Keokuk courthouse tour brings up consolidation

WORKSHOP NEEDED

I guess we need a workshop. You can’t just eyeball something and say, 'yes it will or no it won’t work'.”

Garry Seyb, Lee County Supervisor

GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD

That’s throwing good money after bad and 10 years later you still have to deal with the issues of that building.”

Tim Wondra, Lee County Supervisor

TAKEAWAY

Lee County Board in flux over closing one of the courthouses in county now that state allow permits consolidation.

LEE COUNTY – The Lee County Board of Supervisors may put out a bid for a review of the potential for the South Lee County Courthouse to house all Lee County court activities.
The board met with District 8 Chief Judge Shawn Showers on Friday to review and discuss the potential for closing the North Lee County Courthouse and moving all court-related services to Keokuk.
Supervisor Chuck Holmes said the end result of the conversation was that the Keokuk courthouse wouldn’t be able meet the needs of the judicial district.
The Iowa legislature passed a law in 2024 that was specific to Lee County, which is the only county in the state with two county seats, that allows the county to now consolidate court services, not county services, but court services in one facility.
In May, the board discussed getting a feasibility study done, but no action was taken. Showers took over as chief judge in May. He invited the board down to the South Lee County Courthouse last week to tour the facility and discuss options.
Holmes said the discussion focused on there not being enough room to house all the judicial needs of the state in Lee County. He said that was a “unanimous” agreement that it wouldn’t fit.
Supervisor Ginger Knisley said she didn’t hear that consensus but said there were several issues. Board Chair Denise Fraise said the discussion should focus on whether the county wants to spend money to research the possibility.
Supervisor Garry Seyb, who was unable to attend the meeting Friday, said in light of the discussion the board should hold a workshop to discuss it further. Seyb wasn’t convinced that the south courthouse couldn’t work.
“I guess we need a workshop. You can’t just eyeball something and say, 'yes it will or no it won’t work’,” he said.
“You can do that in Fort Madison because you can see there is not enough square footage, but in that building, you can see there is a lot of square footage.”
Seyb said the board needed to take some action or future boards would be saddled with the high cost of maintaining two buildings when the Iowa legislature specifically passed a law to allow them to consolidate to save taxpayer funds.
Supervisor Tim Wondra, who attended Friday’s meeting, said the improvements that would be required would also be expensive, and could be comparable to what maintaining the buildings would look like.
Seyb said Carl A. Nelson Co. could take a look at what the square footage needs are and provide an opinion before the county spends money on a study.
Previous input for the Iowa Department of Justice indicated their preference would be to have room for four courtrooms in the county. County officials, at that point, weren’t convinced the county first, could accommodate that in one courtroom, and second, that the county needed four courtrooms.
Wondra said this will require a significant investment, including plumbing and adding rooms.
“That’s throwing good money after bad and 10 years later you still have to deal with the issues of that building,” Wondra said.
Fraise said that will also involve displacing many of the county services and that could potentially cost the county, as well.
County Auditor Sherri Yasenchok said the building committee is at a standstill because they bring an idea back to the board and nothing gets done.
“We’re at a point where we can’t do much more for anything, other than we can meet again. But it will be the same answer,” Yasenchok said.
No action was taken, but the board agreed to hold a workshop on how to proceed with potential consolidation options for the county to include renovating the South Lee County Courthouse.
Eight years ago, Lee County voters heavily voted against a bond issue to build one, centrally-located courthouse in the county. Holmes said if the county presented an option for a bond that would save taxpayers money it could be perceived better if they see savings in maintenance, transportation of the inmates, and other savings.
“If we were to put everything together and we present it right, I think a bond issue or referendum could pass a few years down the line,” he said.