Future use of the Brown Circuit Courthouse is still up in the air as the Brown County Commissioners plan to hold public hearings to get input on possible plans to build a new justice center and renovate the current courthouse.
The price tag is estimated to be between $650,000 and $750,000 to make update the courthouse including making it compliant with the Americans with Disability Act; improving the exterior by replacing doors, windows and fixing brick mortar; and repairing and restoring the outdoor stairway at the main entrance.
DLZ principal architect Eric Ratts, project manager Scott Carnegie and division manager Jon LaTurner presented their final study to the commissioners and council June 1.
The renovation price did not include an additional 25 to 30 percent set aside for “soft costs” like professional fees, permits and contingencies.
[sc:text-divider text-divider-title=”Story continues below gallery” ]Last month, DLZ presented their preliminary findings, which included a recommendation to build a new 26,910-square-foot justice center is estimated to cost between $6,750,000 and $7,250,000, along with 25 to 30 percent additional for “soft costs” like professional and financing fees.
During the June presentation, it was revealed that the estimated price range increased to between $6,900,000 and $7,400,000 for a 28,000 gross square footage center.
“As the design evolves, you just continue to meet with department heads, refine the building program until you get the design everyone is confident will meet the needs of today and the future as well,” Carnegie said.
Court offices would be moved to a new building that would be built next to the Brown County Law Enforcement Center and some county employees could be moved into the current courthouse after it is renovated.
“First and foremost, the historic courthouse must remain a county facility,” Ratts said.
Under DLZ’s plan, the county clerk’s office on the first floor of the courthouse would be turned into multiple conference and meeting rooms. The probation office across the hall would be split into a county office and learning center. Public restrooms would be on the first floor.
Upstairs, the courtroom would be made into a chamber for the commissioners and council, and a public meeting room. The current law library would become a history library.
The current court offices would be made into three separate offices for the commissioners, with space for an administrative assistant.
The smaller courtroom upstairs would be made into public restrooms.
A new, two-story justice center would be built next to the jail, but not on the land where Kids on Wheels are planning to build their skate park, Biddle said. The county owns the land up to that property line, she said.
The circuit court office, county clerk, probation department, Community Corrections and public restrooms would be housed on the first floor of the new building. The prosecutor, public defenders, GAL and public restrooms would be on the second floor.
But the decisions on who would go where on the courthouse first floor are not final.
The courthouse was built in 1874.
“I think the most important thing you can do for the historic courthouse is to take the time, listen to the public, to office holders and department heads. Then come together and put the right folks in the building,” he said.
As part of the feasibility study, DLZ conducted user group interviews.
The people who work in the courthouse and with the court expressed concerns about security, parking, additional storage, work space and confidential meeting areas in their current buildings.
DLZ was hired in November to conduct a comprehensive study of space, staffing and operations associated with the court, projected out to what the needs will be in 2040.
In addition to the courtroom and offices currently in the courthouse, DLZ looked at the needs and challenges that related offices are facing, such as the prosecutor’s office, Community Corrections and the county clerk.
For instance, public defenders and the Guardian ad Litem program have no office spaces in county buildings; and other departments say that they need more people but have no place to put them.
Another phase of renovation for the current courthouse did not have a price tag in DLZ’s final presentation because federal and other grant monies may be available.
That phase would include putting down hardwood floors, wall/ceiling detailing, period light fixtures and new interior colors.
Public speaks out
Members of the public stood up following the final presentation to express concerns about the proposed plans.
Concerns centered on the county being able to afford the new justice center, if there truly was a need that warranted the construction of the new center and if DLZ had looked at other, possibly less expensive, options.
Ratts said that one of the “driving forces” for the new justice center to be located to the law enforcement center to cut down on transportation costs and reducing “opportunities for something to occur during inmate transport.”
Resident and county commissioner candidate Kyle Birkemeier said that since the sheriff’s department receives $500 for transportation/travel expenses that cutting down on transportation costs is “not a good reason” for a new justice center.
He said he talked with local attorneys who work in the courthouse and that they had “major concerns” about what kind of message it would send putting a courthouse next to the jail since most of the cases tried there are civil.
