Extreme Makeover

Randall weighing cost of renovation

By George Schwarz
The Amarillo Independent

Randall County commissioners have scheduled a vote on whether to accept a $1.9 million grant from the Texas Historical Commission to restore the courthouse, but one of their own may stall.

Photo by Ralph Duke Historic Debate: The Randall County courthouse is the scene of another controversy.

"First of all, I am probably, on the Commissioner's Court, I am probably the stout No. 1 supporter of saving the 1909 court house," said Commissioner George E. "Skip" Huskey. "I am biased from that aspect. Let there be no doubt."

But, he said, while he favors spending the initial $1.9 million, if he isn't satisfied with the information about the deal, he will move to table the matter.

Part of the information problem stems from the varying cost estimates for the project.

He said the cost estimates from an architect in Austin weren't based on the Randall County market and he was concerned that the nonprofit group working with the county wouldn't get a true estimate of costs. He wanted to be sure the grant application was as truthful and accurate as possible.

"When we did that, the construction firm out of Lubbock said that they felt like it was going to take $9 million to do this project, not $7 (million)," he said. "That was a killer to some of us. We never dreamed that our architect could miss a project by $2 million."

Still, even if the county takes the money offered by the Texas Historical Commission, the county and private donors would be obligated to finish the job.

Huskey said there might be enough support for the private funding to come through, but he isn't sure and if private funding isn't there, the costs would fall to the county.

"I don't necessarily agree with that premise. It is a valid premise, but I don't necessarily agree that this is just going to end up costing the taxpayers $2 million if they take this grant," he said.

Huskey might have an ally in fellow Commissioner Gene Parker, but Parker's approach is more incremental.

"We were hoping we would get $6 (million), but we got $1.9 (million) and that is the one that I think we will take and that will be to restore the outside of the courthouse," he said. "The money that they have allocated us is just $1.5 million or something like that. We can't do that. We'll take it but start out with the refurberation (sic) of the outside of the court house. And then we will work on the rest as time goes by."

He said he favors the project and doesn't want to tear the courthouse down — nor does anyone else.

That's not quite so, as far as long-time Randall County resident Patty Lou Dawkins is concerned.

She said the courthouse is a lost cause and should be turned over to Canyon — perhaps for demolition.

There is nothing left to renovate, she said, adding, "Everything beautiful has been scraped out of it. They are just talking about a dream."

The politics about the old courthouse makes the case for at-large representation on the Commissioner's Court. Huskey wants the full renovation, and he isn't thinking about the overall good of the county, Dawkins said.

Huskey and County Judge Ernie Houdashell agreed the courthouse restoration is a huge political issue.

"If it stays under county hands, it has been a political football for so long that no one has faith that a Commissioner's Court would complete this project on their own accord," he said. "As long as it is part of Randall County it will always be a political football because of the nature of the politics."

Houdashell said the issue is political and emotional.

"I'm not going to vote to take the money," he said. "I've got some people really mad at me, and they're friends. And they're not mad, they're disappointed."

He said he and they, whom he didn't specify, thought they had the problem solved with a bond issue, thought they were going to be able to raise the money, and now no one can raise the money for a $9.2 million project.

Eventually the state will expect the county to finish the project. "And if it's $9.2 million today, I can assure you, in four years, it's going to be $13 million. And I'm not going to break the county."

The most the state will give the county is $5 million. If the county takes the money now, it will be forced by the state to finish the project, he said.

And while Huskey argues that may be true, the state doesn't set a time frame.

Even the state isn't sure what the county's obligation would be in accepting the $1.9 million.

Sharon Fleming, a spokeswoman for the Texas Historical Commission, called the situation "slightly unusual."

The award came as an emergency grant, she said.

"So, I'm not sure we have fully defined what that obligation is," she said, adding that the expert on the grant's conditions wasn't available by deadline.

The $1.9 million was the award that came after the county had asked for $6 million. The application was one of 47 applications vying for $60 million.

"They were not competitive with the other applicants," Fleming said. "Nonetheless, we offered them a $1.9 million grant on an emergency basis."

The emergency funding was to protect the assets — a stop-gap solution. And it was part of the Randall application to renovate the exterior to protect the interior. The building has been significantly threatened because there was a lack of support from the county in the past, she said.

"We want to change that and help preserve the building," she said.

The THC hoped the grant would be enough incentive for the county to do something. The danger to the building was political in origin, she said.

Houdashell said, "This thing has spun out of control."

E-mail comments about this story
to the publisher of The Amarillo Independent.

Posted: February 7, 2008