sheriff’s office - bos.stafford.va.usbos.stafford.va.us/agenda/psc04192016.pdf · stafford...

Sheriff’s Office

This report summarizes the activities for 5 years of the Stafford Sheriff’s Office from March 2012 through

March 2016. The charts compare data year-to-date from January through December of each year. Below are highlights through March. The average reflects

comparison of 2012 through 2016.

Crime Distribution Crime 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Average Property Crime 38.8% 42.9% 50.5% 54.9% 54.7% 48.3% Narcotics Violations 25.7% 23.6% 17.3% 21.5% 20.9% 21.8% Fraud Crimes 26.3% 26.1% 25.9% 18.1% 17.5% 22.8% Crimes Against Persons 9.2% 7.4% 6.4% 5.5% 6.9% 7.1%

The above is a summary for all the crimes reported, YTD

Major Crimes Summary Crime 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Average All Reported Crimes 3,052 3,029 2,612 2,697 2,830 2844.0 Major Crimes 1,127 1,084 1,036 1,013 1,085 1069.0 % of All Reported Crimes That are Major Crimes 36.9% 35.8% 39.7% 37.6% 38.3% 37.7%

Crimes Against Persons Crime 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Average Kidnapping/Abduction 5 3 5 4 5 4.4 Robbery 11 8 8 6 11 8.8 Homicide 1 1 1 0 0 0.6 Rape 4 7 4 8 5 5.6 Aggravated Assault 55 34 26 22 30 33.4

Crimes Against Property Crime 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Average Motor Vehicle Theft 18 11 23 23 26 20.2 Burglary 45 36 46 36 48 42.2 Larceny 374 418 454 497 519 452.4 Fraud/Financial 296 283 268 183 190 244.0

Sheriff’s Office

This report summarizes the activities for 5 years of the Stafford Sheriff’s Office from March 2012 through

March 2016. The charts compare data year-to-date from January through December of each year. Below are highlights through March. The average reflects

comparison of 2012 through 2016.

Misc Activity 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Average Crime Rate per 100 Residents 1.17 1.24 1.15 1.14 1.31 1.2 Concealed Weapons Permits and Federal Licenses 859 631 652 1,307 518 793.4 Criminal Arrest 1,224 1,253 1,290 1,552 1,583 1380.4 DUI Arrests 91 119 80 102 121 102.6 Citations 2,175 2,439 2,667 2,513 1,975 2353.8 Deputies Assaulted 11 - 7 3 6 5.4 Calls for Service 16,757 15,338 15,336 15,362 13,760 15310.6

Animal Control Activity 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Average Dogs Picked Up 126 99 168 149 212 150.8 Dogs Turned In 93 102 84 124 141 108.8 Dog Adoptions 67 69 67 81 87 74.2 Cats Turned In 166 121 106 143 200 147.2 Cat Adoptions 74 31 41 30 47 44.6 Dogs Euthanized 47 57 42 61 81 57.6 Cats Euthanized 46 72 47 79 122 73.2

Courts Activity 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Average Evictions 171 182 237 159 194 188.6 Out-of-State Prisoner Extraditions 33 34 26 23 28 28.8

Communications Activity 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Average ECC Call Volume 64,070 67,325 65,977 71,867 71,903 68,228.4 Total Law Enforcement CAD Incidents Processed 31,604 33,568 34,676 34,625 35,514 33,997.4 Total Fire and Rescue CAD Incidents Processed 4,351 4,078 4,897 4,865 6,063 4,850.8 ECC Auxiliary/Support CAD Events - Utility 433 684 626 538 469 550.0 ECC Auxiliary/Support CAD Events - Animal Control 530 565 662 589 497 568.6 ECC Auxiliary/Support CAD Events - Control Burns 892 710 665 1,113 1,407 957.4

Summary Incident Statistics

March 2016

Jan – Mar 2016

Jan – Mar 2015

Jan – Mar 2014

Jan – Mar 2013

Jan –Mar 2012

Arrived on-scene calls 1,411 4,054 4,069 4,196 3,867 3,956 Responses in excess of eight

minutes 422 1,349 1,260 1,225 992 956

Percentage of responses under eight minutes (All Responses) 70% 67% 69% 71% 74% 76%

Percentage of responses under eight minutes

(Emergency – Priority 1 Only)

67% 64% 65% 64% 66% 67%

Fire and Rescue Department

March’s report, including the 5 year look back comparison includes data on all incidents where the final disposition of the incident was that the Department arrived on scene.

