|
|
|
| Fri, Nov. 20 - - Mobile - RSS | |
|
|
Can city afford courts facility?
Fredericksburg's dilemma raises the question: Should judges be able to order new courthouses?Date published: 12/21/2008 BY EMILY BATTLE When the late Judge John W. Scott Jr. learned in the spring of 2007 that Fredericksburg might not complete a new courts complex until 2012 or 2013, he wrote to the seven other judges in Virginia's 15th Judicial Circuit. "This delay is unacceptable and may require litigation against the City," Scott wrote in a letter on May 10, 2007. His colleagues on the bench supported Scott, who died this past April. "Your court facilities are in dire need of repair, demolition and/or new construction," Judge Harry T. Taliaferro III wrote on May 29, 2007, to City Manager Phillip Rodenberg and City Attorney Kathleen Dooley. As these letters were being written, Fredericksburg was coming to realize that it was no longer king of the regional retail mountain. New developments in Stafford and Spotsylvania counties and the slowdown in the housing market--which led to today's recession--meant the city was getting less money from its sales tax. In the spring of 2008, City Council members approved a budget that called for 2.5 percent less spending than the year before. That brought to a close a four-year streak of roughly 10 percent yearly growth in the city budget. That growth was fed largely by sales-tax increases driven by Central Park's short-lived dominance as the regional retail hub. Council members are already talking about having to raise taxes just to balance next year's budget--without any $54.1 million courthouses in the picture. Nobody knows what the economic picture will look like a few years from now, when the cost of building such a facility would actually hit the city budget. But as council members discussed at their last meeting, they don't get to make this decision based solely on what the city can afford. $10 MILLION PEN-STROKE? Virginia law gives circuit judges the power to put localities under court order to build adequate court facilities. That's the litigation Scott referred to in his letter last year. The process starts when the judges enter an order that essentially requires the local government to show why it should not have to upgrade its court buildings. The judges and the local government both lawyer up, and the taxpayers foot the bill for a legal battle that can be long and expensive.
Read more stories about Fredericksburg Date published: 12/21/2008
Re: Sharing facilities...
(posted by
sleeplessnites
, Dec. 24, 2008 8:59 pm)
I don't see that being feasible. It would require each jurisdiction to have a satellite Clerk's office in the facility for things to run properly . That would place additional logistical and financial burdens on everyone. A shared facility would also likely increase the # of defendants who "fail to appear" for hearings. The more "FTAs", the more police needed to round 'em up (or they go free!). Not to mention that someone arrested on FTA is typically held w/o bond, so the jail population would increase..
I agree w/ dicerotops...
(posted by
sleeplessnites
, Dec. 24, 2008 8:49 pm)
The City spent nearly half a million last year simply trying to make the existing courthouse USABLE. The city's own employees fell ill from working in the building and offices were displaced as a result. The existing building's security risk to the entire general public - not just judges, lawyers, employees, victims, & witnesses - cannot be understated. Just consider the situation in Atlanta a few years ago and numerous others before it. No, the city can't afford it. But unfortunately, it can't be put off.
A Different Approach
(posted by
Rebecca22193
, Dec. 24, 2008 10:03 am)
I'm going to mention, again, that we should be looking at creative approaches to solving the problem. A $54 million courthouse is just absurd. We should consider sharing court facilities with our neighboring communities. If we go ahead with building, we should come up with a more realistic architecture and HIRE SOME UNEMPLOYED LOCALS to help build it.
Police will need to switch to bikes.
(posted by
MrZorro
, Dec. 21, 2008 10:56 pm)
Those Cannondale Bicycles that they bought, will have to replace the cars and horses. The City will be in a serious hole once the 57 million + Courthouse is built. The cops probably won't be able to catch up with the robbery suspects, like they do now. We hear constantly on the news, other cities needing more money now for just the basic things, and not for expensive new courthouses.
Obama should clean out Fort Knox, and pay for our Courthouse, and bail out California, Chicago, and NY.
All or nothing?
(posted by
Einstein
, Dec. 21, 2008 10:51 pm)
A new or updated court complex is needed, agreed. Departing that conclusion and arriving at a $47, $54 or $65 million (depending on which proposal one reads) for a court/ retail/ office/ parking complex is baffling. Is there no middle ground -- and isn't a middle ground demanded by the current economic situation? How can the city reduce budgets for police, schools and other vital services while considering a tax increase to foot the bill for such an extravagant fix? Where are the new, realistic proposals?
|
 |
|||
|
|||
