Recent arguments concerning the former courthouse careened back and forth incongruously.
First, one viewpoint argued for mothballing the structure until the county had money to renovate. Waiting, apparently, was the prudent choice.
Then, after demolition began, the side cried foul because the county has no immediate way to provide probate and juvenile court space that complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Suddenly, time was in short supply.
It is interesting to note, had a previous board of commissioners been as decisive as the current board regarding the courthouse, we might have had a new building under way, possibly even completed, by now.
As it is, one commissioner envisions the county saving funds over the next five years or so to pay for a modern, functional courthouse.
However, there may have been a benefit to waiting, as city and county officials begin to synthesize a plan that could benefit both governmental entities.
Here's one way such a cooperative venture might take shape: If the county succeeds in saving funds to build a new common pleas court building, the juvenile and probate court could move into the current home of the common pleas courts.
But the juvenile/probate court, with one judge, would need one courtroom. Might the other courtroom be used by Tiffin Municipal Court? An elevator in the municipal building resolves access issues, but that location doesn't offer simple answers to security issues.
The financial particulars of such a city-county court arrangement likely would be more difficult to iron out than the logistical details. Could the city help pay for a new county building? Perhaps not, but leasing courtroom and office space might be possible.
This could offer efficient solutions to accessibility and security issues at a price more affordable to both entities. We encourage city and county officials to pursue it.
