PSCC discusses new courthouse planning, funding and facilities committee next steps

5809718 · September 20, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Members discussed updating a 2016 facilities plan, county property purchase for a courthouse site, shifting courtroom needs since 2016, and waiting on the County Commission’s October agenda item before reconvening a facilities/technology committee.

Members of the Public Safety Coordinating Council’s Executive Committee discussed next steps for planning a new courthouse, emphasizing that funding decisions by the County Commission will determine when the facilities committee can move forward.

Chair Susie Lopez said the committee has historically maintained a facilities plan last updated in 2016 and that “a lot of things have changed since then,” including technology and courtroom needs noted during the pandemic. Robert Parkinson, who spoke at length about facilities planning, told the committee the county purchased the property where the old Firestone building used to be and that some capital improvement tax (CIT) money had been appropriated toward courthouse planning.

Committee members said they expect the issue to appear on the County Commission’s agenda in October — members differed at the meeting on whether that was Oct. 1 or Oct. 10 — and agreed it would be appropriate to reconvene the facilities committee once the county identifies funding. Parkinson recommended combining the Facilities Committee with the Technology Committee to coordinate consultants and planning work; he also noted the recent relocation and reduced courtroom count at a regional District Court of Appeal building as an example of how needs have changed since 2016.

Committee members discussed the need to bring a replacement court administrator up to speed following staff turnover and the possibility of inviting the county facilities director to present an overview at the next full council meeting on Nov. 14. There was no formal vote; members recorded direction to wait for clearer guidance from the County Commission before undertaking consultant selection or major planning work.

The committee did not set firm dates for committee reconvening but agreed to monitor the county agenda and return this item for follow-up after the commission’s October discussion.