Meeting About Court House Annex

If you are interested in the Court House Annex, The Commission will be meeting with the architects on January 26th at 10:00 a.m. at the Court House. At this point we have conducted a good overview of the present situation of the Court House and have put it into historical context as to population and usage trends. Now I think the next step is to define what the real problems are; such as storage, handicap accessibility, modernization of heating and electrical services, updating of internet infrastructure etc. Only after we have correctly identified those needs, can we then discuss possible solutions and the costs and form these solutions will require to implement. This is a process which needs thoughtful and reasonable approaches and public input. Remembering that there are not unlimited dollars available and at some point dollars from one pocket will be taken to put into another pocket; that is to say, there are many many needs ahead and the Commission must not forget they need funding as well.

On the coming Tuesday meeting the architects will be outlining possible solutions and costs. I feel the Commission is presently being driven by the opportunity to obtain some stimulus money at a lower interest rate and is being led off the necessary steps of careful analysis of problems, their priority of importance and the ways they can be fixed and the costs involved. As was pointed out in yesterday's meeting, the costs of this will be coming "off the top" of county revenues and those revenues are very likely to be shrinking in coming years and county population is projected to be declining. I think the Court House proper has many needs that need to be fixed such as good access, updated heating and electric and phones and a need to create storage and improve court safety. I am not convinced that these fixes must take the form of an expensive annex that in itself will create additional costs to maintain and staff as well as pay back of the debt to build. I welcome a dialogue with the tax payers and disagree with one of my Commissioners who said that they wanted to hear mostly from elected officials and employees who know the situation best. While this is true in some respects, equally true is that the cost will be borne entirely by the tax payers and spending on this project may well mean less spending on other needs. So let's hear from everyone and come up with a solution that is a consensus.

Very wise decision! Thank you Mr. Saffer!