and so we
18:10 just know that that is not necessarily
18:12 the safest
18:13 option a second option is to get to add
18:17 two locations including a new program at
18:19 Grand Ridge Elementary Northeast Park
18:21 Drive traffic we know is going to be
18:23 more however responsive to photo to
18:25 photo enforcement there we believe
18:27 especially in the first three years
18:28 years given that it is an internal Road
18:31 a neighborhood Road more than pass
18:33 through traffic that's trying to beat um
18:36 congestion in our main downtown area so
18:38 we believe that the the revenues will or
18:41 not the revenues but that we will
18:42 experience Revenue decrease um while
18:45 also experiencing expenditure increase
18:48 over time M challenging the fiscal
18:50 viability of that particular site also a
18:54 third location which would be necessary
18:56 if we were to add two new locations
18:57 would be subject to new Revenue
18:59 restrictions specifically in the fourth
19:00 and the fifth year most speeding um is
19:03 happening outside of school zone hours
19:05 and I'll I'll show some diagrams about
19:07 that here in a moment can I ask um do we
19:10 not give tickets outside of school zone
19:12 hours we do not t we only ticket when
19:15 the cameras are
19:17 flashing the lights are flashing excuse
19:19 me thank you ah do we not our our
19:22 cameras over by the high school we don't
19:24 give out tickets when the when it's not
19:25 flashing only when flashing only during
19:28 school zone hour I did not know that
19:30 thank
19:31 you and um potentially we could station
19:35 a single officer uh at Grand Ridge that
19:39 could help with some of that
19:40 enforcement and the third option is to
19:42 add one location um to our current
19:45 program at isqua Valley
19:49 Elementary I want to share a go ahead
19:51 Council um do we know how fast traffic
19:55 is we we know the number of speeders
19:58 that are occurring during scho hours do
20:00 we know how fast they're driving during
20:02 school hours we do um and so I want to
20:06 talk a little bit about the travel
20:08 patterns and you can also see so in your
20:12 packet um I believe it is attachment C
20:16 you can see the analysis um on the data
20:19 collected from by ver Mobility at both
20:21 School Zone locations um in this green
20:25 shaded version the dark shaded are the
20:29 potential violations during school zone
20:31 hours um this is for Newport way I think
20:34 it's important to emphasize that when
20:36 traffic starts it basically starts and
20:38 it regardless of school zone hours
20:40 people are traveling at about the same
20:42 speed all day long uh that is slightly
20:44 different than the pattern around um gr
20:47 Ridge Elementary School you can see
20:49 actually during the uh School Zone hours
20:54 on average folks are driving at a lower
20:57 rate of speed uh than during the
20:59 non-school Zone hours also in your
21:02 packet you can see the speeding by speed
21:06 so in the top right hand corner of each
21:09 uh cam potential camera Direction you
21:12 can see the the variance of speed so for
21:15 instance it has uh on isqua Elementary
21:19 the first one you can see that about
21:22 over 5,000 of the folks driving through
21:24 there we traveling under or between 16
21:28 and 20 miles an hour um and then your
21:30 fastest Speeders you had three folks
21:32 that were going upwards of 46 M miles an
21:34 hour but it has it for each four M an
21:37 hour bucket and so you can see that bro
21:39 the data broken down that way as
21:43 well thank you so the proposal in front
21:47 of you this evening the administration
21:49 is proposing adding a second school zone
21:51 safety location within our current
21:53 program so not a new program not uh
21:57 subject to the new Revenue restrictions
21:59 of the new law at isqua Valley
22:01 Elementary on Newport Way Northwest
22:04 we're proposing adding a Northbound and
22:06 a southbound camera this will help us
22:08 remain within the terms of our current
22:10 code so no new Revenue restrictions it
22:14 also will help us address the high
22:15 incidents of ongoing speeding so
22:17 speeding throughout the day regardless
22:19 of whether or not the lights are
22:20 flashing but the fact that folks are
22:22 maintaining that speed even when lights
22:24 are
22:25 flashing and the high frequency of pass
22:27 through rather than internal or
22:29 neighborhood traffic provides more a
22:32 more favorable Financial viability over
22:35 the required 5-year lease
22:39 term the administration is recommending
22:41 that the services safety and Parks
22:43 committee recommend the addition of one
22:45 school zone safety location at isqua
22:47 Valley Elementary School and recommend
22:49 that the mayor sign an amendment to the
22:51 agreement with ver Mobility to add two
22:53 cameras at this location at Newport Way
22:56 Northwest the timing and next steps on
22:58 this
22:59 um if it were to move forward would be
23:01 first to conduct an equity impact
23:04 assessment on the location as mentioned
23:06 in the packet similar assessments have
23:08 been done by neighboring jurisdictions
23:11 um and we would imagine this would cost
