Keep the Courthouse in Downtown Bentonville - Guest Column from the NWADG

Beyond sentimentality

Keep courts facility in downtown Bentonville

By Barry Moehring

Posted: April 8, 2015 at 1 a.m.

• Editor's note: This guest commentary is a response to this newspaper's March 25 editorial that suggested the decision on where to build a new Benton County courts facility boiled down to efficiency vs. sentimentality.

  
  

  Keeping the Benton County circuit courts facilities in downtown Bentonville has been described as a sentimental decision. In fact, keeping the court facilities downtown makes sound fiscal sense and would meet the needs of the court system for decades to come.

The Benton County Quorum Court is wrestling with the decision of where to locate the courthouse, either on Arkansas 102 adjacent to the Benton County jail or to modernize the existing historic courthouse in downtown Bentonville and build a new adjacent court facility.

On one issue both sides agree: The current historic courthouse is inadequate for today's Benton County circuit courts system and will become even more obsolete in the future as the county's growth far outpaces the courthouse's capacity.

Proposals for both locations have been developed by highly competent architectural design firms and both meet the basic criteria for a new courts facility. The first and most important need is to create a safe and secure facility for the judges, staff and public. Both proposals envision one secure and contiguous facility with a single entrance for the public, a separate entrance and secure areas for inmates, and secure chambers and parking for judges and court personnel.

Another key consideration is capacity. Both proposals contain significant additional capacity to accommodate courtroom needs both now and for many years in the future along with additional public space for safety, comfort and convenience.

Finally, parking will be a key consideration and both proposals have identified existing and new parking spaces to accommodate the expansion.

Taken objectively, either proposal would be a tremendous improvement over the current court facility.

So let's take a look at the other factors that will help drive the decision.

First and foremost, there is cost. On the surface, the Arkansas 102 proposal would cost $24 million. Digging deeper, however, this figure does not accommodate all of the costs associated with this proposal.

The current Highway 102 proposal makes no mention of how the historic courthouse would be used or at what cost for that use. It is safe to say the cost will run in the millions of dollars to renovate a nearly 100-year-old building for whatever future use is proposed.

The Highway 102 proposal has been presented within the context of a much larger shift of Benton County facilities from multiple locations to two locations. No cost has been offered for this proposal although there has been speculation that the sale of some existing county properties would help pay for this significant move of county facilities. In reality it is unclear right now how much this part of the plan would cost, but again, it is safe to say the tab will run in the millions of dollars.

These two unknown variables will add unknown millions of dollars to the Highway 102 proposal.

The downtown Bentonville proposal carries a price tag of $31.2 million. An important consideration for this proposal is that the actual cost to taxpayers will be substantially less.

The Walton Family Foundation has already committed $2.9 million for initial renovations to the historic courthouse. If the downtown proposal is adopted by the Quorum Court, the foundation has pledged an additional $2 million toward the cost of construction.

These two commitments to the downtown proposal take the actual cost to taxpayers down to $26.3 million. There have also been additional pledges and donations of land (approximately half a block) and parking space to accommodate the new downtown courts expansion.

Three additional considerations heavily tilt the decision toward the downtown proposal.

First, in the downtown proposal, the historic courthouse will continue to function both as a courthouse and as home to several key court functions. No mystery here of how the historic courthouse will be used in the future, and unlike the proposal for the Highway 102 location, the cost to fully renovate the historic courthouse is included in the downtown proposal.

Second, one study estimated the annual economic impact of the courts facilities on downtown Bentonville is approximately $3 million. Moving the facilities to Highway 102 will put a substantial portion of this impact at risk.

Finally, as a member of the Quorum Court, I've heard from a wide variety of county employees as well as others who frequent the historic courthouse that they enjoy all of the restaurants, shops and other amenities offered in downtown Bentonville. These quality of life factors do not exist on the Highway 102 property adjacent to the county jail.

Choosing to keep the Benton County circuit court facilities in downtown Bentonville is not a sentimental decision. It's the right decision that upgrades and modernizes our court facilities, saves taxpayer dollars, improves and maintains the historic courthouse and preserves the economic impact of the court facilities on downtown Bentonville.

------- * --------

Barry Moehring is the justice of the peace serving District 15 on the Benton County Quorum Court.

Commentary on 04/08/2015

Pressing for BHS West Roads

On Thursday February 12th the Transportation Committee of the Quorum Court met to discuss several issues, one of which was the road plan for the new Bentonville West High School.  

I had asked that this issue be placed on the agenda so that the Committee and citizens could get an update from Judge Clinard and the County Road Department.
Also in attendance were Centerton Mayor Bill Edwards, Centerton Road Superintendent Rick Hudson and the Bentonville Public Schools Facilities Director, Paul Wallace.

