Olympia City Council members heard on June 12 that the city faces three paths for municipal court services: build a new justice facility, retrofit/relocate court operations into City Hall and 108 State Avenue, or transition judicial services to Thurston County under an interlocal agreement.

Assistant City Manager Debbie Sullivan told the council staff developed the three options and has been negotiating terms with the county. “This is a hard place to be. We hold our court and the employees in high regard, and absent the significant budget issues facing council, we wouldn’t be here,” Sullivan said, summarizing the fiscal pressure behind the review.

Why it matters: Council must weigh capital and operating costs, impacts on public access and city operations, and continuity of services for defendants, victims and court staff. The city faces an ongoing structural budget gap and earlier facility studies showed rebuilding the Lee Creighton Justice Center would be expensive; staff framed the study session as information gathering to seek council direction at a later date.

Key options and estimated costs

- Rebuild the Lee Creighton Justice Center (900 Plum Street): a prior feasibility estimate (2023 dollars) put the project at about $89–$94 million; roughly $32 million of that estimate was attributed to replacing the jail. Rebuilding without the jail would still be north of $50 million with about $4 million a year in debt service, staff said.

- Lease commercial space: earlier design work produced a tenant-improvement estimate of about $7 million plus an estimated $815,000 annual lease. Combined transition and operating costs would have left an additional $3.2 million to be funded; staff said annual operating increases could exceed $1 million.

- Use City Hall (council chambers) plus 108 State Avenue: architects estimated roughly $7 million in tenant improvements across both buildings (similar to the lease option). Staff said using city-owned buildings would avoid an annual lease but would require selling debt to fund a remaining $3.2 million of tenant improvements, producing roughly $2.26 million per year in debt service over 20 years if financed that way. Converting council chambers for shared use would also require security upgrades, screening, meeting pods and AV/recording modifications; staff’s planning-level estimate specifically for the council-chambers retrofit was presented at about $1.5 million (planning-level, preliminary).

- Transition judicial services to Thurston County (interlocal agreement): the county’s option would keep prosecution, victims’ assistance, domestic-violence support and public defense in city-managed space (108 State Avenue) while moving judicial functions to Thurston County District Court. Staff estimated renovating 108 State Avenue for nonjudicial functions at about $3.8 million — roughly $1.7 million less than the fully shared City Hall/108 State Avenue scenario — and said proceeds from the Lee Creighton sale plus capital funds would largely cover one-time tenant improvements; staff estimated the net recurring impact to the General Fund at about $80,000 per year under that scenario.

What county officials said

Thurston County District Court Judge Sam Meyer and Court Executive Frankie Peters described district-court programs and services that city staff would rely on if judicial services moved to the county. Peters reviewed probation, pretrial services, substance monitoring, therapeutic courts (mental-health and veterans courts), a resource hub partnership and a text-notification system for court dates and conditions. Judge Meyer framed district court as a “people’s court” that handles misdemeanors, infractions and a set of civil matters (small claims, name changes, some civil suits) that municipal courts do not.

Peters described a county plan to add staff to absorb a municipal caseload if Olympia contracts with the county. The draft staffing plan discussed in council briefing materials included roughly 17 FTE additions (probation, courtroom clerks, customer support and supervisory roles) and a county planning-level estimate of about $640,000 for tenant improvements related to the transition. Peters said the county would produce an annual report on services and enrollment in therapeutic-court programs.

Draft interlocal agreement highlights

Assistant City Manager Sullivan summarized the draft interlocal agreement the city and county legal teams prepared: an initial term of July 1, 2025, through Dec. 31, 2026, with the county required to complete a comprehensive rate study before the agreement expires; extension would require city notice by Oct. 1, 2026. The agreement would require 60 days’ notice to the city if the county planned changes to services and includes at least one annual meeting between city and county staff to discuss goals and program continuity. Sullivan also said judicial elections in 2026 affect termination timing and that the agreement contemplates arbitration or further negotiation if the two parties cannot agree on new terms.

Council concerns and council-member comments

Council members pressed staff and architects on operational logistics: how jury flow, secure in-custody movement, restroom access and public seating would work if council chambers became a courtroom; implications for frequent large public hearings; sound and privacy between secure and public lobbies; and parking and code-required spaces that previously were satisfied by the justice center. KMB Architects’ Bill Valdez and City Project Engineer Fran Eide provided layout renderings and said many technical questions remained to be resolved. Eide and others told the council that shared use would require permanent door and hardware changes, controlled access systems and staff time to move furniture and equipment between uses.

Municipal court judge’s position

Municipal Court Judge Pam Negara urged the council to weigh the city’s current, place-based services and the total cost of transition. Negara provided council members a detailed packet summarizing the court’s current programs — community court, restorative justice programming, classes, provider partnerships and program audits — and disputed staff cost comparisons that, she said, did not reflect flexibility or possible reductions in proposed retrofit scope. “We have been willing to collaborate on calendars to only be here in the morning and give you the afternoons,” the judge told the council, asking the body to compare the city court’s current services and costs against the county option.

Next steps

Council members and staff agreed the topic needs more work. Staff asked for direction on whether to continue negotiations with Thurston County; the assistant city manager and legal staff said they will refine the interlocal agreement language, finalize estimates for tenant-improvement work (the county was seeking bids for its tenant-improvement work), and provide more detail about employee transitions and staffing assumptions. No formal council vote or final decision was recorded at the study session.

What the council asked staff to provide next

Council members requested clearer, side-by-side financial comparisons that include one-time capital costs, ongoing operating impacts, staffing and employee transition terms; details on parking and code implications if the justice center property is sold; a refined scope and cost estimate for any city-hall retrofit; and a staffing/transition plan that addresses employee preferences and bargaining-unit issues. Staff said the county will complete a rate study that could inform 2027 budgeting, and the draft interlocal agreement includes reporting and annual meeting obligations.

Ending

City staff framed the study session as information gathering ahead of a future council decision. Council members and presenters agreed the choice carries trade-offs between long-term capital expense, ongoing operating costs, local control and the logistics of sharing a historic civic space. Staff said they would return with refined cost estimates, updated interlocal-agreement language and more detail on employee transition options to inform the council’s next formal action.