Commissioners approve Expo complex design and construction contracts after debate over architect and commissioning costs

Brazos County Commissioners Court took multiple procurement actions on July 15 related to repairs and renovations at the Brazos County Expo Complex, approving design and construction‑management contracts but with public and commissioner scrutiny over professional fees and oversight costs.

Why it matters: the Expo Complex is a county asset used for large events that the court said requires significant repairs, including roof, envelope and HVAC work; the chosen procurement and oversight approach carries multi‑hundred‑thousand‑dollar professional fees that raised questions about fiscal prudence.

What the court approved: the court approved an award of the architectural RFQ for building maintenance to Goodwin Lassiter Incorporated (agenda item 16) and recommended Spa Glass Construction Company as construction manager at risk for the project (agenda item 17). The court also approved a commissioning and engineering services agreement with Tom Green & Company in an amount not to exceed $198,220 for work through design completion (agenda item 24). A motion to table the commissioning item was made and discussed; the court ultimately voted to approve the commissioning contract 4‑1.

Concerns and public comment: Commissioner Brown questioned the scale of professional fees for what he described as repair work rather than new construction, saying he did not “understand why we have to spend $850,000 on the building” for architectural services. Catherine Viens, who spoke during the public comment period on the project, asked that the court “table[d] until you can provide that original report that is prioritizing this project” because the solicitation summary referenced a prioritization report that was not included in the packet. County staff told the court the full documentation is available publicly in the solicitation on the county bidding website and that some supporting files would run to hundreds of pages; staff also said the projects involve multiple conditioned spaces and envelope work that increases the technical scope and the need for stamped design documents.

Court discussion and outcome: staff explained that the county uses a master services agreement model for design and commissioning services (hourly fees established under a prior solicitation and then scoped per project), and that building code and permit requirements in the City of Bryan require stamped drawings for the work. After discussion and a motion to table to seek additional bids for commissioning services, the court approved the commissioning contract by vote (four ayes, one nay). The construction manager at risk award to Spa Glass Construction proceeded as recommended.

Next steps: staff will proceed under the approved contracts with design and commissioning work for the Expo Complex; public speakers asked the county to provide the prioritization documents and additional transparency on cost breakdowns.