After months of debate, Freeborn County commissioners chose a plan for courthouse redesign Thursday.

Wednesday, July 14, 1999

After months of debate, Freeborn County commissioners chose a plan for courthouse redesign Thursday. In a 3-2 split, commissioners chose to move forward by presenting a plan for new construction to the public. The plan is the design created by a citizen courthouse committee early last year.

Chairman Brian Jordahl prompted commissioners to vote on taking the plan to the public.

&uot;I put a lot of weight on the advisory board committee’s plan,&uot; he said.

The plan, estimated at a cost of $8.5 million last year, would tear down the 1954 north addition to the courthouse and build a new section where the parking lot now stands. Additionally, it would preserve the 1888 original building, with an option to replace three of four turrets and the clock tower.

Commissioners noted some elements of the original proposal might change before it is reviewed by the public. One change could be eliminating the need to relocate the Extension Service and Public Health offices.

While commissioners Dave Mullenbach and Bob Berthelsen supported taking the plan to the public, they noted they weren’t sure tearing down the 1954 building was the best idea. Both said earlier in the meeting they supported keeping the building intact.

&uot;Right now, I’m in favor of the most common sense thing I see,&uot; said Mullenbach, referring to the option to keep the 1954 building.

But, Jordahl questioned whether the county would actually save money by keeping the building, since remodeling it could cost nearly as much as building new.

In the end, Mullenbach said he was willing to present the plan to the public and see if there is support.

&uot;We have to do something,&uot; he said. While Mullenbach and Berthelsen were willing to seek public comment on the plan, commissioners Dan Belshan and Keith Porter were not.

&uot;I’m opposed to only bringing one plan to the public,&uot; said Belshan. &uot;It’s a waste of money.&uot;

Instead, he said he favored taking at least three plans to a series of public meetings and allowing county residents to chose their favorites.

Other commissioners, however, said it would be hard to achieve a public consensus.

Porter said he opposed the plan selected Thursday because it doesn’t do enough.

&uot;I’m opposed to any plan that doesn’t remove the 1888 building and the 1954 building,&uot; he said. &uot;And, I’m going to stick to that until the end.&uot;

Porter suggested removing the two older sections of the courthouse and building where the parking lot is located.

His plan also calls for moving the county engineer’s office to the highway department shop and closing the Extension Service.

Belshan also said he had a favorite option, which includes constructing a judicial building south of Pearl Street and doing minimal remodeling to the current buildings.

That plan, however, was ruled out after the commissioners’ last meeting on the project. The owner of the land south of Pearl Street reportedly rejected the county’s final $80,000 offer for the property.

Belshan said he wanted to continue to negotiate, but the other commissioners said &uot;no.&uot;

Without building to the south, Belshan said his only other option was to only remodel the courthouse to meet Americans with Disabilities Act requirements. The remodeling has been estimated at $600,000.

&uot;I can’t support spending $8 to $9 million,&uot; he said.

He said the current farm economy means many area residents won’t be able to afford the extra costs the proposed construction could entail.

Jordahl, however, said the current economy and low interest rates makes it the perfect time to consider the project.

&uot;If we’re going to bond, it will never be cheaper than it is now,&uot; he said.

County Administrator Gene Smith said county staff believes there are ways to fund the project with a minimal, or no levy increase.

The commissioners agreed that cost will likely be an issue raised when the plan is presented to the public.

For the presentation, commissioners plan to ask an architect to develop a conceptual model or drawings.

&uot;We have to have something like that to show them,&uot; Mullenbach said of plans to present to county residents.

With presentation details to be ironed out, commissioners indicated the public hearings could be held in August or September, but no actual time frame was given.