Response Times of Less Than Eight Minutes by First Due Emergency – Priority 1 Calls

March 2016

Jan – Mar 2016

Jan – Mar 2015

Jan – Mar 2014

Jan – Mar 2013

Jan –Mar 2012

Zone 1: Falmouth 69% 70% 69% 68% 75% 75% Zone 2: Stafford 81% 71% 69% 67% 83% 82% Zone 3: Widewater 32% 25% 33% 19% 25% 34% Zone 4: Mountain View 70% 56% 63% 61% 80% 60% Zone 5: Brooke 71% 45% 68% 49% 50% 55% Zone 6: Hartwood 45% 36% 34% 38% 50% 46%

Zone 7: White Oak 60% 60% 52% 56% 49% 66%

Zone 8: Rockhill 53% 49% 58% 39% 33% 33% Zone 9: Aquia 71% 69% 69% 72% 77% 83% Zone 10: Potomac Hills 80% 74% 76% 78% 79% 86% Zone 12: Berea 67% 67% 66% 67% 68% 71% Zone 14: North Stafford 70% 68% 74% 72% 75% 69% Mutual Aid Provided 35% 30% 37% 35% 46% 44%


Incident by Nature

March 2016

Jan – Mar 2016

Jan – Mar 2015

Jan – Mar 2014

Jan – Mar 2013

Jan –Mar 2012

Emergency Medical Calls 854 2,546 2,276 2,241 2,064 2,158

Fire Calls 188 555 663 580 556 540

Vehicle Accident Calls 133 371 368 376 403 386

Technical Rescue Calls 4 12 10 12 12 15

Service Calls 235 570 752 987 832 1,217 Arrived on-scene calls

(TOTAL) 1,411 4,054 4,069 4,196 3,867 3,956

Emergency Medical Services Summary

March 2016

Jan – Mar 2016

Jan – Mar 2015

Jan – Mar 2014

Jan – Mar 2013

Jan –Mar 2012

Total Encounters 873 2,563 2,290 2,264 2,226 2,707 Patients Dead at Scene 8 27 13 21 20 20

Patient Refusals Obtained 149 389 354 356 376 767

Transferred to another Unit/POV 0 4 0 2 2 2 Transports Provided 714 1,427 1,922 1,885 1,828 1,919 Destination MWH 362 818 1,053 1,039 1,001 924

Destination Stafford 339 597 837 816 787 933

Other Destination 13 12 32 30 30 61

Fire Marshal Activity

March 2016

Jan – Mar 2016

Jan – Mar 2015

Jan – Mar 2014

Jan – Mar 2013

Jan –Mar 2012

Fire Marshal Office Responses 14 49 74 51 69 97 Inspections 248 586 771 916 773 900

Plan Reviews 39 88 111 114 94 21 Fire Investigations 16 23 16 12 21 18


Mutual Aid

March 2016 Jan – Mar 2016

Stafford Provided

Aid TO Stafford Received

Aid FROM Stafford Provided

Aid TO Stafford Received

Aid FROM

Fauquier 19 11 42 25

Fredericksburg 40 10 117 36

King George 7 1 16 2

Prince William 1 4 4 5

Quantico 6 41 7 120

Spotsylvania 1 2 4 7

Total 74 69 189 195

Non-Emergency Activity

March 2016 Jan – Mar 2016

Training Hours 3,850 10,534

Pre-Plans of Business / Buildings 27 55

Public Education Hours/ Students 37/190 94/532

Community Outreach Sessions 185 460

Special Project Hours 671 1,892

Volunteer Staffing By Station (EMS)

March 2016

Jan – Mar 2016

Jan – Mar 2015

Jan – Mar 2014

Jan – Mar 2013

Jan –Mar 2012

Zone 1: Falmouth 3% 1% 2% 6% 3% 2% Zone 2: Stafford 0% 1% 6% 21% 33% 20% Zone 3: Widewater 0% 3% 0% 0% 3% 5% Zone 4: Mountain View 12% 12% 14% 16% 12% 6% Zone 5: Brooke 1% 2% 2% 8% 1% 2% Zone 6: Hartwood 21% 9% 3% 2% 0% 8% Zone 7: White Oak 3% 5% 6% 6% 4% 7% Zone 8: Rockhill 24% 29% 33% 38% 34% 30% Zone 9: Aquia 38% 38% 24% 31% 28% 37% Zone 10: Potomac Hills 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% Zone 12: Berea 5% 7% 4% 17% 88% 0%


