Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Commission committee recommends 90‑day notice to Old Courthouse Museum after mixed public comments
Loading...
Summary
After a series of public comments pleading for preservation and others urging fiscal prudence, the Community Services Committee recommended the Douglas County Board of Commissioners issue a 90‑day notice to Old Courthouse, Inc., with last occupancy no later than May 15, 2026; commissioners debated alternatives and asked for more community engagement before final action.
The Douglas County Community Services Committee recommended that the Board of Commissioners exercise its contractual notice option and issue 90 days’ notice to Old Courthouse, Inc., regarding the lease of the Old Courthouse museum space, with a last day of occupancy no later than May 15, 2026.
Dr. Consuela Gilchrist, presenting the committee’s findings, said the committee reviewed two proposals from the Cultural Arts Council and Old Courthouse, Inc., and concluded the county cannot support either initiative “at this time” given current financial priorities. The committee recommended issuing the 90‑day notice on or before Feb. 13, 2026, while offering limited transition assistance: a public notice to artifact owners, a county liaison for the transition, and support for artifact storage and insurance if requested (presentation, SEG 1126–SEG 1243).
Public comment before the presentation showed deep division. Supporters of the museum described long volunteer histories, donated family artifacts and community value. Joseph Hamilton, who identified himself as the CFO of the Douglas County Museum of History and Art, walked commissioners through highlights of exhibits and asked them to “come back and see us,” arguing many Kennesaw State University study recommendations had already been implemented (Joseph Hamilton, SEG 025–SEG 124). Christine Ushrey Arnold, the museum’s newly elected board president, said the board had added five new members and was pursuing staffing, digital outreach and economic‑impact analysis, noting an estimate that day visitors spend roughly $55 and that the museum “conservatively generate[s] $944,000” in combined economic impact (Christine Ushrey Arnold, SEG 718–SEG 746).
Opponents said the museum has not demonstrated sustainable operations, governance, insurance or audit compliance. Susan Bowie told the board the museum “has failed and will continue to fail,” raised concerns about missing receipts and prior noncompliance with audit requirements, and said the county needs that courthouse space for department use (Susan Bowie, SEG 219–SEG 346). Tony Montcalm characterized the collection as “a private collection owned by a incorporated nonprofit that has been warehoused on county property at county expense for nearly 30 years,” and argued the county should reclaim the space for county services if needed (Tony Montcalm, SEG 911–SEG 958).
Commissioners acknowledged the artifacts’ significance but emphasized county space and financial constraints. Commissioner Kenneth Jones and other commissioners said the committee’s work was exhaustive, that county departments need the courthouse footprint for HR, finance and procurement functions, and that the county cannot take on running a nonprofit. At the same time some board members asked for more community engagement and for setting measurable targets or timelines if the board were to allow the museum additional time to meet benchmarks (commissioner discussion, SEG 1251–SEG 1368).
The committee recommended two mitigation options presented by the Cultural Arts Council: Option A would relocate selected artifacts and storyboards to the CAC’s historic building and store the rest in climate‑controlled county facilities; Option B would restore the courthouse as a display-ready exhibit but would require a one‑time $650,000 transition payment and an additional $30,000 annual staff cost for exhibit management (committee presentation, SEG 1158–SEG 1184). The committee notified commissioners that current county finances make either option infeasible for county funding at this time.
By the end of the public session the board did not take a final, recorded vote on item 5. Commissioners agreed to add the lease termination to the agenda for further deliberation at the board meeting on Feb. 3 and then moved the work session into executive session (procedural action, SEG 2830–SEG 2900).
What’s next: the committee’s recommendation includes a concrete timetable (90‑day notice window with a proposed last occupancy date of May 15, 2026). Commissioners signaled they want public input and clearer transition plans; the board will consider the item again at the next meeting where a formal vote could occur.
