County mulls courthouse options

With the riverfront property in Loudon effectively off the table for a new courthouse annex, Loudon County Commission brainstormed at Monday’s workshop.

Commissioners agreed to seek more input in hopes of having some direction before a Nov. 18 workshop.

“Maybe they’ll come to the workshop as well. I intend to get with MBI, with David Matlock and Jay Henderlight, and talk about a couple of options as well,” Rollen “Buddy” Bradshaw, Loudon County mayor, said. “Maybe on the courthouse lawn or just some options in general. I think if we choose to keep the old courthouse functioning, I think that reduces a little bit of what our need is and so maybe we’re not in the 20,000-square-foot range as much as we were prior. So it’ll give us a few more options and more directions we could look at.”

Bradshaw said putting a facility on the old Bacon Creamery property in downtown Loudon probably won’t work.

“I’ve been approached by a couple of (Loudon) city councilmen as well as the city mayor talking about maybe the courthouse square expansion of the current courthouse is best, and so I take that as probably more of an interest at keeping it there at the courthouse square,” Bradshaw said after the workshop.

Commission tossed out ideas for about 30 minutes Monday.

Commissioners Gary Whitfield and David Meers expressed interest in keeping operations at the courthouse square.

However, County Commissioner Van Shaver was in opposition, believing the county has outgrown the building. He pointed to the justice center location.

“My initial proposal was a second annex just like the one we got right beside the one we got down here,” Shaver said. “... But after hearing from a lot of other people, the ideal of this one time getting to do this, we can take it to the justice center. Groundwork is not a problem. We can almost hook them together like the new jail is with the old jail.”

He referenced section B of Tennessee Code Annotated 5-7-105 on the location of county buildings, courthouses, jails, workhouses and county department garages.

“Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing or prohibiting a county that has constructed a criminal justice building or facility, or that uses a building or facility, that is not located within the limits of the county seat, from holding criminal court in that building or facility; provided, that it is located within the limits of the county,” the TCA states. “If the building or facility is used to hold criminal court, a defendant may be indicted, prosecuted, tried and convicted in that building or facility as if done at the courthouse.”

The property does not have to be annexed, Shaver said.

“This is an expansion of our criminal justice facility and we could hold court to it,” he said.

Shaver stressed he wasn’t “hung up” on any option, but hoped to do what was best for the county.

“We don’t want to move the county seat, we don’t want to move the courthouse, but we can legally without annexation add or build at the justice center,” he said. “But I would like to think that whether we did it that way or whether the city of Loudon annexed, either way, everybody the first thought they would want to do is what’s best for the whole program, what’s best for officer safety, what’s best for logistics of the whole operation at the justice center?”

Meers asked commissioners to consider traffic the courthouse pulls to downtown Loudon businesses.

“I don’t feel any obligation to the economy of the city of Loudon,” Shaver said. “Loudon city bailed out on the city of Loudon. LUB bailed out on the city of Loudon. So just for us to say, ‘OK, the only reason to build back in downtown is to preserve some economic balance for the downtown city,’ I don’t think that’s our job. If it works out to where that’s at, fine, but we have our logistical problems that we have to cope with if we do go back downtown. We have parking problems we have to cope with.”

He said the county needs to “move forward.”

Whitfield agreed, but asked if the county needs to “take such a big leap.”

“We took a big leap when we added a new judge,” Whitfield said. “All I heard sitting in this audience was we were going to add a new judge, it’s going to speed up our courts, and it hasn’t made one difference. ... With attorneys and the way the court system moves so slow, do we have to make a $7 million leap?”

Kelly Littleton-Brewster, county commissioner, also questioned if the old courthouse could be expanded.

“Ultimately, we’ve got to do something,” Shaver said. “So far April to now we’ve not done anything anywhere — old courthouse, new courthouse, not anything. What is it going to take for us to finally take whatever the step, whether it’s move back in the old courthouse, build a new courthouse, if we’re going to build a new one, where are we going to build it — what do we need to do to get this process going?”

Commission’s next workshop is 6 p.m. Nov. 18 at the county office building.