Volunteer Staffing By Station (FIRE)

March 2016

Jan – Mar 2016

Jan – Mar 2015

Jan – Mar 2014

Jan – Mar 2013

Jan –Mar 2012

Zone 1: Falmouth 70% 79% 81% 96% 97% 100% Zone 2: Stafford 82% 78% 69% 70% 96% 94% Zone 3: Widewater 14% 16% 7% 17% 15% 16% Zone 4: Mountain View 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 1% Zone 5: Brooke * 1% 7% 19% 11% 10% 12% Zone 6: Hartwood 30% 33% 35% 38% 61% 68% Zone 7: White Oak 33% 34% 7% 15% 22% 66% Zone 8: Rockhill 61% 60% 92% 55% 24% 24% Zone 10: Potomac Hills 4% 5% 8% 24% 33% 37%

* Includes supplemental staffing provided by OPS 5

coadmch

Typewritten Text

14

Attachment 1 R16-125

BACKGROUND REPORT

The U. S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is soliciting applications for the FY2016 Body-Worn Camera (BWC) Policy and Implementation Program Grant (Grant). This Grant solicitation is for law enforcement agencies seeking to establish or enhance their own BWC program. Successful applicants will be responsible for a mandatory 50% in-kind or cash match.

Law enforcement agencies across the country are using BWC’s as a promising tool to improve law enforcement’s interaction with the public. BWC’s would provide visual and audio records of interactions with the public. Preliminary evidence indicates that the presence of BWC’s helps strengthen accountability and transparency, and assists in de-escalating conflicts, resulting in more constructive encounters between law enforcement and members of the community. Preliminary research indicates that departments that have effectively implemented BWC programs receive fewer public complaints, file fewer use-of-force reports, and show a reduction in adjudicated complaints, resulting in a decrease of settlements.

The Stafford Sheriff’s Office spent more than a year researching options available for the deployment of BWC’s, and believes that the technology will have a positive effect on the relationship between the community and the Sheriff’s Office. With the national interest for BWC’s to be implemented, and the urging of nation-wide elected officials, including the President of the United States, federal grant opportunities are available.

The cost of the system is $652,964 for the first five years. The Sheriff and Commonwealth’s Attorney would have annual personnel and operating costs of $312,000 to support the system.

There is a grant opportunity that would provide $142,232 to offset the cost of the cameras at $1,500 per camera. In the first year, the match would be paid from the asset forfeiture fund. The table below shows the flow of funds for the first five years. The County’s cost would approximately $400,000 per year. The Commonwealth’s Attorney, Eric Olsen, provided a memo (Attachment 3), which offers his support and provides his input and concerns about the impact of this implementation to his office.

Sheriff

Grant Funding

Asset Forfeiture

Fund Local Funds Total

1 FT deputy (included in

FY2017 Budget)

I FT prosecutor / 1 FT paralegal (additional cost and positions to

FY2017 Budget)

Purchase and Support the System (additional cost to

FY2017 Budget) TotalYear 1 $121,298 $89,586 $210,884 $86,000 $211,000 $15,000 $312,000 $401,586 Year 2 $20,934 $0 $89,586 $110,520 $86,000 $211,000 $15,000 $312,000 $401,586 Year 3 $0 $0 $110,520 $110,520 $86,000 $211,000 $15,000 $312,000 $422,520 Year 4 $0 $0 $110,520 $110,520 $86,000 $211,000 $15,000 $312,000 $422,520 Year 5 $0 $0 $110,520 $110,520 $86,000 $211,000 $15,000 $312,000 $422,520

Body Worn

Cameras

Yearly Total Local

Funds

Cost of Cameras and MaintenanceCommonwealth's Attorney

Personnel and Operating costs

Attachment 1 R16-125 Page 2 There are reporting requirements on performance measurements should the Grant be awarded. There will only be 16 awards nation-wide to agencies that are categorized as mid-sized agencies. The expiration of this Grant is September 30, 2018, with an application deadline of April 27, 2016.

