Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Justice Building Furnishings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kootenai County gets June target for justice building; commissioners direct staff to pick mid-tier desks
Summary
County staff told commissioners the justice building remains on track for June completion; a change order for the evidence‑room sprinkler system is expected and commissioners directed staff to proceed with a mid‑level furniture package emphasizing an MDF substrate and thermally fused surface.
Kootenai County commissioners on Feb. 25 heard a construction and furnishing update for the county’s new justice building from Building and Grounds Director Jeff Fuller and contracted vendors. Staff said the project remains on track for a June completion date, with the third floor roughly 90% finished, elevators and overhead doors scheduled for installation that week, and detention doors already installed.
Why it matters: finishing the building on schedule affects when county operations move in and has budget and long‑term maintenance implications; a pending change order for the evidence room’s fire sprinkler system could add tens of thousands of dollars to project costs.
Fuller and David Mendez of Turner & Townsend reported the major remaining milestones and identified one forthcoming potential change order: converting the evidence room’s fire sprinkler system from a wet to a dry system. Staff said preliminary pricing is “right around the $30,000 range” with an optional upgrade—described by staff as adding nitrogen to the system—priced at about $12,000. Fuller and Mendez said they will return next week with a formal recommendation and final numbers.
Contract Design representatives Tory Nelson and Gwen Gunzel presented three packaged options for desks and related furnishings, drawn from two manufacturers described in the board packet as “HBC” (a production/stock line) and “Global” (two construction/finish options). Discussion focused on construction and expected longevity: the differences are primarily in the substrate and the top surface (particle board with laminate for the lower‑cost line versus MDF with thermally fused or high‑pressure laminate for higher tiers). Presenters said warranties vary by component and manufacturer; they also stated that the three presented lines carry a stated “lifetime” warranty as provided by the vendors but that warranty terms and lengths depend on each manufacturer and product category.
Commissioners asked about expected lifespan, repairability by county maintenance staff, freight inclusion, hardware quality and warranty handling. Contract Design said MDF will hold screws better than particle board and that high‑pressure laminate is generally more resistant to wear. After discussion, Building and Grounds Director Fuller and the vendor recommended the mid‑level Global option (MDF substrate with thermally fused laminate) as the best balance of durability and cost. Commissioners directed staff to proceed on that basis. Public commenter Ron Hartman asked staff to find an American‑manufactured equivalent to the selected product; Fuller said he would note the request.
Staff reiterated there will be follow‑up board presentations: a formal change‑order recommendation on the evidence‑room sprinkler is expected the next week, and a complete, line‑item furniture price package will be presented once vendors finalize pricing and color choices with the architect’s design team.
The board moved on to other agenda items after the update.
