A closing argument for keeping the courthouse
Ladies and gentlemen of Augusta County, for the past two years we have watched the case of the county courthouse play out on these pages.
Now it is time for you, the voters, to deliver a final verdict on this issue.
You have heard from several well-known, thoughtful witnesses who believe moving the courthouse and county seat to Verona is too expensive, unnecessary and frighteningly short-sighted.
Joel Salatin channeled the sentiments of some in the county when he wrote in August that he agrees with many of the reasons the county wants to move the courthouse, but does not think it should cost $45 million.
Trial lawyer Graham Butler argued that the county’s “or else” cost of $59 million is a strawman, a cooked-up-in-Verona number invented to make the new courthouse look wise.
Wilson Vellines, a local attorney, clearly demonstrated that the population trends used to justify the palatial new courthouse are long out of date and far overestimate space needs.
The county has certainly done itself no favors, with growth slowing and the population aging — neither of which is a harbinger of crime spikes ahead. The county also will automatically need less courtroom space if it divides the juvenile and domestic relations court it shares with Staunton.
You have heard from the board of supervisors, including the most strident among them, Tracy Pyles. Pyles, who dreams in flip charts and speaks in invective. Pyles, who wants this pole barn edifice to justice, an appropriate place to hang a brass plaque forever enshrining his name and those of other current supervisors. Pyles, who promises the courthouse will bring to Verona the development boom the county government complex promised but failed to deliver.
Pyles does get one thing right: Something should be done. Of course, something should have been done long ago, when Augusta County officials continually refused to maintain the historic courthouse, in hopes of engineering a situation so dire that taxpayers could be railroaded into building exactly what the supervisors want, exactly where they want it. And, now, we are at that point.
By the county’s less-than-impartial reading, it’s time to dump the historic courthouse downtown, poison the regional cooperation well, and build an entirely new $45 million structure that looks less like a courthouse and more like a big church — a place to worship the hubris of a board that thought it had so thoroughly stacked the deck that no one would question their plan.
No, ladies and gentlemen, that’s not what has to happen. We maintain there are less expensive options that would maintain the county seat, protect taxpayers’ pocketbooks, and preserve and extend an efficient shared court system while bringing the buildings into the 21st century.
Ladies and gentlemen, our problem remains, as it began. We are divided. County and city officials have been unable to sit in the same room and come up with an adequate solution for this problem, and now it threatens to cost us all.
If this referendum passes, it will cost the county millions that could be used on schools. The money to service that debt would be better invested in teachers and deputies. The city will suffer by having empty buildings and less economic activity and purpose, which we all know impacts the county surrounding the city as much as it impacts the city itself.
Is this how we want our community to function?
Ladies and gentlemen of Augusta County, if you believe we can solve this problem by spending less than $45 million, vote the referendum down Nov. 8.
If you believe the city and county must function in cooperation, not competition, vote the referendum down Nov. 8.
If you want to send a strong message to the county that schools, county services and public safety are more important than building a monument, vote the referendum down Nov. 8.
The crime on trial in our community today is that our leaders have taken us down a road of divisiveness that threatens to alter our economies and history forever. Vote no and send them back to the table to come up with a better solution that will serve the community as a whole.
Our View represents the opinion of thenewspaper’s editorial board: Roger Watson,president;
David Fritz, executive editor; and
Deona Landes Houff, communityconversations editor.