The Pulaski County Justice Center project will be able to keep moving ahead, following action by the county council Monday. Council members passed a revised bond ordinance on first reading by a vote of four-to-three.
If adopted, it would let the county borrow up to $5.6 million to renovate and expand the current building, allowing Circuit Court to move over from the Courthouse, and the Annex Building on Riverside Drive to be closed entirely. But Council Member Rudy DeSabatine wondered if there were ways that cost could be cut in half.
“We looked at the possibility . . . of where they could expand out without doing any digging or excavating and making that piece bigger,” he explained. “I guess I’d just like to see if there’s a possibility that looking into this can be exercised.”
But after two years and more than $400,000 already put into the plan, Council Member Kathi Thompson felt it was time to move ahead. “This is a plan. It’s a good plan,” she said. “It’ll work. It’ll meet the sheriff’s needs. It’ll meet the courts’ needs. It’ll meet the needs of every other employee we have here in Pulaski County. It’s a plan that will work. Let’s move forward. Let Pulaski County, for once in its life, move forward.”
One of the concerns was the amount of money being put into the Justice Center, while the historic courthouse isn’t being addressed yet. The idea of renovating the courthouse without upgrading the Justice Center drew opposition from the county’s sheriff and judges, though, since it wouldn’t address the security issue of transporting inmates across the street for court. Beyond that, Sheriff Jeff Richwine felt the county would miss “a prime opportunity to change people’s lives” by adding a work release center.
Council Member Brian Young ultimately felt the Justice Center project was necessary for the future of the courthouse. “If we don’t move forward on the jail bond, we cannot move the Circuit Court to the jail building, we cannot work on the courthouse,” Young said. “As Laura pointed out last week, this was supposed to be about our historic courthouse. We made a promise. The commissioners picked a plan, and we owe it to the people of this county. And if you think they’re worth the cheap plan, vote for the cheap plan.”
Additionally, the impact on taxpayers could end up being lower than previously thought. Project Liaison Nathan Origer said plans call for the bond to be paid back over 20 years rather than 15. That would mean a tax increase of three-and-a-half cents per $100 of assessed valuation or up to about eight-and-a-half cents if the courthouse renovation is included.
Origer also pointed out that while the maximum bond amount is for almost $5.6 million, the estimated cost is lower. The actual amount being borrowed will depend on how the bids come in.
In the end, DeSabatine, Tim Overmyer and Mike Tiede voted against the ordinance. It’ll be up for final approval on June 14.
