Residents, officials spar over proposed Fairview police training facility near Bowie Nature Park

Dozens of residents and city officials spent more than two hours debating a proposed police training facility and live-fire range planned for a 24.7-acre outparcel adjacent to Bowie Nature Park, with speakers raising safety, noise, environmental and property-value concerns and officials saying the city needs a larger training space for officers.

The amended city budget includes $750,000 earmarked for a police training facility, and city officials said that amount was placed in the budget as an allocation, not as final approval to spend. City Manager Tom Daugherty said the next step is a Planning Commission site-plan review; if the final build-out exceeds the $750,000 set aside, commissioners said they would have to approve any additional funds.

Why it matters: The parcel in question was donated to expand Bowie Nature Park and neighbors, many of whom live just outside the city limits, told commissioners they view the land as parkland and oppose live firing nearby. Opponents also cited possible deed restrictions, the potential effect on horses and livestock, and the chance that frequent gunfire would degrade public use of the park.

Residents who live near the proposed site described fear of noise and loss of quiet recreation. “I’m not opposed to the gun range, but I am opposed to creating an environment that is not…potentially gonna be unsafe for our children, my children,” said Cameron Campania, a city resident who identified himself during public comment. Erin Dubose, a county resident who lives on the park side, said neighbors had received certified letters and noticed signs after the city sought a height variance for a proposed tower; she added that neighbors “were told it’s a done deal,” and urged commissioners to stop construction and reconsider alternatives.

Several speakers pointed to the park’s history and the deed language surrounding the Bowie donations. “This property…was donated as an annex to the park,” Erin Dubose said, and she warned that proceeding without addressing deed restrictions could prompt legal challenges.

City officials pushed back that the proposal is driven by training needs. Commissioners and staff said the police department’s existing training and classroom space is cramped; officials said the department has about 31 officers and the current on-site training room seats roughly 16. A commissioner said broader training — including classroom work, nonlethal tactics, rappelling and joint drills with other agencies — is part of the proposed facility’s justification. The mayor and other commissioners repeatedly described the $750,000 as an earmark for the project and said site-plan approval and budget review still lie ahead.

Costs and alternatives: Public commenters and commissioners offered a wide range of estimated construction costs, from about $750,000 (the budget line item) to $1.1 million and up to $3 million in some public comments. Officials said the firm CEC provided earlier high- and low-end estimates, and that the city will put construction work out to bid if the project advances. City staff also said Dixon and other regional ranges have been used historically for training but that Dixon is moving toward charging the city — a figure discussed in the meeting ranged from $300 to $800 per day in different comments — which is part of the city’s rationale for building local capacity.

Environmental and operational costs: Speakers raised the long-term environmental cost of a firing range, including lead remediation. City staff said remediation is part of federal requirements; a staff member told the meeting that ranges must undergo periodic remediation (discussed in the meeting as every 36 months) and that remediation costs are part of ongoing operations.

Process and next steps: City Manager Tom Daugherty told the meeting that a site plan must be approved by the Planning Commission; if the project can be built within the $750,000 allocation it would not necessarily return to the full board, but any required spending above that amount would require additional board action. Commissioners repeatedly encouraged residents to attend upcoming public meetings and to submit formal questions and public-record requests for documents (environmental analyses, cost estimates, site plans and contracts).

Residents and several commissioners asked staff to keep searching for alternative sites and to publish more transparent cost and planning documents. One speaker pointed to properties outside the immediate area and urged the city to investigate land purchases or partnerships instead of building adjacent to the park.

The meeting closed with officials promising continued outreach: the board identified the Planning Commission site-plan review as the immediate next public milestone and said the next town hall would include further updates.