Just when the conversation over how to upgrade and expand Benton County's courts system couldn't seem to get more complicated, the drive toward a solution hit a new pothole.
"Historic preservation!" is the rally cry. It's the kind of issue that can send shivers down the spines of those trying to develop a property. Whether building a new road, an airport, a subdivision or an office building, the discovery of artifacts or some historically significant fact about a property can toss a wrench into the already laborious process of getting a project approved. It's like a ghost from days gone by rising up to haunt the march of progress.
What’s the point?
If Benton County officials choose a Northeast Second Street site for a courts facility, tearing down the building there now makes sense despite preservationists’ desires to keep it intact.
Sometimes it's a friendly ghost, one that needs to be revealed so that today's leaders can take the steps to embrace history and accommodate its preservation. In Bentonville, for example, a house slated for demolition early this year had been the home decades ago of Louise Thaden, a renowned female aviator who was a contemporary of the better-known Amelia Earhart. The house now will be moved to a planned private school in Bentonville that will also take the name of the hometown historic aviator.
Other times, the disturbed spirit of the past is more of an imagined apparition. Some people come to equate "old" with "historic." Absent a fairly major historic figure or event connected to them, the level of their historic nature is largely an "eye of the beholder" exercise. It's not that a building may not be beloved by those who admire its architecture or its one-time place of significance in a community. The question really is whether its place is unique and vital to telling the community's story, to the point its significance trumps all modern demands for the space.
Benton County officials have spent a long, long time debating how to deal with inadequate facilities for its court system, which are now housed in the old Benton County Courthouse and two buildings nearby. The Benton County judge, Bob Clinard, long ago set out on a course to develop a new courts facility to handle the county's needs for the next several decades. It's a need that must be addressed in ever-growing Benton County.
Planning for the future, however, has been a slog. Clinard set his sights on a courts facility on county-owned land near the jail, which makes great logistical sense. Such a move, however, would take the courts system out of downtown Bentonville. So the debate isn't just about what's needed for the courts system, but about what impact any decision will have on the downtown area.
Complicating matters further was an election. Clinard's term ends later this year. He ran for re-election, but faced opposition in the primary from Barry Moehring, a sitting justice of the peace who opposes the courts' move from downtown.
Moehring won and faces Libertarian Ronnie Smith and a write-in candidate on the November ballot. But the potential for significant progress on the courts was lost as county leaders wait for the transition in power. Studies and discussions have proceeded even if any definitive answers have been elusive.
Now, back to that apparition.
Keeping the courts downtown would involve new construction, with a new building on Northeast Second Street across from the 88-year-old courthouse as one possibility. On that corner, though, sits an 81-year-old building that years ago was renovated into a courtroom. The structure was once a post office and a weather bureau.
Clinard -- and anyone who reasonably evaluates preliminary drawings showing what it would take to build around that structure -- says it needs to go if that's the county's choice for a long-term courts solution.
"If you're going to use that site, it's better to use the whole site and demolish it," Clinard said at a public hearing last week. "Incorporating the old post office into a new, 21st century-structure is about like taking a Model T and attaching it to a BMW."
That set the advocates of historic preservation on edge. Glenn Jones with the Historical Preservation Commission said he will fight to save the building.
"Tearing down that old building has got to be the dumbest thing you can do," Jones said.
That, of course, depends on perspective. Where's the significant community history for that building, other than having anchored that corner for a long time, a good deal of it as part of Benton County's endless Band-Aid approach on its facilities shortcomings? Maybe a relative of Louise Thaden mailed a letter to her from there?
If county leaders are desperate to keep the courts downtown, it's going to mean some sacrifices. It's more important to create a courts system that works for the people of Benton County for the next 50 years than it is to preserve the old post office on that corner. And it certainly doesn't make sense, as Clinard suggests, to tie its continued use into planning for a new courts facility.
The building has been renovated over and over. It lacks the architectural significance to demand its preservation. And the fact a lot of postal items flowed through there does little to build the case for letting the structure stand in the way of modern needs.
Preservation-minded folks deserve credit for standing up for the old building. We commend them for their passion and view them as a vital voice in every community. Indeed, they're right when they say progress has paved over many of this nation's great historic places.
The building at Second and Northeast A Street just isn't all that great.
Of course, if the county decides it wants to preserve the building at all costs, maybe they should ask Bob Clinard. He's got a plan that will make it easy.
Commentary on 09/25/2016