Spencer County Fiscal Court approves MOU with state for proposed $33.66 million judicial center
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Spencer County Fiscal Court approved an MOU with the Administrative Office of the Courts to participate in development of a proposed 25,100 sq. ft. Spencer County Judicial Center; the AOC documents describe a $33.66 million project scope and establish a Project Development Board, procurement and financing rules.
Spencer County Fiscal Court unanimously approved a memorandum of understanding with the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) on Dec. 15, formalizing local participation in planning for a proposed Spencer County Judicial Center.
Judge Scott Travis said the county was top of the list for a new judicial center after AOC staff delivered the MOU to his office. The AOC’s description attached to the MOU identifies a Project scope of about 25,100 square feet and a budget figure of $33,661,000. The document states the project is included in the Judicial Branch 2026 Budget Request and anticipates General Assembly consideration in 2026.
Under the MOU, the AOC and the county will form a Project Development Board (PDB) to oversee site selection, procurement, contracting and construction oversight. The agreement spells out that the AOC will review and must approve design, construction and financing contracts, and that any use‑allowance or state payments are subject to legislative appropriations. The MOU also says the AOC will pay a use allowance toward the KCOJ’s pro rata share of debt service and will assist with capital planning and project management under AP Part X rules.
The county’s obligations include advertising and procurement for architectural and construction services consistent with AP Part X, establishing a public properties corporation if needed, providing legal representation for the PDB at no cost to the PDB, keeping project records, and complying with change‑order and occupancy approvals by AOC staff. The MOU requires AOC approval for any change that would increase the AOC’s use allowance payment or alter the AOC’s spatial allocation.
Court discussion focused on the scope of state oversight and the county’s responsibilities for procurement, financing and long‑term maintenance. The approval was taken by roll call; the motion to approve the MOU as presented carried with all members voting aye.
Next steps outlined in the MOU include establishing the PDB and moving forward with site selection and design work pending legislative authorization and funding.