He questioned the fiscal responsibility of the county by questioning parts of the plan he thought to be extravagant, like hardwood floors and private offices for part-time employees.
He said he did not see how creating new buildings for the county to manage is “in the best interest of this county.”
Birkermeier said he would like to see a “comprehensive plan” on budget needs and look at where spending is happening currently.
Birkemeier, who works in data analysis, also created charts showing increases to the county debt out to 2050 if $9 million is spent on this project.
One of the financing options listed in the DLZ final report was using income tax. Birkemeier created a second chart he presented that showed a decrease in the county’s labor force. His projections showed the workforce dropping from 7,743 in 2000 to 5,820 in 2040.
Resident Chris Ross asked if DLZ or the local courthouse committee had looked at other options in the county, like the Hidden Valley Inn that is currently for sale and is located not far from the current courthouse on Mound Street.
“The possibility of lowering the price and getting the same things you need at not the same impact is out there. You gotta look for it, it’s there,” she said.
Pam Raider sits on the courthouse committee and said during the meeting that the committee looked at other location options as well as at past studies.
“It’s not like out of the blue these folks came up with this brilliant idea for no reason. This is an ongoing issue,” she said.
“This is Brown County. This happens every time. There’s always a fight, nobody wants change. It comes back around and finally gets done probably at more of a cost.”
Ratts said DLZ also looked at other options.
“There were opportunities to look at other places around the downtown area. We kept going back to the law enforcement center. It made a lot of sense for a lot of different reasons,” he said.
“We did look at a lot of different sites, not just this one.”
Resident Tim Clark also questioned if DLZ had looked at other options and expressed concerns about the county being able to afford the project as well as if there really is a true need for the new justice center.
“That’s Plan A. Where’s Plan B or Plan C? The pros and cons of each alternative? I think it’s great if we can afford it, my concern is affordability,” he said.
According to Gateway, the state’s data reporting website, Brown County has the third highest debt per person.
The county’s property tax rate has increased by 33 percent between 2012 and 2017, according to Gateway data.
Clark said that the council shouldn’t forget that the Brown County School Corporation also has an eight cent referendum in place on property taxes to help support the district’s general fund and Career Resource Center.
He asked why repairs had not been made to the Brown County Parks and Recreation Office and the prosecutor’s office to maintain them.
Biddle had mentioned previously that there are problems with the modular home that serves as the Parks and Recreation office at Deer Run Park. One thought was to move parks and rec to the Community Corrections office once they move into the new justice center. If not, a new office space will have to be built for them.
“Why haven’t those been maintained? What does that maintenance budget look like?” Clark asked.
Baker said both buildings are temporary, portable buildings. He said the prosecutor building was a barrack that was moved here.
Baker also noted that the county is “catching up” on capital improvement requests since the Department of Local Government Finance had previously not given the county the “green light” to fund them.
“That’s why we didn’t do that,” Baker said.
Area Plan Commission member Paul Navarro said he continues to hear about the need to bring people to live in the county and questioned if a new justice center would attract people here to live.
“I see this project as a government for the government project, not a project for the people,” Navarro said.
Council Vice President Dave Critser said this project is to mostly make everything ADA compliant before the county is sued.
“That’s the reason we built a new jail because we got sued in the old jail,” he said.
“The only good thing that happened was we had a plan in place…What this is is a plan in place. We could sit here forever. We went through this five, six, seven years ago. Somewhere it’s going to bite you and bite you bad. You can only take an old vehicle and fix it so many times…We’re going to get in trouble sooner or later.”
Council member Darren Byrd said he doesn’t want to spend more money, but that is part of being an elected official.
“I am a taxpayer. I don’t get a commission from building a new courthouse, persevering this courthouse, its my tax money too. I am taxed at the same rate,” he said.
“(Elected officials) weigh what we need with what we can afford, what we’re doing right now. We have a courthouse that leaks water. It’s lawsuit trap waiting to happen…I am a taxpayer who just happens to be elected. I also have to shoulder the burden of these costs. It’s something I take very seriously.”
Navarro encouraged Byrd to look at data presented by Birkemeier and Clark as well different ways to save money.
