'Justice is bleeding'

Years of talk about expanding Kootenai County departments is nearing the need for financial decision-making as initial cost estimates eclipse the $20 million mark. 

Commissioners Leslie Duncan and Bill Brooks met with representatives of two architecture firms last week to discuss nine options to relieve overcrowded county staff. 

Longwell + Trapp Architects and Lombard/Conrad Architects were chosen to do a facility study in early 2019. Since then, available space for county personnel has changed due to property acquisitions and increased staffing. 

"We were asked to look at a number of different county facilities and master plans," Ken Gallegos from Lombard/Conrad Architects said. "Kind of a road map, if you will, of moves that could happen in the county to better utilize space for growth in the future for county facilities."

Through the study, architects developed potential projects for the Kootenai County main campus on Government Way, public safety buildings, Kootenai County North — the former Kootenai Electric Cooperative headquarters, and the Office of Emergency Management. 

"This is not meant for you guys to make a decision today," Gallegos told the commissioners. "You guys have to take this, digest it, to determine what's best for the county." 

Of the nine proposals, Cory Trapp with Longwell + Trapp Architects said their preferred options were:

• A $25 million to $31.4 million main campus improvement plan, which would redistribute and expand several departments, remodel human resources, construct a new courts facility and a building for the public defender office. 

• A $970,000 to $1.4 million public safety plan to redistribute several offices and demolish the Compton Building on Dalton Avenue for additional parking. 

• A $225,000 to $330,000 Kootenai County North project that would support multiple county departments 

• A $2 million to $2.5 million Office of Emergency Management project to construct a 911 addition to the existing property 

Trapp noted that the OEM expansion was likely the lowest priority on the list of expansion projects.

Referencing the $25 million minimum price tag for the preferred main campus option, Trapp said the brunt of the cost would go toward the new four-story court facility.

"It's going to be easier for construction, and we can potentially see that being maybe more cost-effective … It also gives us more space in the old courthouse building for future growth," Trapp said. "If we stay with option one once it's built, you will have no more space to be offered, no flexibility." 

Shawn Riley, the recently retired county project manager/consultant who is continuing to work as an adviser at the architects' request, noted that it was nice to finally see a path forward after 14 years with the county. 

"I commend you guys for at least getting that taken care of," he said. "What you do with it and how you deal with it, that's totally up to you. But it's nice that there are options on the table and some type of road map to really see what we're looking at." 

Last year commissioners contracted with the two firms to design a multi-department legal center that would house county attorneys, defenders and other justice services. 

After much back and forth, largely hanging on possible legislation from the 2021 legislative session, commissioners postponed deciding on the then-$20 million design. The discussions brought up an important question: How would the building be funded? 

In February, there were three main funding methods on the table:

• General obligation bond

• Forgone taxes

• An annual lease agreement 

Now commissioners are considering another funding source, a potential $32 million American Rescue Plan Act grant. Duncan said the county should find out in September how it can use its ARPA allotment. If possible, Duncan said, the county hopes to allocate a chunk of the grant to finance part of the construction associated with justice services, which is a top priority.

"The justice building will give us courtrooms. It will give us prosecutors and some of the other things we're hoping to have," Duncan said. "Then we can decide what we have money for going forward." 

Duncan said in February that without the building, the county legal services could suffer with efficiency. 

"To me, justice is bleeding; we've got to fix that first," she said. 

On the other hand, Brooks believes the county should not rely on federal dollars. Instead, he suggests commissioners put the projects out to bond and "let the taxpayers decide." 

"If the commissioners believe in it, by God, go out and sell it to people," he said. "Let them know what we're doing with their money." 

He also disapproved of the increased project price tag. 

"I agreed to about $20 million, and I said you know it's going to be $30 million by the time this is over," Brooks said. "Now it's going to be $30 million-plus. We're just spending money like we have it, which we don't have."