Clear Creek Amana board declines amended SVPA agreement for baseball/softball concession plan after community, size and cost concerns

The Clear Creek Amana School District Board of Education on Tuesday voted not to approve an amended agreement with SVPA for a proposed concession/ support building at the district’s baseball and softball complex, after extended discussion about building size, storage and community engagement.

Board members raised questions about whether the plan as presented would deliver needed storage and volunteer space, and whether the district should pursue a different procurement approach (construction manager at risk) or gather broader public input before advancing design development. The motion to approve the SVPA amendment did not carry.

Why it matters: The building is tied to an ongoing baseball/softball complex project and to volunteer-run concessions. Board members said a design that is too small or missing items now could be difficult or expensive to retrofit later. Several trustees urged more community engagement and more detailed budgeting before committing to the next design step.

Board discussion and concerns Board members repeatedly pressed for more information about the footprint and storage included in the design, and about how the contractor-selection approach could affect cost and flexibility. Trustee Allison (board member) noted small square-foot differences can have large dollar impacts later in construction, and said the district should consider a construction-manager-at-risk approach to obtain more budget certainty and subcontractor pricing earlier in the design process. Mori (project staff) reviewed completed site work and explained the architect’s current documents, while Dr. Seymour (Superintendent) and other trustees argued for wider community review and further vetting of the budget assumptions.

Several speakers said that the community members who run the concession stands should have a clearer opportunity to provide feedback on layout and storage before the board commits to a design. Trustee Jones (board member) and other trustees said that because the project timeline would push design-development decisions into late January, the district needed more time for public meetings and to collect ticket-sales and usage data that would inform grandstand and concession sizing.

Outcome and next steps The board voted against approving the amended SVPA agreement as presented; the motion did not carry. Trustees asked staff to 1) reopen community outreach to include volunteers and concession operators, 2) provide clearer budget breakout and storage alternatives (including the 500-square-foot storage figure referenced in the attachment), and 3) bring options for procurement and a short informational overview of the construction-manager-at-risk approach at the January work session. Board members discussed forming a small, focused subcommittee and scheduling public sessions before the board takes another vote.

Documented numbers and attachments - Attachment referenced a recommended 500-square-foot storage allocation attached to the concession/concessions building recommendation. - Trustees discussed an attached “revised size” noted at 2,000 square feet in the packet; trustees asked staff to confirm and to supply public-facing renderings and ticket/attendance data.

What the board did not decide Trustees did not approve any change to the overall baseball/softball complex budget or award a construction contract. They did not select a construction-manager-at-risk firm; they asked staff to return with more information and examples of RFPs and local districts that have used that procurement method.

Provenance (transcript evidence): meeting discussion and vote on the SVPA amended agreement and related public-input questions.