Jackson County commissioners approve purchase of building for tax collector after debate on security and costs

Jackson County commissioners voted to move forward with buying a commercial building to house the county tax collector and some related services, the board heard during a discussion that focused on an appraisal, estimated relocation costs and how to handle security at the new site.

The appraisal came in at $1,055,000, $30,000 above the agreed sale price of $1,025,000, Mary Carol, tax collector, told the board. County staff presented a memo outlining relocation needs including cabling and cameras, specific equipment for the tax office, relocation of state-owned equipment ($5,002.35) and building signage (about $2,500). The memo estimated roughly $34,000 for those items and said total relocation expenses would be “less than $50,000.” Mary Carol said she would pay for new furniture from the tax collector’s excess fees.

The appraisal and cost estimates formed the basis for a motion to proceed with the purchase. Commissioner Crutchfield made the motion to purchase the building and Commissioner Donald Crowder seconded; the board approved the motion by voice/show-of-hands vote (vote taken by show of hands; individual roll-call names were not recorded in the transcript). The transcript indicates the board’s vote was unanimous.

Why it matters: commissioners and staff said the building would improve public accessibility — especially for the driver’s license office that shares space with the tax collector — and argued it offers a favorable price-per-square-foot compared with new construction. Commissioner [last name recorded as] (speaker) said the building costs about $138 per square foot and noted new construction would likely cost substantially more.

Security and operations: much of the public discussion centered on security at the proposed site versus existing courthouse facilities. Mary Carol told the board the proposed building is “very secure” for limiting unescorted public access, and staff have arranged for panic buttons. County officials and the sheriff discussed options including placing reception staff behind glass and relying on sheriff response rather than posting a full-time deputy immediately. The county attorney (on the record during the meeting) advised that detailed discussion of building security could be held in executive session under the Sunshine Law exemption for security matters, but the board chose to continue the discussion in public.

Financial context and next steps: commissioners noted that the purchase could be funded without borrowing. Mary Carol and staff cited prior years’ unused fee balances that were returned to the county — figures mentioned in the meeting included $93,000 returned last year, $13,000 the previous year, $69,000 the year before that and $60,000 another earlier year — and suggested excess fees could help cover fit-out costs. Staff said they will meet with a designer the following week to refine modular furniture and equipment plans. The board asked that security considerations for this move be applied consistently when evaluating other county departments’ needs.

The board’s approval authorizes staff to complete the purchase and proceed with initial relocation work; details on a formal closing date, final funding source allocations and any future security staffing decisions were not specified in the public discussion.