EDITOR’S NOTE: This story is in response to a reader-submitted question through Open Source, a platform where readers can submit questions to the staff.
MOUNT VERNON — As perhaps might be expected when you’re talking taxpayers’ dollars and big-ticket price tags, our recent Knox Pages’ story about the need for a new municipal court building generated plenty of questions and comments.
Several readers favored renovating the current Plaza Building at 5 N. Gay St. vs. tearing it down and building new while others questioned why not use a location in Cooper Progress Park. Some readers commented that there’s nothing wrong with the Plaza Building; still others wrote saying the building has never been good from the start.
As Knox Pages follows this developing story, here is some background information that helps shape the conversation.
According to the Knox County Auditor’s website, the Plaza Building was built in 1974. Between 2016 and 2021, the city spent $631,053 in capital improvements on the building. Higher-priced improvements include:
•Replace 12 heat pumps ($104,735)
•Courtroom remodel, repairs, and security/video equipment ($60,061)
•Roof, generator, and HVAC repairs ($64,495)
•Elevator remodel, $170,766
•Replace sinks and flooring ($70,094)
•Remodel of law director’s office ($38,501)
•LED lighting ($34,520)
According to Auditor Terry Scott, the building has water leaks and drainage issues, and the HVAC system is constantly being worked on and repaired.
“During the summertime, air conditioning isn’t available at all, and since the windows can’t be opened, it becomes an oven,” he said via email.
Of the $631,053 spent, $64,687 was related to COVID-19 and reimbursed through CARES (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security) Act money. COVID improvements include a keyless entry/card reader access; touchless toilet valves, faucets, and drinking fountains; and occupancy sensors for lighting.
Planned 2022 repairs and upgrades total $91,000 and include:
•Parking garage clean, paint and stripe ($15,000)
•Parking garage duct work repair and exhaust fan replacement ($8,000)
•Court ADA lift for jury box ($8,000)
•Flooring replacement third floor ($15,000)
•4 heat pump replacements ($45,000)
“While it may appear to be sound on the outside looking in, the city has had structural engineers examine the facility as early as five years ago who have advised that there would be approximately 10 years of life left in the Plaza Building before the need for relocation or the need for structural overhaul,” Mayor Matt Starr wrote in an email to Knox Pages. “In looking at historical data on the upkeep of the Plaza Building, it is clear that maintaining this for the long term is not cost-effective. We have another $91,000 planned for maintenance this year just to maintain daily operations. If there are other mechanical or structural issues that happen, those would be additional costs to those currently projected.”
“We will not be renovating the current building,” City Engineer Brian Ball said. “It’s grandfathered in to Supreme Court regulations on safety. Our plan at this point would be to get the court established [somewhere] and remove the building from the parking garage. If it’s in good enough condition, we’ll convert it back to a four-story parking garage.”
Ball said that a structural inspection of the garage by a licensed professional structural engineer will give the city a better feel for the condition of the garage and its remaining lifespan.
“We don’t want to have to move everybody twice because of the condition of the building, but there are a lot of things aging out in that building,” he said.
The ideal location
Municipal Court Judge John Thatcher said that a new municipal court facility, whether it is new construction or renovation of an existing building, should be on a main thoroughfare through the city and in or near the Central Business District.
“First, the public needs to find us easily,” he said via email. “We get people from all over the county, the state, and even out-of-state coming here. I think there is a public perception that a court in any city is going to be located somewhere in the middle rather than on the outskirts of the city. The court should be where people think it should be.”
A second reason Thatcher said the court needs to be centrally located is because of its community partners. In Knox County, those partners include TouchPointe Counseling, Behavioral Healthcare Partners, Anew, The Main Place, Freedom Center, Riverside Recovery Services, and Knox Public Health.
“These agencies provide services to probationers in the probation department, and they participate in the drug court treatment team that meets here,” Thatcher explained. “The agencies that aren’t already downtown are moving in that direction. Being in the middle of town makes it easier for the agencies to work with us.
“Third, a lot of the approximately 900 people who are being supervised by the probation department have transportation barriers, no license and no vehicle, and have to walk, get rides, or use Knox Area Transit,” he continued. “Probationers are required to check in frequently with their probation officer. Many do frequent random drug screening here.”
Thatcher said there were about 7,000 check-ins like this in the probation department last year.
“We will get better compliance from probationers who have to walk here or who rely on public transportation if we’re in the middle of town,” he said.
Additionally, Thatcher noted that in 2021, there were five squad runs to the court.
“Being close to the fire department in case of medical emergencies or fires is important,” he said.
Mayor Starr said that in December 2020, the administration proposed a solution to the courthouse location. The property and structure was in the Central Business District, but city council chose not to acquire the property.
Starr declined to give specifics because council held the discussion in executive session. Council President Bruce Hawkins likewise declined specifics, but he did say council’s decision was primarily due to cost and too many “unknowns” involved.
