Farmers Weekly Review

By Nick Reiher

The Will County Board on August 17 held a special meeting to consider a non-binding resolution to have the county investigate reusing the former Will County Courthouse.

The County Board voted in October 2019 to demolish the former courthouse, built in 1969, once the new $215 million courthouse to the west was ready.

COVID halted the demolition, which gave a grassroots group led by Joliet attorney Hudson Hollister time to gather support for saving the former courthouse.

They say the structure is an example of the Brutalist Design, popular from the 1950s to the ’70s, which uses stark concrete, steel and glass treatments, such as with Marina Towers and the UIC complex in Chicago.

Leaders say they have more than 2,000 in the group, including interest from some County Board members elected after the 2019 resolution was passed.

Despite the county moving ahead with plans for demolition this year, one of those new members, Dan Butler, R-Frankfort, recommended the non-binding resolution, as well as a special meeting to discuss the issue.

The failure to go through the Executive Committee and Board Chair Judy Ogalla, R-Monee, drew the ire of board Republican Leader Steve Balich, R-Homer Glen, who sought a censure of Butler.

Ogalla had planned to hold a Committee of the Whole on the issue, as there were so many new board members elected since the County Board adopted a resolution in 2019 calling for the demolition of the former courthouse.

At the special meeting, Butler said he had hoped county officials have the courage to make the difficult decisions to think out of the box and use the residents’ money efficiently.

“I’ve done construction my whole life, and that building is far from dilapidated,” Butler said. He added the county is spending $1 million a year in renting space, when the former courthouse could be used instead.

The non-binding resolution notes asbestos remediation has been done on the former courthouse, and that the previous, binding resolution approved by the board says adaptively reusing the former Will County Courthouse was “not in the best interests of the citizens of Will County, as such an endeavor would be difficult, costly and illogical, given the constraints imposed by inefficient floor plans, deteriorated building systems and estimated cost of building renovations versus estimated cost of new construction.”

But Butler’s resolution also notes that new information has come to light in the nearly four years since the original resolution was passed. That includes learning new construction would be much more expensive than adapting the building for reuse.

A major obstacle to saving the former courthouse has been an oft-repeated decision by the Will County State’s Attorney’s Office that the original deed is held by the county in a public trust, and cannot be used for commercial endeavors, or even a public-private partnership.

It would take state legislation to change the trust, the State’s Attorney’s Office said, and any legislation change would affect all trusts in the state; not just this one.

Butler’s non-binding resolution offers that “multiple state legislators have offered to work with the County Government and the County Board to seek any statutory changes which may be necessary to facilitate adaptive reuse of the former Will County Courthouse funded through private investment …”

State Sen. Rachel Ventura, D-Joliet, has said she would be interested in carrying legislation forward.

Butler also mentioned forming an LLC that could be eligible for special financing. That was not in his proposed resolution.

Will County Executive Jennifer Bertino-Tarrant fueled increased, bi-partisan action on the County Board when in June she released a comprehensive plan, with color renderings, on what a new county/city office complex could look like on the site of the former courthouse.

The release took by surprise not only County Board members, but Joliet Mayor Terry D’Arcy, who said he had not seen the plan, which he called, “more optimistic” than what he would have liked to see.

At the same time, he said he told the preservation group, “the city does not want to be chained to the old courthouse.”

Both city and county officials say they need new office buildings. Will County non-judicial offices are currently located at the County Executive Office Building, 302 N. Chicago St. along with leased space throughout Joliet.

The COB was built in 1947 as a Sears Department Store and became Will County’s primary government building in the 1980s, when the county’s population was around 300,000. Will County now has nearly 700,000 residents.

Joliet’s City Hall, 150 W. Jefferson St., was built in 1968 when the city population was approximately 75,000 people. That population has since doubled to more than 150,000 residents today, and the existing space has no additional capacity for city staff.

While City Hall was renovated following the relocation of the Police Department and Fire Department, the retrofitted offices have customer service centers and administrative offices inefficiently scattered throughout the building.

At an April 4 meeting of the board’s Capital Improvements Committee, Dave Tkac, Bertino-Tarrant’s Director of Facilities and Capital Programming, said, all told, the county is spending about $500,000 to keep on minimal heat and electricity for security lighting, as well as the possibility of having to spend upwards of $100,000 a year for its own insurance if the county keeps it open much longer.

Tkac has said if all goes well, the bid for demolition, estimated at $1.3 million, could be awarded this summer, with work beginning in August and completion by the end of the year. The land then would be graded and possibly used for a public space until the county develops a plan for a new building.

At the August 17 meeting, Tkac said the county is spending $8,000 to $10,000 a month to maintain the closed building, not counting repairs caused by vandalism.

Butler proposed forming an ad hoc committee to discuss the issues in his resolution. The board voted to send the issue back to the Executive Committee.

If not resolved this year, a new County Board may have to take it up again next year. Because all seats were up in 2022 following the census in 2020, some terms were staggered, meaning half the board will be up for election again next year.