23:13 between five and
23:15 $8,000 in December we would finalize
23:19 communication to the community including
23:21 Outreach directly to any school uh but
23:25 also setting up more information about
23:27 why schools safety cameras um what are
23:30 we hoping to what are we hoping the
23:32 impact of this camera will be and why do
23:34 we see it as a viable solution to solve
23:36 this problem of safety in our school
23:37 area and also in December if we were to
23:40 move forward this would be when we would
23:41 sign that contract amendment in January
23:44 and February is when the new cameras
23:45 would be installed and the program would
23:48 launched so the direction needed tonight
23:51 specifically the administration is
23:52 recommending or excuse me is requesting
23:55 uh that you review the administration's
23:57 proposal to add a new school speed zone
24:00 camera location at isqua Valley
24:01 Elementary School and to provide
24:03 Direction on the administration's
24:05 proposal to sign a contract Amendment
24:07 with ver Mobility to install and operate
24:09 two new cameras on Newport Way
24:13 Northwest and with that I will pause for
24:17 questions council member
24:20 Joe thank you I had a question on the uh
24:22 Equity study you just touched on uh
24:25 would that Equity study be the same
24:28 study is required under HP 2384 or does
24:31 it differ that is the same study okay
24:34 and then uh followup question it the
24:37 analysis indicates that uh the impact
24:41 study needs to look
24:42 at um the placement of livability
24:46 accessibility economics education and
24:49 environmental health when identifying
24:51 where to locate the automatic automated
24:54 Traffic Safety camera could you give a
24:56 little bit more information about that
24:59 if you could so the the great thing is
25:02 that actually the vendor assessment has
25:04 done a little bit of that work for us
25:05 already um a great example and I'm
25:09 kicking myself for not including it in
25:10 the packet this evening Lake Forest Park
25:13 uh recently did a similar study uh for
25:16 their new traffic camera program um and
25:19 so it I can't speak exactly to the
25:21 methodology but that would be a good
25:22 example of what you would see a lot of
25:25 the the data is actually pretty similar
25:27 so it's around what is the current
25:29 travel pattern there what is the current
25:31 incidence of speeding um what is the
25:34 flow of foot traffic and bike traffic in
25:37 that area as well um and trying to get a
25:39 sense of who might be if anyone
25:43 um the word I'm looking for who might be
25:47 um impacted un necessarily by the
25:50 installation of new
25:52 cameras okay and um I guess there could
25:55 be a number of different parties that
25:57 could be impacted when I was thinking
25:59 about this um are we concerned about
26:02 equity in terms of the racial socio
26:06 economic breakdown of the people that
26:08 are getting the tickets are we concerned
26:10 about the equity impact to the people in
26:14 the neighborhood or the people going to
26:17 and from school as you point out kind of
26:19 walking to school and I don't know if
26:21 you have the answer that I was just
26:23 curious um as to how what Equity lens
26:26 we're using and what Equity point of
26:28 view we were going to approach it from
26:30 it would be people in the neighborhood
26:31 and people going to and from school
26:34 there's not a great way on a
26:37 pre-installation timeline for us to
26:39 predict the demographics of people
26:42 driving through the area okay thank you
26:44 for that clarification appreciate it
26:47 yep Deputy council president thank you
26:51 so one of the things that um isn't
26:54 talked about here is would uh I'm
26:56 presuming this would allev iate or
26:59 relieve a traffic um officer from
27:03 patrolling Newport Way as often as they
27:06 do now uh are there any potential
27:08 savings that we would make through
27:10 putting the cameras in um and that might
27:14 be I know that might be hard to document
27:16 because they probably are responding on
27:19 a needs basis but it seems to me that in
27:21 some ways we're going to save some money
27:24 here in terms of Officer presence on
27:27 Newport Way is that that correct I can't
27:29 say that that that is correct I do think
27:32 what I would hope and assume would be
27:34 true is that by not needing to be there
27:36 they could be elsewhere I think in
27:38 general we have a need for officers in a
27:40 number of places so if we can alleviate
27:43 their need to be there that means
27:44 they're able to be present in other
27:45 parts of the
27:47 community okay all right that was my
27:49 assumption too uh and um the other I
27:52 also was interested in the equity study
27:55 um would we be looking at
27:59 Equity differences between Grand Ridge
28:01 and isqua Valley Elementary um would
28:05 that be part of that Equity study are we
28:08 looking at are more people of color for
28:11 example impacted at grandbridge than at
28:13 isal Valley Elementary or vice versa at
28:17 we would be just looking at the one
28:19 location if we were going to move
