County project staff provided a construction update on the new behavioral health care center and answered commissioners’ questions about cost escalation and future operations.

A presenter who did not state a name in the transcript said the negotiated contract was $44,400,000 under a CMAR approach but that escalation during bidding consumed nearly $4,000,000 of the anticipated contingency, leaving little remaining cushion. The presenter reported about 21 change‑order requests to date with roughly half approved and estimated the current guaranteed price at roughly $45,000,002.61; the presenter said the county is attempting to recover about $1 million from an oil company related to project costs and that the district attorney is pursuing that recovery.

The update emphasized design choices for a mental‑health facility—antiligature fixtures and layouts intended to reduce risks to patients— and said the architect HOK included national subject‑matter experts on the design team. Project staff said foundation and steel work are in place and that the schedule remains tight to finish by December 2026, adding that a severe winter would jeopardize schedule.

Commissioners pressed for clarity on where day‑to‑day operational funding will come from once the facility opens. One commissioner said he is “opposed to bankrupting the county” if operations are not funded, and other commissioners noted the county’s budget constraints and suggested a sales tax would likely be required to cover ongoing operating costs. Project staff said planning for operations has been discussed among commissioners to some degree but that the budget board has responsibility for final operational funding decisions. Staff also said they expect to have an operator selected between Thanksgiving and Christmas and would then finalize equipment orders and operations planning.

The presentation described ongoing quality control efforts—over 50 failed tests tracked and replaced concrete/blocks removed to ensure build quality—and noted the CMAR method allowed early collaboration between contractor and architect to reduce change‑orders before construction.

Commissioners did not adopt a new funding source at this meeting; they asked staff and the budget board to provide further analysis of operational funding options.