Saul, 

I did not say it was in error, just out of context so the impression reading the article is that I was already in full support of building the full 250,000 sq ft when in fact I was commenting on the efficiency of having all in one and noting that if we go smaller it will have impacts on siting and connectivity to existing structures.

I also wish you would stop referring to a cost estimate because there has not been one done yet. There was a placeholder we gave OJD so they could do their 12-year planning on bonds but it was not a cost estimate for the facility as we have not even decided on how big it will be, where it will be and what the design guidance will be. 

The first step was in trying to determine who should be in the new building and how much space they will need over time to make sure the building has a useful lifespan. That is what the report supplied, the opinion of national experts that the Board, the Presiding Judge and other partners can use in decision making.