Staff recommends approval of proposed Resolution R16-125, which authorizes the County Administrator to apply for the FY2016 Body-Worn Camera Policy and Implementation Program Grant.

R16-125

PROPOSED

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF STAFFORD STAFFORD, VIRGINIA

RESOLUTION

At a regular meeting of the Stafford County Board of Supervisors (the Board) held in the Board Chambers, George L. Gordon, Jr., Government Center, Stafford, Virginia, on the 19th day of April, 2016: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MEMBERS: VOTE: Robert “Bob” Thomas, Jr., Chairman Laura A. Sellers, Vice Chairman Meg Bohmke Jack R. Cavalier Wendy E. Maurer Paul V. Milde, III Gary F. Snellings ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On motion of , seconded by , which carried by a vote of , the following was adopted:

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO APPLY TO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR A GRANT TO PARTIALLY FUND BODY-WORN CAMERAS WHEREAS, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice

Program (OJP), Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), provides funding directly to law enforcement agencies through a Grant program to establish or enhance its Body-Worn Cameras (BWC) Policy and Implementation Program (Program); and WHEREAS, the Sheriff’s Office desires to increase both trust and communication between its deputies and citizens of Stafford County; and

WHEREAS, the Sheriff’s Office desires to seek grant funding for BWC’s through the Program; and WHEREAS, the BWC Grant (Grant) will cover $121,298 of the first year cost of $210,884 for any part of the Program; and WHEREAS, the balance of first year costs, $89,586, would be covered by asset forfeiture funds; and

R16-125 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Grant, in year two, would fund $20,934; the balance of $89,586 also being paid out of local funds; and WHEREAS, the County would be required to provide future funding for the line-item data storage costs, and maintenance payments for years three through five ($110,520 annually) totaling $331,560; and WHEREAS, the County would be also required to provide funding in years one through five for a deputy assigned to the BWC program, at an annual cost of $86,000 including salary and benefits;

WHEREAS, the County would be also required to provide funding in years one through five for a two additional positons in the Commonwealth’s Attorney Office assigned to the BWC program and operating fund support the system required for the BWC program, at an annual cost of $226,000; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Stafford County Board of Supervisors on this the 19th day of April, 2016, that the County Administrator be and he hereby is authorized to apply to the United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance for a grant under the Body-Worn Camera Policy and Implementation Program Grant, No. BJA-2016-9199. AJR:DPD:cmm

coadmch

Typewritten Text

Attachment 3

coadmch

Typewritten Text

Stafford County Courthouse A Quick History Since 1992

Space Needs Planning In 1992, the County completed the most recent expansion of the 1922 courthouse and from that time until the early 2000’s, the building held:

Circuit Court & Clerk General District Court & Clerk Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court & Clerk Sheriff’s Office Administration 911 Center Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office Court Services Unit

In 2004, with dramatic population increase, the County engaged in a space

needs planning exercise that addressed near-term and long-term space needs for general government and the courts.

In 2005, the County purchased the former Virginia Boat Storage Center

with the intent of using the land for a new Juvenile & Domestic Relations Courthouse. In 2006, the Board directed that the boat property not be used for a courthouse and that a master plan be developed for a courts complex on County-owned land south of Courthouse Road and west of Jefferson Davis Highway, named “Courts Square”. Courts Square would include a new Juvenile & Domestic Relations Courthouse opening in 2010 and a new Circuit/General District Courthouse in 2020.

In 2009, the Board-appointed a citizen Courts Planning Committee to

reassess courts spaces needs. The Committee recommended a three-courtroom expansion of the existing courthouse. With the adoption of the CIP in 2010, the new J&DR Courthouse was removed from the CIP and the Board added the courthouse expansion project. This project remains in the adopted CIP with an anticipated completion date of 2022 and was validated with a 2015 space needs study. Space Enhancements in the Existing Courthouse

Since 2006, the County has taken steps to prolong the life and enhance the space of the courthouse.