28:21 forward specifically to understand the
28:23 impacts on Newport Way um rather than
28:26 comparing the two okay thank
28:30 you we have any other
28:34 questions and uh does that conclude your
28:36 presentation for us this evening it does
28:39 I'll ask the clerk whether we have
28:40 anyone uh uh remote have we have we had
28:44 anyone join us remotely who might
28:45 potentially want to make public comment
28:48 chair Mars we have not we have not okay
28:51 so I guess now we can go into the
28:52 direction needed
28:56 section I will go first thank you uh
29:00 appreciate the staff presentation
29:01 tonight very thorough and you were able
29:03 to answer uh some of the curveball
29:05 questions that chairman Marts had for
29:07 you appreciate that um I believe this is
29:10 a good uh program to uh pursue and to uh
29:14 complete the equity
29:16 study um I had I had kids who went to
29:19 Ive and I often travel to the road
29:22 myself and and try to walk that road um
29:25 the speeds during school hours are are
29:28 manageable um and when people slow down
29:32 to 20 M hour uh people speed during
29:35 those times it is a little bit scary so
29:38 I think this proposal is uh appropriate
29:41 for Public Safety I think that it's uh
29:44 an appropriate direction for the
29:46 administration to pursue I would ask
29:49 they look into signing the contract
29:50 Amendment with the vendor Vera Vera
29:53 Mobility excuse me
29:58 Deputy council president thanks uh well
30:01 first of all yes I uh would like to see
30:04 us put a traffic uh camera uh along
30:07 Newport Way again I also travel that
30:10 road frequently and um it it can get uh
30:15 dangerous out there if uh people are
30:18 speeding um there's already a lot that
30:20 we've done out there but I think there
30:21 could be more and I think we talked way
30:24 back when we first started looking at
30:25 this uh that we would revisit this when
30:28 the traffic circles go in and yes
30:30 because that might have an impact on
30:32 speed as well so so at some point we
30:34 might revisit this my concern um and I
30:38 told you earlier I'm a little conflicted
30:40 because we discovered through this
30:42 process that grand Bridge Elementary
30:44 does have a
30:45 problem um and I um when I'm looking at
30:49 the speeding figures for after
30:53 school uh in that Community grandbridge
30:56 is a public facility and there 's a lot
30:58 of activities that are going on there
31:00 after school and so um getting an extra
31:04 officer out there I think to help that
31:06 Community again um I brought this one up
31:10 because uh had heard over the years many
31:12 many complaints about people speeding
31:15 past that school um in dangerous fashion
31:18 and especially when it's dark and rainy
31:20 it's really a dark Road at that time so
31:24 I don't know what that what that might
31:26 mean but I'm wondering if we can work
31:29 with the school district to identify
31:31 those large community Gatherings at that
31:33 school and see if we can get some extra
31:35 enforcement out there during those
31:37 periods of
31:39 time if we didn't have to sign a
31:41 five-year contract i' you know it' be
31:44 fun to do a pilot for a year but we
31:46 can't do that so uh just to see if it
31:49 really made an impact but since it's a
31:51 five-year contract I don't think we we
31:53 ought to uh obligate ourselves to that
31:56 so I I do want uh the U administration's
32:00 uh recommendation thank you thank you um
32:04 can you go back to the slide that shows
32:07 the impact of the uh revenues in the
32:09 fourth and the fifth year going over to
32:12 uh other fund yeah I I just totally
32:15 think we should do um both locations um
32:17 they're both a problem it seems very
32:19 arbitrary to me to tackle one of the two
32:22 they're both they're a comparable
32:24 magnitude problem it's a comparable
32:25 number of speeders going past the two
32:28 locations um it seems really bizarre to
32:31 just choose one of the two and not do
32:33 the other two clearly um the
32:36 cameras uh at Grand Ridge would make
32:39 enough money over the five years to
32:41 cover the cost and and a lot more than
32:43 that even if in years four and five uh
32:46 it didn't make a lot of money uh they
32:48 would bring in a lot of money in the
32:49 first three years according to our
32:52 projections um and so we have we have
32:54 facts and we have theories right the
32:56 facts is that people are speeding at
32:58 both of these locations a ton uh in
33:01 front of where our kids go to school um
33:03 there's a theory that we won't make a
33:05 ton of money in years four and years
33:06 five but again over the course of the
33:09 contract um both will make a lot of
33:11 money and if you stand back and sort of
33:13 squint they're both going to make the
33:15 same you know there's going to be same
33:16 number of digits the amount of money
33:18 that we would make in both of these
33:19 programs and if we have to give some of
33:21 the money back to the state well we do
33:23 that in other programs as well so I
33:25 would really like to see us do um both
33:27 of these schools they're they're an
