Without public discussion or debate, Augusta County supervisors approved a $5.3 million contract for a Richmond architect to plan the multi-stage renovation and expansion of the Augusta County Courthouse.

The discussion and vote were not on the agenda for the Sept. 12 public meeting. Instead, it was listed under the closed session agenda to discuss procurement. It indicated supervisors would discuss hiring an architect. Immediately after the closed discussion, supervisors reconvened in a public session to award the contract to Moseley Architects of Richmond.

The agreement includes creating designs for the renovation of the old Beverley Manor Elementary School to hold temporary court facilities, demolition of the current district courts building in Staunton and the construction a the new building that will house all county courts.

The new building will be where the General District court currently sits across from Johnson Street.

The board also authorized Fitzgerald to approve the final contract between the county and Moseley Architects. The completed timetable of the project is around four years.

The sticker price of $5.3 million might be less, depending on what work the county is able to do in-house during the process. Fitzgerald added that the final contract will have language included to make sure the county will be able to offset the cost with its own work during the design process.

The cost of the project led Marshall Pattie, supervisor for the North River magisterial district, to be the sole dissenter on the contract vote.

"The is not the direction that the Augusta County people wanted to go," Pattie said.

More:Courthouse referendum fails in landslide

When he talks to people in his district, they often say they don't want to spend a large sum of money on a new courthouse, he said.

"I don't think it's fiscally responsible," Marshall said.

He cited the raise in real estate taxes in the county, the natural property growth going flat and added he expected school funds to be cut in future as well.

When asked what he would consider to be an appropriate cost for the design of the courthouse project, he did not have a cost estimate.

He recalled an offer he would have liked to accept from the City of Staunton. Although it's no longer an option, Staunton offered about $5 million, about half in historic tax credits, to renovate the building about a year before the referendum vote was held.

"The $5.3 million is a large sum of money for an architectural plan," he said.