Addition of jury boxes in General District courtrooms for use by circuit court

Addition of three judges’ chambers Use of the Board Chambers as a courtroom Construction of Courtroom #6 after moving CSU to rented space Construction of Courtroom #7, judges chambers, clerks’ storage, and jury

assembly room after moving the Sheriff’s Office and 911 Center to the Humphrey Building

Construction of the Chichester Building to move CSU out of rented space and move the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office out of the courthouse and rented space

Renovated Circuit Court Judges’ office space after moving the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office to the Chichester Building

Completed security enhancements at the public entrance to the courthouse

Space Needs Analysis – 2015 After the completion of the modifications noted above, and the new data available on caseloads since 2009, the County felt that another look at space needs was advisable. A consultant experienced with court facilities conducted a thorough analysis of the current space and caseloads, and prepared recommendations for expansion to meet courtroom needs until 2025. A summary of these findings and recommendations were provided to the Public Safety Committee last June. This summary is attached. The proposed Capital Improvement Program was developed using the information and recommendations from this recent study, with $29 million budgeted for the courthouse expansion beginning with design in FY2019, and opening in 2022.

Courthouse Space Study

Public Safety Committee Update

June 16, 2015

The County conducted a Courts Planning Study in 2009 to assess immediate

and long range Courthouse requirements.

A number of options were studied to expand the Courthouse, including a

new standalone Courthouse complex near Station 2, and expanding the

existing Courthouse.

The Board decided to include funding for the expansion option in the CIP.

Since that study, the Courthouse has seen multiple projects which affect

the space needs, including renovation of the basement to add a courtroom,

storage and office space, completion of the Chichester Building with

relocation of Commonwealth Attorney staff out of the Courthouse, and

renovation of the judge’s office area.

Additionally, updated data is available on case load and state judge

assignments.

Due to these changes, staff felt it would be beneficial to conduct an

updated space needs study to re-examine the space requirements at the

existing Courthouse campus site through 2025.

The study analyzed the current space situation at the Courthouse,

identified future space requirements for 2020 and 2025, and identified

approximate costs for each space need scenario.

Information included in the study was gathered through Court staff

interviews, questionnaires and onsite investigations; space needs for all

Court units and support services were analyzed.

The space study indicates current deficiencies as identified below:

o Inadequate Courtroom availability with current judicial staffing

o Issues with accessibility (ADA) and circulation (cramped office areas)

o Lack of workstations for current staff; deficient size of workstations

o Lack of storage and shared production areas

The results of the space study identify the need for additional space for all

Court units in 2020 and 2025 as identified below:

o Additional courtroom space for Circuit and Juvenile and Domestic

Relations Court due to increased judge allocations

o Increased staffing and additional associated office space

o A relocated secure public entrance that provides adequate ADA

accessibility

o A secure and enclosed prisoner ingress and egress area

o Training and meeting space for Court operations and staff

Overall space needs for 2020 increase 75% above the current square

footage; for 2025 there is a 103% increase:

o Current Square Footage 45,676 SF

o 2020 Square Footage 79,991 SF

o 2025 Square Footage 92,862 SF

Concept layouts to meet additional space needs have been developed as

Phase II of the space study project.

Anticipated costs for the 2020 space needs are estimated at $24.5M and an

additional $6.1M needed to meet the 2025 space needs; completing one

expansion in 2020 to meet both scenarios is estimated at $29.9M.

Estimated costs do not include additional site development (outside of the

building area), parking, plan review/permitting fees and furnishings:

o Estimated cost of site development/parking TBD

o Estimates cost of plan review/permitting $100K

o Estimated cost of furnishings $1.5M

The adopted FY16 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) contains $29.1M in

FY2019-2021 for the Courthouse Expansion, funded with bonds as the

identified revenue source.

The report will be completed in final form this summer. Consideration will

be given to adjusting a future CIP to reflect the information provided in this

report.

Presentation to the Stafford County Board of Supervisors by

Courts Complex Planning Committee November 17, 2009

Alan Gayle, Co-Chair

Samer Shalaby, Co-Chair

2

Courts Complex Planning Committee- November 17, 2009

Outline:

Authorization and Scope of Courts Complex Planning Committee assignment

Summary of Committee research and analysis

Committee recommendation

3


Authorization & Scope of Courts Complex Planning Committee:

Whereas, it is the desire of the Board to review past courts complex space needs planning and to evaluate those plans based on current and future courts needs as well as the current economic climate;

Whereas, the Board desires to appoint a committee that will be comprised of five citizens to accomplish this undertaking;

Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Stafford County Board of Supervisors on this the 5th day of May, 2009 that:

NAME EXPIRATION Joe Alexander Project Completion Ferris Belman Project Completion Alan Gayle Project Completion Ted Hontz Project Completion Samer Shalaby Project Completion

Be and they thereby are appointed to the Courts Complex Planning Committee; and

Be it further resolved that the committee be and is hereby requested to present its final report no later than August 31, 2009. The Committee received a 60-day extension to report in November.

