Judged inadequate

Circuit judges shine light on courts facility planning

Government is boring. At least that’s what you’ll hear from any kid who has been required to watch C-SPAN or many adults who’ve attended a local School Board, City Council or Quorum Court meeting. And they’re right. They’re often dull, confusing and lend themselves to seemingly endless discussion. And it’s vitally important. Government is the proverbial sausage — people will wander into the kitchen once they get a good whiff of what’s cooking, but most of them don’t care to see how the sausage is made.

Monday night’s meeting of the Benton County Finance Committee, set to discuss proposals for a multi-million dollar courts facility, won’t be about making sausage, but it might be a little spicy.

Sure, it’s just another government building, right? But Benton County has on its hands quite a dramatic debate. It involves the probability of new taxation, something that never goes down smoothly with the county’s residents. It involves a county judge facing a contested re-election bid next year — challenged by a fellow Republican who sits on the Quorum Court. That county judge wants to build a courts complex on spacious county-owned land near the Benton County Sheriff’s Office and jail. It involves a Quorum Court that has rejected the county judge’s plan, instead favoring construction at a downtown location that operationally makes less sense. And it involves millions of dollars provided by Bentonville’s most influential family, the Waltons, which favors keeping the courts downtown.

And the latest dramatic wrinkle: Last week, Benton County’s six circuit court judges — Robin Green, Brad Karren, Thomas E. Smith, John R. Scott, Xollie Duncan and Doug Schrantz — delivered a letter to the Quorum Court expressing dissatisfaction with the designs for a downtown facility. They’re disappointed the county, three years after the judges encouraged it, failed to involve architects and engineers who specialize in development of court facilities.

Two proposals for downtown development, one by County Judge Bob Clinard and another by downtown business interests and the Walton Family Foundation, are inadequate to the needs of Benton County’s courts system now and in the future, according to the judges.

“Simply put, the land mass proposed is not large enough for a building of the size necessary to accommodate the security concerns, the functionality needed, nor the expected expansion necessary to meet the needs of the justice system in Benton County in the foreseeable future,” the circuit judges wrote. “Therefore, we cannot support the existing proposals for a courthouse located downtown nor the expenditure of taxpayer dollars for either of the two plans.” Thus sayeth the court. After all these years, isn’t it amazing that the men and women elected to serve as circuit court judges in Benton County have so clearly been ignored? These are, for all intents and purposes, the people who must carry out the administration of justice. That doesn’t mean they are the only people who must be satisfied with a new courts facility, but they sure are among the people one would expect to be heard.

Among their concerns are a lack of parking, an inadequate secure area around the building; the blending of old, existing structures with new facilities; a lack of floor space for clerical staff; and separation of the circuit clerk’s office from the public. The two designs provide inadequate street access and room for buses bringing prisoners to and from the courts, the judges say.

But perhaps most disconcerting among the circuit judges’ concerns is the assertion the Quorum Court’s downtown plans won’t come anywhere close to meeting space needs for the courts system even over the next decade.

“Population studies … project that Benton County will have a larger population than Pulaski County by 2025, less than ten years from now,” the judges wrote. “As of today, Pulaski County has seventeen circuit judges, and has had seventeen circuit judges for years. Any courthouse facility that is designed today must take into account the phenomenal growth expected in Benton County.”

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we suggest the judges have a serious point. The slow march toward a new Benton County courts complex needs to come to a halt. The process, driven by the county judge and Quorum Court, has been focused too much on spending as little as possible. The circuit judges correctly pointed out building an inadequate facility can be as poor a solution as building no facility at all.

If Benton County taxpayers are going to invest in a new courts facility, it needs to be one capable of handling what will be substantial growth in the years ahead.

Our theory? The justices of the peace on the Quorum Court need to understand the difference between spending wisely and being cheap. And, if they can, the justices should set aside the enticements dangled in front of them by the Walton family so they can focus entirely on the needs of county government and the taxpayers they are there to serve. Serving taxpayers means building a quality facility that anticipates future needs and accommodates them in a wise, economical way.

The Walton Family Foundation has been gracious to offer nearly $5 million toward the costs of a downtown building, with strings attached. And that money is enticing to the members of the Quorum Court, who like the idea of having someone else pay for part of the project rather than asking taxpayers for the money. But that doesn’t mean the Waltons’ desires for Bentonville necessary match up with the Quorum Court’s responsibility to build a lasting facility capable of unifying the courts system under one roof and expanding as Benton County’s population does. A new courts building should be designed as a 50-year structure, or longer. The downtown plans don’t appear to be up to that standard.

The Quorum Court and county judge should concentrate first and foremost on feedback from prosecutors, public defenders, the circuit clerk, the sheriff, the circuit judges and local attorneys to develop a long-term plan for the court system. Those factors should drive the decision on design and location. Then, if the Waltons want to contribute to a real solution for Benton County’s residents, it will be a lasting gift to serve the county’s needs rather than influence its decisions.

We don’t fault the Waltons for being engaged in such community decisions. They have done so much for the community. Rather, we fault the Quorum Court for letting the lure of free money become a dominant force in their deliberations about how to best serve the residents of Benton County.

To have gotten this far along in planning for the new facility only to have the circuit judges declare the plans to be inadequate demonstrates the county’s attention has been focused on the wrong aspects of a solution. At Monday’s meeting, we suggest the Quorum Court refocus their attention on building a structure that solves the challenges facing the judicial system of Benton County. Any structure that fails to provide a long term solution to those issues will be a failure, no matter who provides the money to help build it.