What we learned is that the City of Centerton and Bentonville Public Schools are moving ahead rapidly on developing needed roads and other infrastructure for BHS West.  

The County's current plan is to wait until 2016 to move forward on building the roads and include funding for this purpose in the 2016 budget.  In the meantime, the County Road Department has moved ahead on securing right-of-way and other preliminary steps that will be needed to move forward.

However, an overall plan for how the County is addressing the needs of BHS West was not presented.

Members of the Committee, myself included, expressed concern that the County was not moving fast enough and that we needed concrete (no pun intended!) action soon on this issue, particularly in conjunction with the work being done by Centerton and Bentonville Public Schools.
During the meeting, I asked that a detailed plan for the County's portion of the BHS West roads be presented at the next Transportation Committee meeting.
Additionally, the Committee took an informal "straw poll" vote to gauge interest in accelerating the work into 2015 instead of waiting until 2016.  That vote was unanimous.
The ultimate decision will rest with the recommendations of Judge Clinard but clearly the Quorum Court wants to see a detailed plan and a way to get work done sooner rather than later.  If you're interested, here's a link to an article that appeared in the paper about this issue.  I'll post more information here as it becomes available.

On a side note, the NWADG recently ran an editorial about how committee meetings are run in Washington County.  Several good points were made but one in particular called out the fact that in Washington County, members of the Quorum Court are paid $200 when they  attend committee meetings -- even committees that they are not members of. 

In Benton County that's not the case.  Benton County Quorum Court members only receive per diem (lower than Washington County I might add - $150) for attending meetings for committees that they are members of.  We have many members who attend various committee meetings (like the Transportation Committee meeting referenced above... I'm not a member and several JPs were in attendance who are not members) and we have an agreement that any and all can attend and participate regardless of whether or not they are a formal member. They just cannot vote on ordinances or resolutions in the committee meeting itself.  And they do not get paid a per diem for their participation.

As always, let me know your thoughts!

Thanks,

Barry

New Issues On Quorum Court Agenda for 2015

Its only early February and we've already addressed or will address a number of new issues facing Benton County in 2015.  I'll spend a little more time on many of these in subsequent posts but below are quick updates.  As always I would really like to have your comments.

• Sales Tax: I'm very pleased with how our sales tax revenue is coming in.  We're starting the year with a 7.28% year on year increase which reflects the strength of our economy in Northwest Arkansas.  We finished 2014 roughly 2.5% over 2013 so keeping this momentum going is terrific news for all of the residents of Benton County.  Keep in mind that the County sales tax rate is 1%.  But of that amount Benton County itself only receives about 20% of that revenue.  The rest goes to cities and other local government entities.
• Benton County Courthouse: The Walton Foundation has generously granted the County $2.8M to repair and refurbish parts of the courthouse.  The County has an obligation to maintain the integrity of the current courthouse and the grant from the Walton Foundation is much appreciated as we consider the future use of this historic building on the Bentonville Square.  I'll have more info on this throughout the year as we consider the future of the courthouse and the potential for developing, financing and ultimately building a new judicial center.
• War Eagle Bridge: I attended a very spirited community meeting at Hobbs State Park this past Saturday concerning the future of the War Eagle Bridge.  No doubt the bridge has tremendous practical and historic significant both to the surrounding War Eagle Valley and all of Benton County.  Benton County Judge Bob Clinard will ultimately have to make a recommendation on the future use of the bridge.  The Quorum Court will then have to decide how to fund that recommendation.  More to come on this as well.
• Funding for State Inmates at the Benton County Jail: We've had several discussions about the state providing appropriate per diem for state prisoners while housed at the County Jail.  Currently the state pays only $28 per day while cities and the federal government pay much higher per diem rates.  A recent state report put the actual cost at more than $60 per day.  The Legislature is addressing this issue in its current session and hopefully we'll see the first increase in per diem in many years.  In the meantime there has been some discussion of filing suit against the state.  I would only support this as a very last resort and we're a long way from that point.
• County Roads for Bentonville West High School:  I've asked that this issue be put on the agenda as a discussion item for the Transportation Committee meeting that will be held on Thursday, February 12th.  The City of Centerton and the Bentonville Public School District have been working diligently to ensure that roads and other infrastructure leading to the new high school will be ready when the school opens in August 2016.  Several Benton County roads and intersections also need to be improved in anticipation of the new school.  I'll have a new update on this after Thursday's meeting.

These are just a few of the issues on our agenda so far in 2015.  Again, please let me know your thoughts on these or any other issues impacting Benton County.

Thanks!

Barry