The courts expansion plan estimate in the adopted CIP was $36.1 MM.

4


Committee Research & Analysis:

The Courts Complex Planning Committee met on: June 9, 2009 July 1, 2009 July 27, 2009 August 19, 2009 September 10, 2009 November 12, 2009

The Committee Research & Analysis included (among other items): Project overview and review of Virginia Courthouse Facilities Guidelines Tour of Courthouse Presentation of needs by Judge Bass, Commonwealth’s Attorney, Circuit Court Clerk, General

District Court, J&DR Court, Court Service Unit, Sheriff’s Office, others Tour of Chesterfield County Courts Building Analysis of existing recommendations Analysis and comparison of Courthouse Expansion vs. New Site Construction Request for additional specific options Review of comparative county debt profile

5


1. Stafford will have 7 courtrooms as of December 31, 2009 2. 3 new judges approved for circuit awaiting funding could be assigned to Stafford

Courthouse Space Needs: Growth Estimates

Judges and Courtroom Trends from 2012 Base Year (Occupancy Year) Stafford County Courts

20-Year2009 Population-

Virginia Caseload Population- BasedStatewide Trends-Based Based Judges/

Stafford County Average Judges/Courtroom Judges/Courtroom CourtroomCaseload Trends Caseloads Needs Needs (1) Needs (1)

Courts 2009 2019 Per Judge 2009 2019 2012 2022 2032

J&DR 10,932 15,807 4,487 2.44 3.52 2.29 3.39 5.01

Gen Dist 39,090 50,817 26,485 1.48 1.92 1.83 2.71 4.01

Circuit 6,148 10,479 1,858 3.31 5.62 2.29 3.39 5.01

Total Judges/Courtroom Needs 11.06 6.41 9.49 14.03Courtroom Needs Rounded to next Full Courtroom 11 7 10 14

Notes(1) Need calculation is based upon the Benchmark County---Prince William County

2003 Population/Judge and Stafford County growth factor at 4%/year from 2003.

REDUCED GROWTH RATE: 3.8%Total Judges/Courtroom Needs 11.06 6.33 9.13 13.30Courtroom Needs Rounded to next Full Courtroom 11 7 10 14



6


Courthouse Expansion vs. New Site Construction

Advantages / Benefits

Disadvantages / Challenges

Expansion of Existing Courthouse

Demolition of Chichester Building and old Jail Reduces overall operating costs by

consolidating security entrance requirements, reducing maintenance staff and lowering energy costs by not having a second, separate building.

Move public entrance to parking lot level; enhance ADA accessibility

Tignor site is cleared for future development May allow development of an access from

Courthouse Rd to Bells Hill Rd. improving traffic flow in the Courthouse area.

Opportunity for parking lot resurfacing. Opportunity for new roof, new HVAC, better

camera security, secure judge parking, and secure prisoner exchange.

Can be converted to administrative space in the future.

Cost (depending upon option selected) Interior Courthouse enhancements (more space

for J & DR with lobby relocation, etc.). Provides for additional storage in clerks area.

May require acquisition of Clark property (Goggins Building)

Court Services Unit remains in rented space indefinitely.

Limits expansion of non-Courts agencies at the Government Center complex.

Meets short and near-term need but not 20-year need. Doesn’t include needed Courthouse Road and

sidewalk improvements. Site plan approval complications – Architectural

Review Board (historical building designation) , Board of Zoning Appeals (40’ setback, sidewalk requirements), VDOT (Traffic Impact Analysis, highway entrance limitations), open space quantities, landscaping

Unknown site conditions with demolition of former jail and construction in same location.

Proximity to Courthouse Road and effects on redevelopment and security.

Storage space currently provided for by the jail and Chichester buildings will need to be replaced.

Disruption of current court operations during construction.

