NWA editorial: Fund the study

In Benton County, it’s no time to get chintzy

If a government-hired consultant examines an option not ultimately selected by decision-makers, does that mean examining that option was a waste of taxpayer dollars?

That's the message we're getting out of Tom Allen, a Benton County justice of the peace, regarding the future location of a courts facility that should be -- we'll have to see if it actually is -- designed to effectively house the county's judicial system.

What’s the point?

Benton County Quorum Court members should fully fund a study of all potential sites for expansion of the circuit court system.

"I think we have to be considering what will happen when [Bob] Clinard is no longer county judge on Jan. 1," Allen said recently as to the Quorum Court's path forward on funding, designing and picking a site for a judicial facility. "Barring the biggest upset in Benton County history, Barry Moehring is going to be county judge. Barry has been pretty outspoken about what he wants to do in regards to the courthouse, and one thing I don't want us to do is spend precious money on architects and engineers that might be wasted."

The Quorum Court is scheduled to decide Thursday about how to proceed, primarily involving the second phase of a consultant's study of potential sites for what will undoubtedly need to be an expansion of the Benton County judicial system for the decades ahead. Justices of the peace must decide the scope of that study, and naturally, the wider the scope, the more the study will cost.

Moehring favors a downtown solution. But is what the county judge wants always the best choice? If that's the case, why hasn't the Quorum Court simply adopted Clinard's preferred plan to build on county land adjacent to the jail on Southwest 14th Street? It's because the Quorum Court owes it to taxpayers to examine options thoroughly.

Moehring's victory over Clinard in the GOP primary wasn't a referendum on the location or design or affordability of a courts complex. It may have been that voters welcomed Moehring's fresh perspective in the office or that they had grown tired of Clinard's leadership. Or it might have been Moehring's more than 9-to-1 spending on the campaign, bolstered by significant financial backing by the Walton family. Whatever the case, the Quorum Court would be unwise to simply discard Clinard's experience in the role of county judge. As a man who has managed county facilities for nearly six years, he's got a more informed perspective than practically anyone, save for the circuit court judges who operate the judicial system. And oh, by the way, those judges have said the downtown proposals so far discussed fall short of what it will take to meet the criminal justice system's needs for the future.

Perhaps our justices of the peace, if they've already decided it's downtown or bust, don't see the point in getting detailed information about the Southwest 14th Street site near the jail. Why put numbers to a choice if you're dead set against choosing that option, especially if it might put elected officials in an uncomfortable position? Actually studying the site next to the jail might demonstrate it's more cost-effective or that it's a less-complicated site on which to build for the future. Why pay for a study that might demonstrate a better option if that information might be a barrier to what you really want?

From our standpoint, it just makes sense to proceed with a full study of the locations identified so far. Benton County doesn't build a courts facility every day. In fact, the last large-scale construction for the county's judicial system was in 1928. If the county is serious about developing a long-term solution that can grow with Benton County's population and the growing case-load pressure on the courts system, the project will register in the tens of millions of dollars. The Quorum Court is now in debate over spending $205,250 on a consultant's study of all potential sites identified so far. Trimming that study back may save a few thousand dollars, but at the loss of information that will prove critical to a thoughtful decision.

But if the decision has been predetermined, yeah, what's the point? If that's the case, the justices of the peace ought to just come out and tell their voters the rationale behind the decision and why it's important to ignore options that might be less costly and more effective before they're even fully studied.

Susan Anglin, another justice of the peace, favors a downtown courts facility, but she recognizes a responsibility to taxpayers to study the issue thoroughly.

"For me, I want to know that we're looking at all the possibilities at all the sites we're considering," she said. "We need to know what's possible."

The consultant's study of all available sites will ensure Benton County justice of the peace have the data to make an informed decision residents have some reason to trust. It's not a waste of time or money to check out every reasonable option, unless, that is, there really is only one option. And if that's the case, the taxpayers deserve to know that, now.

If a government-hired consultant examines an option not ultimately selected by decision-makers, does that mean examining that option was a waste of taxpayer dollars?

That's the message we're getting out of Tom Allen, a Benton County justice of the peace, regarding the future location of a courts facility that should be -- we'll have to see if it actually is -- designed to effectively house the county's judicial system.

""I think we have to be considering what will happen when [Bob] Clinard is no longer county judge on Jan. 1," Allen said recently as to the Quorum Court's path forward on funding, designing and picking a site for a judicial facility. "Barring the biggest upset in Benton County history, Barry Moehring is going to be county judge. Barry has been pretty outspoken about what he wants to do in regards to the courthouse, and one thing I don't want us to do is spend precious money on architects and engineers that might be wasted."

The Quorum Court is scheduled to decide Thursday about how to proceed, primarily involving the second phase of a consultant's study of potential sites for what will undoubtedly need to be an expansion of the Benton County judicial system for the decades ahead. Justices of the peace must decide the scope of that study, and naturally, the wider the scope, the more the study will cost.

Moehring favors a downtown solution. But is what the county judge wants always the best choice? If that's the case, why hasn't the Quorum Court simply adopted Clinard's preferred plan to build on county-owned, unoccupied land adjacent to the county jail on Southwest 14th Street? It's because the Quorum Court owes it to taxpayers to examine the county's options thoroughly.

Moehring's victory over Clinard in the GOP primary wasn't a referendum on the location or design or affordability of a courts complex. It may have been that voters welcomed Moehring's fresh perspective in the office or that they had grown tired of Clinard's leadership. Or it might have been Moehring's more than 9-to-1 spending on the campaign, bolstered by significant financial backing by the Walton family. Whatever the case, the Quorum Court would be unwise to simply discard Clinard's experience in the role of county judge. As a man who has managed county facilities for nearly six years, he's got a more informed perspective than practically anyone, save for the circuit court judges who operate the judicial system. And oh, by the way, those judges have said the downtown proposals so far discussed fall short of what it will take to meet the criminal justice system's needs for the future.

Perhaps our justices of the peace, if they've already decided it's downtown or bust, don't see the point in getting detailed information about the Southwest 14th Street site near the county jail. Why put numbers to a choice if you're dead set against choosing that option, especially if it might put elected officials in an uncomfortable position? Actually studying the site next to the jail might demonstrate it's more cost-effective or that it's a less-complicated site on which to build for the future. Why fund a study that might demonstrate a better option if that information might be a barrier to what you really want?

From our standpoint, it just makes sense to proceed with a full study of the locations identified so far. Benton County doesn't build a courts facility every day. In fact, the last large-scale construction for the county's judicial system was in 1928. If the county is serious about developing a long-term solution that can grow with Benton County's population and the growing case-load pressure on the courts system, the project will register in the tens of millions of dollars. The Quorum Court is now in debate over spending $205,250 on a consultant's study of all potential sites identified so far. Trimming that study back may save a few thousand dollars, but at the loss of information that will prove critical to a thoughtful decision.

But if the decision has been predetermined, yeah, what's the point? If that's the case, the justices of the peace ought to just come out and tell their voters the rationale behind the decision and why it's important to ignore options that might be less costly and more effective before they're even fully studied.

Susan Anglin, another justice of the peace, favors a downtown courts facility, but she recognizes a responsibility to taxpayers to study the issue thoroughly.

"For me, I want to know that we're looking at all the possibilities at all the sites we're considering," she said. "We need to know what's possible."

The consultant's study of all available sites will ensure Benton County justice of the peace have the data to make an informed decision residents have some reason to trust. It's not a waste of time or money to check out every reasonable option, unless, that is, there really is only one option. And if that's the case, the taxpayers deserve to know that, now.

Commentary on 07/26/2016

Upcoming Events