9/24/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

It should be noted that any option involving the use of the annex and/or old state attorney building, maintenance, capital, and utilities is estimated based on current historic data. These buildings will be another sixteen years old in 2010 and some major renovations could be required within or at the end of that time frame. The Board has authorized the hiring of a consultant to study all space needs in the County other than the judicial system. Every County owned building was included in this study and a recommendation for use. Any option for the courthouse which would involve use of the annex or old state attorney building would have an impact on the recommendations of this study. It was anticipated these buildings and others not in use would be sold and the dollars generated be used to fund other needed facilities. RECOMMENDATION The original concept to house all branches of the judicial system under one roof was previously discussed, recommended, and adopted by the Board earlier this year. Due to errors found in the 1988 ADG study, *it has been determined that a larger building along with approximately an additional 2.8 million dollars will be required to. accomplish this concept. -Staff still feels this is the proper way to proceed and recommends that Option I be adopted. Director Dean introduced Michael Thomas, president of Justice Planning Associates. Mr. Thomas briefly described the methodology they used to develop their conclusions which were different from the 188 space study, noting that they started with exhaustive analytical forecasts based on all the elements of the County's judicial system. These elements included population growth, case load growth, and the historical funding patterns'for judgeships and personnel. He then made a presentation to the Board as set out in his letter of September 6, 1991, particularly referring to Table 6 comparing the two different planning strategies: 47 PUUK. 8a, i F'PU �1".1b SEP 90 4 1'