New Site Construction

Initiates Courts Square vision for the County. Provides for outdoor space for public events – music, art, etc. and improves opportunity for economic development for the Courthouse area.

Provides short-term and near-term fix for all Courts.

Provides long-term fix for J & DR Courts Establishes infrastructure for Courts Square

Complex Facilitates extension of Jason Mooney Drive

thereby realizing re-development vision.

Cost. Additional land acquisition required (Clark/Alsop

properties)

7


Cost Estimates: Getting the Most for the Money – Capital Costs

CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW J&DR COURTS BUILDING AT THE COURTS SQUARE SITE (South side of Courthouse Road)

NEW J&DR COURTS SQUARE FEET IN COURTS BUILDING BUILDING

ITEM BUILDING OPTIONS J&DR GD CIR SHARED TOTAL CC CLERKGD CLERK

J&DR CLERK

COM ATTY

TOTAL (GSF)

1 NEW SITE---A 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 6,200 0 86,400 $32.70Provides Five (5) Courtrooms/Outdoor Civic Space/Roads/Parking

2 NEW SITE---B 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 6,200 0 80,500 $30.90Provides Three (3) Courtrooms/Outdoor Civic Space/Roads/Parking

3 NEW SITE---C 3+2 Shelled 0 0 0 5 0 0 6,200 0 86,400 $32.10Provides Five (5) Courtrooms w/ two (2) Shelled/Outdoor Civic Space/Roads/Parking

EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING COURTHOUSE

COURTHOUSE COURT ROOMS IN EXPANDED COURTHOUSE SQUARE FEET IN EXPANDED COURTHOUS EXPANSION

ITEM EXPANSION OPTIONS J&DR GD CIR SHARED TOTAL CC CLERKGD CLERK

J&DR CLERK

COM ATTY

TOTAL (GSF)

Retrofit Cost

Expansion Cost (Mil)

1 CONCEPT A 3 2 3 2 10 7,441 4,073 4,022 0 40,000 $21.68 $1.87 $19.81Provides Ten (10) Courtrooms/Enlarges Lobby/Provides HC Access from Parking Lot/Upgrades Security and CCTV/Replaces (2) RTUs/Re-Roofs/Adds 208 Parking Spaces/Renovates Existing Govt Center Parking Lot *

2 CONCEPT B 4 2+1 Shelled4+1 Shelled 1 13 7,441 3,389 4,022 0 76,350 $32.68 $1.87 $30.81Provides Thirteen (13) Courtrooms w/(2) Shelled/Enlarges Lobby/ProvidesHC Access from Parking Lot/Upgrades Security and CCTV/Replaces (2) RTUs/Re-Roofs/Adds 208 Parking Spaces/Renovates Existing Govt Center Parking Lot *

3 CONCEPT C 4 3 5 1 13 7,441 3,389 4,022 0 76,350 $34.20 $1.87 $32.32Provides Thirteen (13) Courtrooms/Enlarges Lobby/Provides HC Accessfrom Parking Lot/Upgrades Security and CCTV/Replaces (2)HVAC RTUs/Re-Roofs/Adds 208 Parking Spaces/Renovates Existing Govt Center Parking Lot *

4 CONCEPT A-1 3 2 4 3 12 7,441 4,073 4,022 0 71,419 $32.69 $1.87 $30.82Provides Twelve (12) Courtrooms/Enlarges Lobby/Provides HC Access from Parking Lot/Upgrades Security and CCTV/Replaces (2) RTUs/Re-Roofs/Adds 208 Parking Spaces/Renovates Existing Govt Center Parking Lot *

COURT ROOMS TOTAL EST COST

(Mil)

TOTAL EST COST

(Mil)

8


Cost Estimates: Getting the Most for the Money – Operating Costs

FY2010 Cost to Operate Current

Courthouse 6/7 Courtrooms (65,000 Sq.Ft.)

