GRAND TRAVERSE COUNTY: Government facilities plan sparks debate

Bill O'Brien, The Record-Eagle, Traverse City, Mich.
·4 min read

Oct. 6—TRAVERSE CITY — A sprawling Grand Traverse County and Traverse City facilities expansion plan — with early cost estimates soaring past $100 million — generated numerous questions and concerns from county commissioners as they await a final version of the proposal.

The county board met this week with Ryan Archer from Grand Rapids-based TowerPinkster for an update on long-range county-city facilities strategies. The firm received a $98,750 contract in February to create a 10-year plan for upgrading county and city facilities at the Governmental Center in Traverse City, the county's satellite operation on LaFranier Road in Garfield Township, and the city and county properties along Woodmere Avenue that includes the joint law enforcement center and the city's Department of Public Services building.

Archer said the plan lays out a "three-campus model" that includes:

* A massive expansion of the county's LaFranier Road site that would include a new 250-bed jail and Sheriff's Office operations, a 40-bed juvenile detention facility, and relocation of all county departments not legally required to be in Traverse City as the county seat. That would include county administration and IT offices, a new Department of Public Services building, the Commission on Aging, MSU Extension, Parks and Recreation, storage facilities and an animal control area.

* A full renovation of the Boardman Street/Governmental Center area, including fully renovating the three floors of the Government Center, additions and renovations to the Robert P. Griffin Hall of Justice, renovations to the existing courthouse including a new public entrance, and demolition of the existing county jail for a parking lot. The 1.5-acre parking area on the south side of the Governmental Center would be eliminated and utilized for future development. State law requires the county clerk, treasurer, register of deeds, and court operations to be in the county seat. Officials said the county sheriff also would be required at have an administrative office within the city limits.

* Redevelopment of the city's Woodmere campus to include a new city police department and Department of Public Services building.

Archer said cost estimates would be in "the higher end of tens of millions" of dollars, but declined to offer further specifics. Commissioner Brad Jewett said he expects the price tag at $120-150 million, while Commissioner Ashlea Walter added, "I think way more than that."

Archer said the consultant's final report, which is expected by year's end, will include preliminary cost estimates for the various projects.

The City Commission is scheduled to review the TowerPinkster report at its regular meeting on Oct. 16. The county and city share development and operational costs at various municipal buildings, including the Governmental Center, the law enforcement center and property along West Front Street.

County officials said the facility recommendations were developed following months of work that included facility tours and inspections, and several meetings with county staff to get their input on facility needs.

"It was really an in-depth, intensive process," deputy County Administrator Christopher Forsyth said. "We tried to be as broad and as inclusive as possible."

But commissioners voiced numerous reservations about the scope and potential cost of the plan.

"I have a huge problem with this ... This looks like a 10-year plan to build an empire and have a lot of money being spent," Board Chairman Rob Hentschel said. "This needs a lot more discussion from the Board of Commissioners."

County Administrator Nate Alger disagreed, and said officials have consistently identified the LaFranier site for more county operations in earlier facility plans dating to 2008 and 2015.

"It's not an effort to build an empire," Alger said.

Commissioner Scott Sieffert said there were "some pretty pricey things" in the plan, including the new jail and juvenile detention facility. He questioned if the county board will be able to prioritize various projects based on public feedback and budget limitations.

Archer responded that the plan isn't an "all or nothing" proposal and will provide flexibility to the county and city going forward.

"It's a 10-year plan — not necessarily 'let's do all this right now'," Archer said.

The board took no action on the facilities plan — other than to approve a $3,000 addition to the contract for consultants to develop an online survey to get public input.

Archer said the intent isn't to gauge reaction to the plan, but to seek information on how county residents access public services to help consultants with the facility designs.

But commissioners expect the various proposals to generate plenty of debate in the weeks and months ahead.

"There's a big survey 13 months from now," Hentschel said, referring to county elections coming up in 2024. "And then we'll know what the taxpayers think."