Commissioners consider plan that would move numerous government departments out of courthouse

County commissioners yesterday considered a space-needs study of the county courthouse campus that focused on how to best move multiple governmental offices away from the campus.

The study is the latest piece of analysis on what to do with the courthouse campus, which has at various times been found too small or out-dated to house all of the county government's needs.

The space-needs study suggests moving all the general governmental offices out of Building 1 on the courthouse campus to a separate, leased property at 3000 Pacific Avenue in Olympia — otherwise called The Atrium. County officials have yet to sign a lease for The Atrium, which is one of two available properties in Olympia that could house all the general governmental offices. The other property is a pair of buildings on Chandler Court, where the county already leases a building to serve as an off-site courtroom for superior and district courts.

Moving general government departments out of the courthouse campus — such as the assessor, auditor, commissioners, human resources, and others — would give the justice system more space to expand and consume full buildings on the campus. It would also allow the Sheriff’s office to move onto the campus.

Leasing The Atrium would cost approximately $2.5 million per year, with about 70 percent of those monies coming from the general fund, said Assistant County Manager Robin Campbell during the meeting yesterday. Campbell said there could be some potential savings in other areas, should the plan move forward. For instance, the sheriff’s office and drug court would have space at the courthouse campus. Currently, both operate on leased property.

Commissioner Gary Edwards, who in the past staunchly opposed building a new courthouse, said "We need to have a lot of discussion as this moves forward. See how it all plays out here from different individuals that are going to be in the game,” Edwards said.

Commissioner Tye Menser said he supports the plan, calling it a more cost-effective solution to spacing needs than building a new courthouse — a concept that has been long discussed and often contentious among county commissioners, but now appears to have faded.

“I’ve never seen another plausible plan B,” he said.

Menser said he had remaining questions about the financial details of such a decision — details, he said, they would be diving into in future meetings.