COURTLAND
The Southampton County Board of Supervisors at Monday evening’s meeting approved Jeff Stodghill of PMA Architecture Firm to perform an evaluation on the county courthouse in regard to space and security concerns at the existing building. The supervisors acknowledged that renovating the building may not be a feasible option, but that instead building a brand new courthouse is a possibility.

“We’ve been advised by the courts that our current court facilities no longer meet the needs of the court system physically or security-wise,” Supervisor Barry Porter said. “This is not something that we take lightly and it’s not something that we enjoy having to do, but it’s something that we have to do so that we can control the process and not let the court system force on us what they want.”

The county will pay PMA $15,000 to conduct the study, and a timetable for its completion is not clear at this point.

“This is going to be an expensive project,” Porter continued. “Building a new courthouse or completely renovating the existing facilities is a huge project. It will have to be funded by the taxpayers. We need to understand that this is something that is coming and we have no control over. We want the public to be aware that this is coming down the road and that we’ll try to do our best to minimize the impact on the county taxpayers.”

Vice Chairman Ronald West added, “We either work with an architectural firm up front and plan and design to meet what the court’s needs would be for the present and the future. If we do not, it simply means that at that time the judges determine what we build and what is put in it. They control everything about the design and the cost, but we still pay. We choose to get ahead of the curve.”

Stodghill and the county have discussed security upgrades to the courthouse for more than three years, but various court personnel continue to voice concerns that the century-old building is not up to today’s standards. The most recent attempt at solidifying a plan came in September, when the supervisors considered the addition of bullet-resistant glass around the offices of the clerk of courts and commonwealth’s attorney.

“If we were to put bullet-resistant glass in there, the budget for that is approaching $95,000,” Stodghill said, noting that type of glass costs approximately $240 per square foot. “That includes pulling the glass out and putting in the new frames and the much more expensive bullet-resistant glass.”

He also suggested a hybrid solution, which would cut the project cost in half, but would also make it more complicated.

“It would bring the cost somewhere down to the $50,000 range,” he said. “But if we simply replace the glass, that’s one subcontractor that can do that in one fell swoop. If we do the hybrid solution, it’s three subcontractors that have to come in and then it’s a more complicated assembly.”

The increasing costs and additional concerns have brought the county to this point, the supervisors said, though building a new courthouse would be a long-term solution.

“We need to be very proactive about this and not be forced into anything,” Dr. Alan Edwards said. “We basically need to see which is the best economic way to go for the county — repair the old courthouse or build a new one. It’s something we have to do. We have no choice, and we want to take the best path for the county.”