City Council, November 25th - Flood Insurance

Monday's Council agenda is light on items of interest here, but one to note is a change in City rules for  the National Flood Insurance Program.

100- and 500-year flood zones (City of Salem)

It's not terribly clear, however, and there seems to be a consistent error in the Staff Report. There are three options to consider, and the Staff Report flips a couple of times between recommending Option 2 and Option 3. (I think Option 3 is the intended recommendation.)

Some of the flood zone that could be affected is in West Salem where we are considering a Climate-Friendly, Walkable Mixed-use Designation. 

This is another piece of evidence that our CFA/WaMU designations should not be clustered only downtown, but should be dispersed around the city with multiple hubs, including elevated ones on hills well above flood zones.

The recent plans for the former Boys Reform School and Prison Annex area are likely unaffected since approvals precede any change, but would otherwise have been likely affected.

There might be more to say later on this.

November 2nd, 1924 (comments added)

Council also will consider moving forward on a possible five-year Livability Operating Levy, including Library funding. 

At least at the level of historic trivia, and perhaps more deeply, it is interesting to consider the 1925 City budget from 100 years ago.

In the proposed budget for 1925, the ratio of Police to Library funding was about 3.5:1. (Actual dollar amounts do not seem relevant, because of course they are a lot smaller!)

As we head to 2025, the current forecast suggests a ratio of about 10:1.

Nearly 10:1 for 2025

Library advocate Jim Scheppke has posted multiple times on hours of operation in the 1920s and on rates of change since 2013, and this older ratio of Police to Library funding is also a measure of priorities. (See Fund our Libraries Now for more discussion.)

Was it more happy and peaceful?
(November 7th, 1924)

Others may have better ways to interpret the data or to place it more fully in a meaningful context, but it is at least interesting trivia. It's possible that Salem in the 1920s was a little under-policed, but the difference between the ratios of 3.5 and 10 is still very great!

And as Council considers the recent announcement about reallocating Police staffing, they should remember the initial coverup for the DEA agent who killed Marganne Allen. The most recent update from Salem Reporter focuses on pre-trial maneuvering, with a distinction larded with BS between "standard driving" and the implied extraordinary driving, and an attempt to dismiss the charges:

“In light of what Agent Landis knew at that tense moment, informed by his extensive training and experience with clandestine surveillance missions, his decision was reasonable. He is entitled to immunity,” according to his attorneys’ filing. “This is precisely the type of enforcement action in which agents are permitted to use their judgment to violate traffic laws....This accident did not occur because Agent Landis was trying to get to the office more quickly to start his normal workday. Rather, it arose in the context of ongoing surveillance of a fentanyl dealer, an important and potentially dangerous law enforcement activity. And while this might not have been a situation that required lights and sirens, it was reasonable for this highly trained and experienced agent to conclude that it required more than just standard driving,” they said.

But there is also the prior coverup when Salem Police muddied and delayed the investigation with exonerative narratives that turned out to be false. Without Salem Reporter's stories, none of this would have come to light. Particularly for the next four years, local Law Enforcement needs strong civilian oversight by Council and others.

And there is an airport update, highlighting one subsidy to date: "The revenue guarantee fund has reimbursed $445,039 out of a total of $1.2M available, or 37%."