The daily newspaper -- the Arkansas Democrat Gazette -- has done a a good job of keeping us up to date on discussions concerning the status of Benton County's need for a new court facility complex. Regular reports have revealed some disparities in the views of the Benton County judge and some members of the Quorum Court. No decision has been made on a location for the facility nor on a means of financing any facility. Discussions continue and if you are not aware of the status of this issue, it might be worthwhile trying to stay abreast of the debate since the cost will certainly be a factor when and if a new plan is approved.
The county judge, by the power of the office, has the ultimate control over county facilities but is dependent on approval from the Quorum Court for financial support -- or approval of his or her desire to spend county money. The limiting factor in all the discussions seems to be location with a side issue of size to accommodate future needs. Much has been said about the location and currently that seems to be the obstacle that provides the roadblock to constructive dialog.
As taxpayers, we need to consider how we will be affected by any of the current location proposals. Any person assigned, or called to jury duty will be affected as will all who are called as witnesses or have an interest in a case coming before a judge in the court complex. So far there seem to be only a few avenues for the citizens of the county to have input -- attend meetings where the question is being discussed, write letters to the newspapers or contact the Justice of the Peace for the district in which the person lives.
It is understandable that the downtown Bentonville business interests want the complex to be downtown. The numerous groups that make up the downtown interests are making some very generous offers financially that could affect the ultimate decision about location. The long-term question, however, is who will be affected most by the decision and that is the county citizens -- not downtown Bentonville.
There are numerous questions that should be asked about how the final decision will be made. The likely winner in the November election for county judge is a resident of the Bentonville area, was supported very heavily by the downtown groups and has former ties to Wal-Mart. Since the Walton Foundation is active in the downtown interest, and has been involved in the discussion regarding the location, it might be assumed that the downtown location might be preferred purely on business interests regardless of the convenience factor, parking potential and future needs.
I don't know how many justices of the peace have ties to Wal-Mart, the Wal-Mart Foundation or live in Bentonville. It would seem there could be some potential problem in maintaining a neutral position when talking about the location when the Foundation's position has been so clear about keeping it downtown.
Since the taxpayers across the county will be using the facility and will be paying for it, one way or another, maybe the best solution would be a public vote on the location. If people from Siloam Springs, Maysville, Gateway and War Eagle will be affected by the location and costs of the facility, why not simply put it to a public vote -- a referendum if you like -- and take the potential for any implied but non-verbal pressure off the Quorum Court?
•••
Editor's note: Leo Lynch is an award-winning columnist. A native of Benton County, he is a retired industrial engineer and former Justice of the Peace. He can be contacted at [email protected].
Editorial on 08/17/2016