Starr said that council’s decision led to the city selecting Columbus-based DLZ Inc. to do an in-depth needs analysis based on the workforce and workflow. According to Auditor Scott, the price is $18,500 for the courthouse project.
“This needs assessment takes time and is based on the people’s needs and not the building’s constraints,” Starr said. “This is a very different point of view when designing a facility that should hopefully last at least 200 years.”
The needs analysis
Engineer Ball said the needs analysis started with Kenyon College interns interviewing and job-shadowing personnel in the court and Plaza Building. The students wrote a report on the needs they saw based on how the building flows.
“DLZ took that report and went more in-depth with two rounds of interviews with each department and the two courtrooms,” Ball explained.
The next step is to take that information and find a suitable site. Ball acknowledged that some people are critical of the city’s approach to the process.
“Typically you pick a site or an existing building and try to cram the workforce into an existing structure with no site evaluation taking into account the needs of the people, workflow, or safety standards,” he said. “This document will be used to start site selection, whether it’s a new building or an existing building, and grading it against the needs of the people.”
Ball hopes to select a site this year.
Once potential sites are identified, the city will evaluate other issues such as demolition or whether the site is too far from the downtown area.
“We’re also starting a list of requirements for the court and the police department,” Ball said. “They do not have to be in the same building, but we don’t know that yet.”
He also said the size requirement of a site or structure is unknown, noting that a downtown facility is limited by the size of a city block. If a new facility is all on one floor, it would require slightly more acreage than the size of a city block.
If the new facility was the courthouse only, the court could be housed on the first floor with the city law director’s office and probation department located on the second floor.
Why not Cooper Progress Park?
In January 2021, Mayor Starr, Engineer Ball, Judge Thatcher, municipal court staff, and Police Chief Robert Morgan, along with other city staff, toured the administration and engineering buildings at Cooper Progress Park. Jeff Gottke and Sam Filkins of the Area Development Foundation led the tour.
“We did include them in the needs analysis, but preliminary examination of the buildings being considered required us to attend to age-old problems such as the value of renovating an already aged building and attempting to shoehorn a judicial operation into a manufacturing campus,” Starr said.
“The group unanimously agreed that the Cooper Administration Building was not at all suitable. The other building was also found unable to meet future needs in addition to needing many upgrades, efficiencies, and overhauls.”
Upgrades and renovations needed include asbestos and lead paint abatement and roof problems.
“Both buildings are too big for what the court needs,” Thatcher said. “No one has worked out what it would cost to renovate either building versus a new building. And I understood that another organization wanted the [engineering] building on Chestnut.”
Starr said the group took the direction of having DLZ design a facility based on workforce needs, not fitting the courthouse into an existing building.
“Once the assessment is completed, we can compare to see if the plan and existing buildings are remotely close,” he said.
Starr said that he and Safety-service Director Richard Dzik recently communicated to the ADF that while existing facilities at Cooper Progress Park are not sufficient, CPP could be a viable option if the ADF is willing to demolish a structure and provide buildable land on the campus.
Funding
Knowing that the estimated lifespan for the Plaza Building is 2026, Mount Vernon City Council agreed to set aside $500,000 a year starting in 2018 toward either a new building or major overhaul. Auditor Scott said that at the close of 2021, there is $2 million set aside.
“This topic continues to be at the forefront of important projects we are engaging in at this time, but it is very understandable that time is ticking not only for the design aspect but also the construction timeline as well,” he said.
When Judge Thatcher spoke to council on Jan. 10, he noted that the county commissioners could put a levy on the ballot to help fund a new court building. Council President Hawkins noted that a joint meeting between council and the commissioners might be helpful.
In response to Thatcher’s request, the commissioners said they saw no reason to meet.
“We fund the Mount Vernon Municipal Court, according to O.R.C. [Ohio Revised Code] regulations, which fulfills our county obligations, and we will continue to do so,” they wrote.
The next step
Judge Thatcher said that ultimately the matter of a new municipal court or court complex is the city’s decision. Mayor Starr acknowledged this is partly true but said the city must ensure that the structure of the facility is acceptable to the judge and court operations and must meet Supreme Court standards.
“In many ways, the judge does have some control over the location for the municipal court,” he said. “Additionally, we want to ensure that the location will suit not only the court today but the court 50 to 100 years in the future.”
Starr said that both he and safety-service director Dzik set a goal of identifying a location and land purchase by the end of the year.
“Ideally, we could begin the design process as well once it is approved by council,” he said. “This depends on many factors.”
Thatcher is also working to move the issue forward. He said that at his annual court security meeting last Thursday, the main takeaway was the need for a committee that will do the work to put options and numbers on paper to present to city council. The committee will look at three options:
•Continue to put money into the Plaza Building
•Acquire property with an existing building to renovate
•Acquire property and build a new building
“Next time I go to council in February, I’ll have names of volunteers and ask for approval to move forward this way,” he said. “I’ll also want to work out a schedule for reporting back to council and a final deadline for council to make a decision.”
