Odessa council approves SportsMed contract, sets $140 million cap and 10% contingency

The Odessa City Council voted unanimously Oct. 2 to authorize execution of a contract with SportsMed Properties for construction of a sports complex and set a maximum project budget of $140,000,000 with a 10 percent contingency.

The vote followed an extended discussion during which council members and staff identified technical contract issues to be resolved before final execution, including clarifying the project scope (building square footage versus fields and ballparks), specifying governing law, setting insurance minimums and defining authority for change orders.

Council members pressed for precise language on scope after the contract text described the project as “approximately 156,818 square feet,” while staff said the building itself is about 140,000 square feet and that the larger number likely includes outdoor fields and ballparks. City staff said language from the project request-for-qualifications that includes the fields can be inserted into the contract to clarify scope.

Council members also flagged a clause that still referenced North Carolina law; staff agreed to change governing law to Texas. The council discussed previously appropriated funding and contingencies: staff noted prior resolutions appropriated $130,000,000 for the overall project and that a $6,000,000 donation from the Park Foundation would cover an adjacent park component. Council members asked that the contract include a clear dollar limit for execution, and the motion approved a $140,000,000 cap plus a 10 percent contingency.

Insurance coverage and builder’s risk were a recurring concern. Council members said the draft lacks specific coverage amounts and asked that the contract require builder’s risk sufficient to cover 100 percent of replacement cost, a minimum liability amount, and excess/umbrella coverage. Participants discussed a minimum primary-liability floor of $1,000,000 and excess/umbrella coverage in the $5,000,000–$10,000,000 range, and directed staff to insert concrete limits.

Council members also sought clarity on who would purchase builder’s risk if the developer did not, and on whether the contractor (Lee Lewis was discussed as the contractor name in the meeting) or the developer would be the named purchaser. The council asked staff to require that the contractor provide the builder’s risk if appropriate and to ensure the city would not be left uninsured.

The council questioned an $850,000 construction-management fee listed in the agreement and asked staff to clarify how that fee differs from an owner’s representative fee and whether the developer’s proposed construction manager would also act as the owner’s rep. Staff acknowledged the need to clarify that section.

On contract administration, the council agreed that the mayor or the mayor’s designee should be authorized to execute the agreement and handle routine change orders. Council members discussed a threshold for change orders that the mayor/designee may approve without bringing each to the full council; the motion adopted authority for execution and set a 10 percent change-order contingency, consistent with the overall 10 percent contingency discussed for the project budget.

Staff said they would continue to work with the developer’s counsel to exchange redlines and return a revised draft within days for final review. Staff indicated conceptual renderings promised by the developer were expected soon and that the city would press for those drawings.

The motion to “consider and take appropriate action regarding this contract for SportsMed” was moved by Councilman Haynes and seconded (second not specified in the record). The council voted in favor; the motion was declared unanimous.

The council directed the city manager, legal staff and project management staff to incorporate the council’s clarifications (scope language to include fields, change of governing law to Texas, specified insurance limits, clarification of the construction management fee and owner’s-rep responsibilities, and a maximum budget with contingency) and return a final contract for execution under the authority approved by the council.