The Winnebago County Board voted July 24 to send the proposed architecture and engineering contract for the juvenile-detention center expansion back to committee for further work after members raised questions about procurement approach and contract specificity.

Board member Butita initially presented a resolution to award an architecture and engineering contract for the juvenile-detention center expansion, listing the contract amount as $135,000. Board member Arena said he supported the project but urged reconsideration of the procurement method. “On the Public Safety building, we went with a design build approach where we have 1 company take care of both the design and construction, and for the purpose of having clearer lines of responsibility,” Arena said, adding that the contract in the packet “is kind of vaguely worded without the specificity that I think we should have that defines responsibilities.”

Board member Penny also urged exploring design‑build procurement. “I would prefer to see it go out to bid as a design build and see what kind of numbers we get back from there,” Penny said, noting possible cost and liability differences. Board member Neighbors clarified that the mental health board funding and its contract could be extended if needed and said that appeared not to be a barrier to changing procurement approach.

After discussion, Penny moved to send the item back to committee; Arena seconded. The board voted to return the item to committee; the motion carried with members voting “yes” for all present.

Why it matters: County officials framed the expansion as a needed project, but several board members pressed for clearer contractual responsibility and recommended evaluating a design‑build approach that would combine design and construction under a single contract to reduce disputed liability during construction. The board’s action pauses contract award and sends more detailed contract and procurement options back to committee for further analysis and possible revision.

Next steps: The item will be reviewed in committee; the board did not award the $135,000 architecture and engineering contract at the July 24 meeting.