Not much known about courthouse

Source: Odessa American, TexasAug.文件倉 18--Don't know the $95 million details of a proposed new courthouse in Ector County? You're not alone.The committee that recommended a bond and the commissioners who voted for it don't know how many stories the building will be or many of the other fine-print details of the proposed building.Although the committee tasked with making a recommendation, soon to become a political action committee, is going to be advocating for votes in the Nov. 5 election, chairwoman Sondra Eoff said they only have a rough estimate on what the building will cost and comparable buildings in Texas.The 15-member courthouse committee met for six months to come up with the recommendation and cost estimate for the commissioners' court."We just did a rough estimate on what it would cost," Eoff said. "We have an architectural drawing of something similar; of what it could look like."In a presentation to commissioners Aug. 6, the committee reported that aside from infrastructure problems such as the plumbing and the roof, the building was too small for current needs, with some employees using closet space as an office.The architectural drawings are of currently existing buildings, like courthouses in Midland and Tarrant counties. There are no architectural renderings.The current plan being discussed among officials is to build a new courthouse at an unknown location downtown and then tear down the old courthouse for parking.What is known are general estimates for demolition, land acquisition and additional parking that are included in the bond.Right now all that is known about the proposed new courthouse building is that project will cost $95 million and will encompass 180,000 square feet.Currently the Ector County courthouse sits at 300 N. Grant Ave. and is about 136,000 square feet, including the jail contained inside.But the lack of information has some residents concerned.Jason Moore, a self-described citizen watchdog and local radio show host, said he's upset with the lack of details about a possible new courthouse and was not happy that commissioners didn't fight for a lower price."It's their job as elected officials to say (to the committee), 'Thanks for your work. Now, let's see what our taxpayers can afford,'" Moore said.Since the approval of a bond vote, Moore said he's already received inquiries about how to run a campaign against the bond.But Moore said the problem extends to further than just the current building and more toward the utilization of the building."Not all of the judges are there all of the time," Moore said. "It's been well known among the legal community that there's quite a few judges that it's a mandatory three-day weekend."The StudyLarry Johnson, former principal architect at JSA Architects, said the $30,000 study that was done in 2009 was one of the main study points for committee members in the recent incarnation of the courthouse committee.Johnson's firm was the group who did the study, which consisted of maps of the current courthouse and where the additions were made as well as floor plans for the courthouses in Midland and Tarrant counties.The study also encompassed alternative solutions for renovating or moving into a new courthouse with cost analysis. Johnson said renovating would only cost about 10 percent less than building a new courthouse.Johnson said the committee in 2009 had all that information and it was passed on to the new committee, which used it as a guideline for what a new courthouse could look like if modeled after a different one.For example, Johnson said a best-case scenario would be similar to a Tarrant County courthouse, which holds eight courts on one floor with separated pathways for inmates going to court.But Johnson also said there are no floor plans and no plans for where the courthouse would be located other than a strong preference of the committee to have it located downtown."Are (taxpayers) willing go take all these details and pay for (the details) before they agree to it?" Johnson said.Instead, the committee looked at what could be a possible courthouse and made an estimate on cost, Johnson said, even though there's no concrete courthouse plan.He said it is now up to taxpayers to decide what they want to do."It depends on how much trust people have in their government," Johnson said.The needDale Childers, commissioner for Precinct 3, said the committee was working mostly off the 2009 study when looking at a new courthouse as it also gathered information about the current courthouse.Ultimately, Childers said the committee was tasked with making a recommendation and the commissioners accepted the recommendation.As far as the lack of hard details for the new building, Childers said that was by design."If we were to go out and hire an architect firm and say, 'OK, what should we do?' that's going to cost a lot of money," Childers said. "The county doesn't have the money to begin with and we're certainly not going to waste it if the citizens don't want it."But committee members and commissioners insist there is still a need for a new courthouse.The current courthouse was built in 1938, a three-story building for the soon-to-be burgeoning growth of Ector County.But in 1930, the population didn't even crack 4,000 people. The population spiked to more than 15,000 people 10 years later in 1940.Just a few years later, the courthouse was expanded upon, and rededicated in 1964.The next 30 years would prove the need for that courthouse, as the U.S. Census Bureau reported an 87,000 person increase in population, bringing Ector County to more than 90,000 people.But since the 1964 renovation, only two small expansions have been made despite an increase of more than 50,000 people from 1960 in Ector County's population as reported by the census.AlternativesThe committee also looked into the possibility of gutting and repurposing the 43,000 square foot federal lockup that's housed inside the courthouse to make more room and avoid the expense and construction of a new courthouse.Landgraf said that, too, was not feasible."Repurposing the jail didn't seem like a viable option to us. It was designed to be a jail," Landgraf said. "It would be difficult to make that into office space or courtroom space."The jail located in the courthouse was used as the county jail from 1938 until the new Ector County Detention Center was built in 1996.O.C. Carrillo, the director of building maintenance0 , said it could be done, but to the tune of up to $10 million for gutti存倉g and transporting steel from the jail cells. The plumbing would also have to be rerouted and one of the elevators would have to be redone.Johnson said he looked for five years for an alternative that included a second building near the current courthouse. The second building would have courtrooms while the original courthouse would contain the current offices such as district and county clerks, district attorney, county attorney and other court support staff.Johnson said the alternative would mean most offices could be housed in the current courthouse and courtrooms would be located in the new building nearby.But when it came down to the numbers, Johnson said in 2009 it was only 10 percent cheaper to do it that way than to build a new courthouse. In 2009, a new courthouse would have cost about $75 million.Without floor plans, though, the committee members will be selling the idea and general features of a new courthouse, Johnson said, including room for expansion, about three or four floors, and better circulation to avoid inmate contact with the public.The courthouse would need room for at least nine courts, based on the projection that Ector County would be receiving fifth felony court, and would also need to house the clerks' offices and the two elected prosecutors' offices.While not ideal, Childers said, it's the reality of the county's financial situation.SecurityEctor County Judge Susan Redford said repurposing the jail or taking state and county inmates through the jail instead of in public elevators still would not solve security issues, such as prisoner contact with the public and with employees of the court.During days when inmates are scheduled to go to court, sheriff's deputies escort the shackled inmates in a line through the main areas of the courthouse to get where they are going.Because the second floor, where misdemeanor cases are prosecuted, does not have the same hallways that the third floor does, Redford said inmates would still be around the public at the misdemeanor level.And on both floors, she said, inmates would be led directly past judges' offices.The new building would allow for separate travel areas for inmates so no direct interaction with the public would occur.Jarrod Eicher, a 27-year-old Gardendale resident, said he believes the bond is a "total waste of money," and that the many issues raised by the courthouse committee are nonissues.Eicher said there are no security issues when inmates are restrained and escorted through the courthouse."They're shackled up and have to be escorted by bailiffs," Eicher said.After recently going to the courthouse himself, Eicher said he didn't notice any overcrowding, security issues or structural issues.However, he said he wants more information before he votes on the issue."They've been very short on information," Eicher said. "It's real vague. They're proposing a courthouse but they don't even have a location? If you're going to propose a bond and you want $95 million from the taxpayers, you need to have a better plan and have a location."Antiquated buildingBrooks Landgraf, attorney with Medical Center Hospital and one of the members of the courthouse committee, said the members questioned the accuracy of the census numbers, thinking the population is actually much higher.When he went to his first meeting of the committee, Landgraf said the tone was investigative because not many of the members had daily interactions at the courthouse.A lot of questions were asked, he said, and after going to the facilities and speaking with employees in the courthouse, the consensus became clear that something needed to be done."We have antiquated facilities that have served their purpose in the past, but that building is no longer able to serve the people of Ector County," Landgraf said.The committee reported that four employees were working in closets and files were overflowing from several offices. In the last several years alone, the District Clerk's Office was reorganized so the space used by the criminal division could be converted to file storage.And while the word "dilapidated" has been used by those in the courthouse and agreed upon by Ector County Judge Susan Redford, there are those who disagree with that sentiment.Carillo said the building is not dilapidated, although many repairs would be needed if the courthouse were to remain.Elevators, electricity, plumbing and the roof are among the repairs that would cost several millions of dollars to fix, Carrillo said."The courthouse itself is not going to collapse tomorrow. It could be there another 20 years," Carrillo said. "They say dilapidated. The building is not dilapidated. It's undersized for the needs of today's growth and it has been for several years."Tall City courthouseMidland County took a considerably different route before opening the courthouse in 2010.Jimmy Smith, a county commissioner who took office in 2000, said their courthouse was in about as bad of shape as Ector County and with as big of a space crunch as Ector County when their new courthouse was built."It was made for three courtrooms and we had nine in there," Smith said. "The court system was just going at a crawl."So when the court looked for a building to buy, originally there were none, he said.Just as Midland County was beginning to look to buy land and build a courthouse, the current 223,000 square foot building at Main Street and Michigan Avenue became available, and the $30 million process to gut and renovate the building began.With sales tax revenues funding their courthouse, Midland County was able to pay for the deal out-of-pocket, and Smith said it began saving the county about $1 million a year because of the pickup in court speed.Ector County does not collect a sales tax.Political committeeFor the Ector County courthouse, the next step is to form a political committee from the courthouse evaluation committee.Eoff said the committee will be meeting next week to name a treasurer, pick a name and file the necessary paperwork to be able to begin accepting donations and marketing the courthouse.In addition to marketing efforts, Eoff said the group would be speaking in a number of engagements and getting as much information to the public as possible.--Contact Lindsay Weaver on twitter at @OAschools, on Facebook at OA Lindsay Weaver or call 432-333-7781.Copyright: ___ (c)2013 the Odessa American (Odessa, Texas) Visit the Odessa American (Odessa, Texas) at .oaoa.com Distributed by MCT Information Services自存倉