According to an illustrative financing report by Umbaugh & Associates, if the county took out a bond to pay for the new justice center in 2019 and decided to do a $3 million bond for capital improvement projects property taxes would increase from $0.1089 to $0.1246 in 2019 then up to around $0.1250 from 2020 to 2024 — if the $3 million bond was paid back over four years.
Before the presentation on DLZ’s final study, the commissioners and council held a joint meeting to discuss the possibility of taking out two loans — one for a $1 million and the other for $2 million — to fund capital improvement projects and road work in the county.
Umbaugh did not have a scenario in their financing report specific to those loans, but Jason Semler with Umbaugh said taking out the loans would have similar impacts on property tax rates when compared with a $3 million bond.
“I have not done the scenario if you wanted to pay that over three years, it would probably be around a two cent increase,” he said. “If you want to pay back sooner than four years the tax rate would probably be closer to 13 and a half cents.”
Taking on the bond for the justice center would go on the county’s total debt. According to Gateway data, the current debt the county has as of Dec. 31, 2016 is $30,992,175.
Resident Sherrie Mitchell asked how much it would cost to make the courthouse ADA compliant and fix water leaks?
Ratts said it would be less than a million dollars.
“That still does not address space needs,” Biddle said.
Or where the prosecutor office would go, she added.
She said even though the county would add a new building to maintain they would also be removing the Parks and Recreation office and prosecutor office off the maintenance roll.
Towards the end of the meeting, Commissioner Jerry Pittman said there will be more opportunities for the public to share their opinions.
“I won’t vote for it. I will listen to these people in the county,” he said.
At the June 6 commissioners meeting, when Biddle asked what the next steps should be with the justice center, Pittman said again that public meetings should be held.
“I really want people to be involved in this,” Pittman said. “So many times we hear ‘The county did this. They’re working behind our backs.’ That’s not what I want at all. I want this to be widely publicized. Everyone have a chance to give their two cents. Build a consensus to move forward. We don’t want to wind up with remonstrance,” he said.
Auditor Beth Mulry encouraged the commissioners to host town hall meetings in the different townships at elementary schools or the clubhouse in the Cordry Sweetwater Lakes area.
“Where it’s more convenient and accessible so people feel like we as a county are really reaching out to them,” she said.
Dates for the next public input meeting have not been announced.
[sc:pullout-title pullout-title=”The courthouse/justice center plan” ][sc:pullout-text-begin]
If a new justice center were to be built, the plan is that court offices would be moved to the new center. Some county employees could be moved into the current courthouse after it is renovated.
IN THE COURTHOUSE
The current county clerk’s office, on the first floor of the courthouse, would be turned into multiple conference and meeting rooms. The current probation office across the hall would be split into a county office and learning center. Public restrooms would stay on the first floor.
The courtroom upstairs would be made into a chamber for the commissioners and council, and a public meeting room. The current law library would become a history library.
The current court offices would be made into three separate offices for the commissioners, with space for an administrative assistant.
The smaller courtroom upstairs would be made into public restrooms.
IN THE NEW BUILDING
A new, two-story justice center would be built next to the jail, but not on the land where Kids on Wheels are planning to build their skate park, said county commissioner Diana Biddle. The county owns the land up to that property line, she said.
The circuit court office, county clerk, probation department, Community Corrections and public restrooms would be housed on the first floor of the new building. The prosecutor, public defenders, Guardian Ad Litem program and public restrooms would be on the second floor.
However, the decisions on who would go where are not final.
WHY THE CHANGE?
As part of the feasibility study, engineering/architecture firm DLZ conducted interviews with “user groups.”
The people who work in the courthouse and with the court expressed concerns about security, parking, additional storage, work space and confidential meeting areas in their current buildings.
DLZ was hired in November to conduct a comprehensive study of space, staffing and operations associated with the court, projected out to what the needs will be in 2040.
In addition to the courtroom and offices currently in the courthouse, DLZ looked at the needs and challenges that related offices are facing, such as the prosecutor’s office, Community Corrections and the county clerk.
For instance, public defenders and the Guardian ad Litem program have no office spaces in county buildings; and other departments say that they need more people but have no place to put them.
[sc:pullout-text-end]
