What should be done with the empty county hall?

Should it be flogged to the highest bidder or knocked down for housing?

Worcestershire's five main political parties give their opinion on the future of County Hall.

Since last June, Worcestershire County Council's headquarters – 200,000 square feet of brick, glass and concrete – has been completely shut.

Since then staff have worked remotely or from other council buildings.

In February, the county's Conservative-controlled administration declared the building surplus to requirements after exploratory work revealed a repair bill of more than £36m was required.

"It isn't repairable within a reasonable sum of money," said Worcestershire's current Conservative leader Simon Geraghty.

"It is an important capital receipt, potentially, for the council."

He said his administration was exploring all options and would set forward proposals within the coming months if re-elected.

Given the council's financial position it is now highly likely the site will be sold off.

The local authority only managed to balance the books this year after receiving £33.6m of exceptional financial support from the government.

That money will have to be paid back, either through borrowing or the sale of assets like County Hall.

"The environmental cost of knocking down the building, and building something new, is huge," said Green candidate Matthew Jenkins.

Discussions with nearby Worcestershire Royal hospital were an "obvious" option for the site's future use, he said.

"It's very near to the hospital… they're over-capacity… so it would be a perfect location for the NHS.

"Maybe if we sold it to a housing developer we might get a few more million, but actually I think most people in the county would actually want a functioning hospital first."

"I would not put more housing there," said Liberal Democrat candidate Mel Allcott.

"I think the hospital. It's a key, key area for the hospital to grow... already we have traffic and congestion and the car park is full."

She added the council should still seek to find a replacement headquarters.

"I don't think we can just not have a central building… I think there's too much homeworking and it's not good for the council," she said.

County Hall had served as the council's HQ since 1976.

But when it was sold for development four years earlier, a legally-binding agreement was placed on the site's future use.

A restrictive covenant listed on the land's title register reveals the council agreed not to use it for any purpose except as a site for a headquarters or for local health services.

The covenant only permitted housing "as required as residential accommodation for persons employed by the purchasers in the care supervision and maintenance of the development".

While restrictive covenants can be discharged or modified, the agreement appears to be an obstacle to putting new homes on the site.

"I'm inclined to say because of the financial pressures flog it to the highest bidder," said Reform candidate Max Windsor-Peplow.

"But I'm also in complete agreement, practical uses for the NHS also need to be considered," he said.

"It is and it will be too expensive to run and too big for the needs of the council," said Labour candidate Beverley Nielsen.

She said her party would make an "early decision" on the site's future, if it secured political control after 1 May.

"We would look at all the options", she said.

"I don't think I can say any more at this point."

Both Worcestershire County Council and Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust declined to say whether talks had taken place over a sale.

The local authority would also not comment on the impact of the covenant.

"In February 2025 Cabinet made some decisions regarding County Hall, including approving preparation of options for the site," a spokesperson for the local authority said.

"This work is underway and will report back to Cabinet."

Follow BBC Hereford & Worcester on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X, and Instagram.