The City Council Courthouse Oversight Special Committee met Wednesday and by the time it adjourned three hours after it was called to order, two more government entities were added to the list of agencies, commissions, departments and offices that are sharing a confrontational relationship with Mayor Alvin Brown’s administration.
The meeting adjourned with the proviso that it will be reconvened when the person or people who can answer questions posed by the committee are present at the meeting to answer the questions.
The main item on the agenda at the meeting was the $4 million reduction in the budget for the Unified Courthouse Facility scheduled to be completed in May.
The mayor’s office issued a list of items that would not be included in the project, primarily telephone and security systems, audio-visual equipment, some new furniture and the pedestrian bridge across Pearl Street between the old federal courthouse and the new County Courthouse.
Fourth Judicial Circuit Chief Judge Donald Moran appeared before the committee with questions of his own concerning communication between the court and the mayor’s office. He said the ordinance that applies the courthouse and its design and outfitting specifically requires that the mayor consult with the chief judge and the City Council president concerning any changes.
“We have been directed and told what will be cut without consultation,” Moran said.
“There needs to be some collaboration, which there was at one time. We’re not getting any input from the administration,” and “The system isn’t working like it’s supposed to work. We can disagree, but we need to be able to discuss it,” he said.
One of the directions from the mayor’s office, Moran said, is that old furniture in the courthouse on East Bay Street must be moved into the new courthouse before any new furniture is purchased. Moran said that could raise health and legal issues.
“Moving the old furniture is OK as long as it doesn’t have mold in it,” said Moran.
“I don’t know if there is mold in the furniture, but we can’t insure the new building if there’s mold,” he said.
The City would have to certify the furniture as being free of mold if it is moved into the new building, which could create a substantial additional cost for decontamination.
City CFO Ronnie Belton said that based on information provided to the mayor’s office by the Council Auditor, “it appears the City is taking care of some items the state is responsible for,” including the individual video monitors scheduled to be installed in jury boxes.
Concerning the pedestrian walkway, committee members questioned why the budget approved in January 2010 for the project has escalated from the original $700,000 to $1.7 million seven months later.
Committee member Denise Lee said it was her understanding that the original precast concrete design for the walkway was rejected by the State Historic Preservation Office. The office required the walkway to have a modern design with windows, Lee said.
She questioned why representatives from the state, nor a representative from the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission’s Downtown Development Review Board, which approved the design change that forced the cost of the walkway to $1.7 million, were not at the meeting.
Lee also asked why Sam Mousa, the City’s former director of Public Works who was hired by former Mayor John Peyton as the consultant for the new courthouse, did not attend the meeting to answer the committee’s questions.
Lee said according to the contract, Mousa was responsible for maintaining and making available all documents and evidence pertaining to the courthouse project.
“The person who is responsible for the records is not here,” said Lee.
Assistant City General Counsel Margaret Sidman confirmed that Mousa, as the consultant, is responsible for maintaining the documents, but said she didn’t know if Mousa was involved in the changes.
Renovations to the old federal courthouse to accommodate the relocation of the State Attorney’s Office to the unified facility also were questioned.
The original plan drafted by a court facility design consultant called for 170,000 square feet of space to be renovated, but that has increased to 200,000 square feet.
Committee member John Crescimbeni questioned why the State Attorney’s Office needs 200,000 square feet of office space when the staff is currently working in 115,000 square feet of space in the Courthouse Annex on East Bay Street.
“It’s not pretty how we’re having to function” in that space, said Assistant State Attorney Cheryl Peek.
Courthouse Project Manager Dave Schneider said the State Attorney’s Office was aware that 200,000 square feet violates some of the design standards, but the staff “didn’t think the design reflected how the office works today.”
Peek said she was attending the meeting instead of State Attorney Angela Corey because Corey is selecting a jury for a murder trial.
Peek said the State Attorney’s Office has never been told it was over the amount of space approved for the project.
“This is the first time we’re hearing this. We’re flabbergasted,” she said.
“It appears to me the major problem is a lack of communication. Something is wrong when you have a chief judge, a state attorney and elected officials and you have this lack of communication,” said Lee.
Committee chairman Greg Anderson said he would schedule the committee to reconvene when the parties able to answer the committee’s questions would be available to attend.
Belton said the administration would contact the parties and work with them to provide information and answers to the committee’s questions before the meeting.
356-2466