Cost to Build New J&DR Courthouse

5 Courtrooms (90,000 Sq.Ft.)

Cost to Expand Current Courthouse

Concept A 3 Additional

10 Total Courtrooms (40,000 Sq. Ft.)


Concept A-1 5 Additional



Concept B 4 Additional



Concept C 6 Additional


Construction/Expansion of Courthouse 32,700,000 21,700,000 32,690,000 32,680,000 34,200,000 Renovation of 1st. Floor 1,030,200 Included Included Included Included

33,730,200

1st year start up costs:Community Facilities 103,500 74,500 74,500 74,500 74,500

Court Services - Sheriff 128,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 231,500 194,500 194,500 194,500 194,500

Estimated Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs (in FY10 dollars):Total annual operating & maintenance:(including Community Facilities, Court Services, and Court Expenses: 5,067,100 1,733,400 1,277,600 1,446,000 1,472,500 1,472,500 Less: Savings - Court Services Unit Rent (104,800) (104,800) (104,800) (104,800) (104,800)

1,628,600 1,172,800 1,341,200 1,367,700 1,367,700

Debt Service - 20 years, 5.5% $2,823,000 $1,816,000 $2,735,000 $2,735,000 $2,862,000

TOTAL $4,451,600 $2,988,800 $4,076,200 $4,102,700 $4,229,700

*Current budget for Sheriff's Court Services includes personnel in supervisory, administrative, and civil process positions whose numbers would not be increased in any of the added courtroom options.

Operating costs for all scenarios assume that three courtrooms will be in operation on opening day.

Estimated Annual Cost: Debt Service and Operating Maintenance Stafford County Courts

9


Financial Capacity

Debt ServiceTax Real Estate Government Debt/ Debt/ Adj. Debt/ as % of Rate Valuation Debt (4) R/E Valuation Capita (1) Capita (2) Gov't. Revenue (3)

COUNTY POP. (/$100) ($MM) ($MM) (%) ($) ($) (%)

Group One - Fast GrowingStafford 123,700 0.700 16,913 409.6 2.42% (4.5%) 3,446 3,311 8.5 (12%)Spotsylvania 120,600 0.620 13,433 369.8 2.75% 4,108 3,066 10.3Loudoun 287,700 0.917 59,472 1,081 1.82% 3,766 3,757 9.9Prince William 378,900 0.787 56,451 1,016 1.80% 2,681 2,681 6.8

Group 2 - Other Fast GrowingFairfax 1,017,000 0.890 228,499 2,750 1.20% 3,116 2,704 7.1Chesterfield 303,500 0.970 28,749 584.2 2.03% 2,349 1,925 6.6Hanover 97,800 0.810 11,025 160.4 1.45% 2,057 1,640 6.2

Group 3 - StableHenrico 291,800 0.870 32,520 433.8 1.33% 2,148 1,487 6.3Arlington 206,800 0.818 54,293 772.2 1.42% 5,228 3,734 7.5

Group 4- OthersRoanoke 91,200 1.090 7,053 199.4 2.83% 2,186 2,186 5.1Montgomery 90,500 0.630 6,318 99.7 1.58% 1,176 1,102 6.7

Sources: Auditor of Public Accounts, Commonwealth of VA, Comparative Report of Local Government Revenues and Expenditure, Y/E June 30, 2008Principles of High Performance Financial Management

Notes:1 As computed by APA to include all long term indebtedness.2 Adjusted to deduct enterprise supported debt.3 Includes revenue from Commonwealth for Education

Excludes Enterprise supported Debt Service.This ratio is not included in the APA's report.

4 Governmental Debt Excludes Enterprise supported debt.

10


Recommendation:

1. The Committee is impressed with the stewardship of existing courthouse resources and agrees that more space is required to meet future needs.

2. The Committee also recognizes the challenges of the current economic climate and the stress on cash-strapped Stafford County taxpayers in addressing these needs. Moreover, we realize that the Courts Complex Project is but one of a long list of critical projects in the CIP.

3. After considerable review of space needs, existing proposals, new options, and the financial challenges of the current environment, the Courts Complex Planning Committee recommends expanding / renovating the existing courthouse facility via Option A with a total estimated cost of $21.7 MM ($19.8MM Expansion + $1.9MM Retrofit).

4. The Option A capital cost is $14.4MM or 40% lower than the $36.1MM in the current CIP. Moreover, the projected annual operating expense is $1.5MM or 33% lower than the original plan.

5. The Committee also recommends further fine-tuning in these estimates as the project moves forward, as construction market softness may offer additional cost-saving opportunities.

sheriff’s office - bos.stafford.va.usbos.stafford.va.us/agenda/psc04192016.pdf · stafford...

Documents