On Feb. 5 and Feb. 7, the bond committee will be presenting their “options” to the public for judicial improvements. Remember that the committee was started because the county said we need more space for our courts.

While one of the options appears to address this need, the other falls drastically short.

Option 1 costs $24.9 million and includes 109,010 square feet for the judiciary, an increase of 44,010 square feet for the courts.

Option 2 costs $80.8 million and includes 84,370 square feet for the judiciary, an increase of only 19,370 square feet for the courts.

Option 2, the expensive option, costs more than three times as much yet provides less than half the additional space for the courts than the cheaper Option 1. ​It actually appears to prioritize space for the Board of Commissioners and other administrative functions over and above space for the courts, which flies directly in the face of the justification the county gave for this spending spree to begin with.

In my opinion, Option 2 is merely a rehash of the $140 million plan, less the amphitheatre, which fails to address the stated need and it is an immediate non-starter.

Alex MacDonald

Conyers

Support Local Journalism

Now, more than ever, the world needs trustworthy reporting—but good journalism isn’t free. Please support us by subscribing or making a contribution today.

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Please log in, or sign up for a new, free account to read or post comments.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.