33:29 equal magnitude problem currently and it
33:31 would be a great problem to have at the
33:33 end of year five if we've if we've
33:35 caused a huge reduction in speeding and
33:37 Grand Ridge and we're not making much
33:39 money at the end of year five then we
33:41 can we can dismantle that those cameras
33:43 and declare Victory so I would I would
33:47 ask that my fellow um committee members
33:50 um consider a recommendation of both
33:56 locations council member Joe yeah I'll
33:58 just ask um I'm not opposed to that I
34:01 just want to hear from staff to see if
34:03 that would cause um any delays or
34:07 additional uh work that might need to be
34:09 done and how that might impact the
34:11 timeline sure I think one of the big
34:13 concerns uh that I didn't go into in
34:15 this presentation is Staffing um so you
34:18 see the numbers there the expenditure
34:20 numbers around hiring enough people to
34:24 administer this program um
34:28 however hiring enough people to
34:29 administer to school zone cameras may be
34:32 a challenge uh you're looking at that
34:35 point at the addition of upwards of
34:37 potentially five Court staff um and
34:41 potentially
34:43 even in some cases at least at the
34:46 beginning um maybe up to eight police
34:50 officers uh and so that could be the
34:52 that I think is probably the biggest
34:53 barrier uh is potentially the the
34:55 ability to staff the
34:59 response to the violations that we would
35:01 see if we were to install both at the
35:03 same
35:05 time well now I'm confused because these
35:07 are net revenues I assumed they were the
35:09 revenue after covering the costs
35:11 associated with the programs not not an
35:13 issue of cost an issue of hiring so not
35:16 an issue actually not an issue of we
35:19 have we would have the dollars to pay
35:21 for the people it would be the issue of
35:23 bringing that many new staff members on
35:25 here um between now and the end of
35:27 January when we would hope to launch the
35:29 first camera so we're looking at maybe
35:33 two uh court and four police right now
35:36 for one um and we look at upwards of
35:38 potentially double that that would just
35:40 be the that would be the barrier not the
35:42 not the dollars but the human human
35:46 capital all right but I mean this has
35:48 been a problem evidently for a while and
35:51 if it takes us a little while to staff
35:53 up takes us a little while to staff up
35:55 the the other thing I would I I um would
35:58 mention in consideration in both of
36:00 these is I do not like the idea of
36:03 saying well we can just put an officer
36:05 up there so we don't need these cameras
36:07 every single officer we have is vital
36:10 right to the city and is is hard one
36:13 right and and every uniformed officer
36:15 that we have that's out there on patrol
36:18 we need on patrol not stacked up when we
36:21 could solve the problem with a robotic
36:25 just we are told time and time again how
36:27 how vital are very small police council
36:31 member to Michelle Deputy council
36:32 president just just a note that the
36:34 cameras won't be working after uh school
36:37 gets out so so even if we did this extra
36:41 program it's going to stop at 5:00 is it
36:45 on Second Avenue so so that wouldn't
36:48 solve the problem of of the extra
36:50 Speeders uh in the evening we'd still
36:53 need an officer up there I think so or
36:57 now I thought about do we start the
36:59 cameras a little bit later and let them
37:01 go a little bit later that might be
37:03 another option
37:05 but we'd still need uh if we if it was
37:08 during the regular school hours we're
37:10 still going to need an officer up there
37:12 I will say that point well taken by your
37:15 comments this is going to go back to the
37:17 full Council right so I think maybe it
37:19 goes back to the full council with a
37:21 split decision and we red discuss it at
37:24 that point if that's the will of the
37:26 body then then then we then that'll be
37:28 the will of the body
37:32 okay so I uh so I take it uh both of you
37:35 still would like to just have uh the
37:37 cameras
37:42 Newport and not on at Grand
37:45 Ridge I think the recommendation should
37:47 go back with um a split decision as as
37:52 council member D Melle points out um
37:54 that U the location on Newport is sounds
37:59 like it has three votes and then the uh
38:02 other camera is uh recommendation for
38:06 full Council consideration with no decis
38:09 of two 21 or
38:11 30 I think 21 reflects the sense of the
38:14 body two of the council members would
38:16 like to um have the program in front of
38:19 isqua Valley Elementary and one of the
38:21 three would like to have it in front of
38:22 both elements great very well sounds
38:24 good does the administration have what
38:26 they're looking for from us this
38:28 evening all right Dale thank you so much
38:30 for your presentation this evening uh do
38:33 my fellow committee members have
38:35 anything else uh for the committee at
38:37 this
38:38 time all right well uh I have no
38:41 announcements to make so with that we
38:43 are adjourned at
38:46 708 thank you all very much thank you at
38:48 home