Nez Perce County plans to ask voters about courthouse

Nez Perce County officials have decided to ask voters for their advice on the project to replace the aging courthouse, but they are still scratching their heads over exactly what they should ask.

County commissioners and Nez Perce County Prosecutor Justin Coleman met via teleconference Tuesday to bat around ballot language for the advisory vote they are planning for the November general election. The vote would not be binding since the county will rely on existing revenue to finance the construction.

But the commissioners have expressed a desire to involve the public in the process since the price tag for a new courthouse is expected to surpass $40 million. They are planning open houses for later this year to gather public input, but also want the advisory vote to help guide their decision on how to proceed with the project.

After discussing several options, they eventually shied away from asking for a simple “yes” or “no” in case a majority opposes the project. Coleman advised against posing that basic question since the existing courthouse is in such poor shape and timing for the project is good since interest rates have been slashed to stimulate the economy during the coronavirus pandemic.

Instead, Coleman suggested some language to educate voters on the need for the courthouse and the county’s intention not to raise taxes to finance the project. But Commissioner Douglas Havens said he was wary of saying outright that no new property taxes will be needed, even though the county is confident it can use its existing revenues.

“Somewhere in the shuffle, a tax increase is probably going to have to be done,” Havens said of future property tax increases that may be imposed for other reasons. “But it will be all mixed up with other needs of the county and a tax increase somewhere to fund something.”

The county is planning to use “certificates of participation” to finance the project, where the issuers of the certificates own the building and the county makes lease payments over a set period of years to buy it back. It used the same financial instrument to fund the jail project a decade ago.

Other questions that may be on the ballot include where to build the courthouse, whether to move forward now while interest rates are low, or whether to use debt financing at all. On the issue of location, the commissioners have tentatively decided to build at the existing location on Lewiston’s Main Street. But Havens suggested the ballot question could ask whether voters prefer a more central location, or somewhere in the Lewiston Orchards.

The commissioners also emphasized their desire to press the city of Lewiston for an answer on whether it is willing to move its neighboring police station to give the courthouse project more room. That issue will be discussed at an upcoming joint meeting with the Lewiston City Council, as will questions on whether the city will require a traffic study and what utility upgrades are likely to be needed. The parties will also discuss the process to vacate the block of 12th Street between Main and F streets to make way for what could eventually become part of the new courthouse parking lot.

In other business, the commissioners approved a $143,495 bid from J&M Reiner Construction of Clarkston to perform repairs on the Southway boat ramp on Snake River Avenue in Lewiston. Half of the ramp has been closed because a 6-foot wide section where some old docks were located has no concrete driving surface, creating a drop-off that poses a safety hazard to boat trailers and vehicles, commission Chairman Don Beck said.

Construction on the ramp won’t begin for at least a month, however, because permits from various federal agencies have to be approved first.

Mills may be contacted at jmills@lmtribune.com or (208) 848-2266.