Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Eddy County authorizes RFP for new detention center after design, budget briefing
Loading...
Summary
After a 100% design presentation by Studio Southwest, the Eddy County Commission voted to authorize issuing an RFP for a new detention facility, with proposals due Jan. 12 and an intent-to-award targeted for Feb. 10; presenters described site, program, modular cell units and a multi-layered cost estimate but the meeting record contained inconsistent all-in totals.
Studio Southwest and county staff briefed the Eddy County Commission on the 100% construction documents for a proposed new detention center and the commission voted to authorize issuing the request for proposals (RFP).
Gordon Massengill of Studio Southwest told the commission the project package is ready to go out to bid and said, “we are hoping to advertise for bid tomorrow,” with proposals to be received Jan. 12, 2026, and the county targeting the Feb. 10 commission meeting for an intent to award. He described a primary building of roughly 142,000 square feet with capacity to add about 50,000 square feet in future housing units and a site layout occupying about 15 of the 48 acres originally considered.
Massengill said modular, off-site-manufactured cells are included as a cost-saving measure (the cell package was described at about $8.5 million), and he walked commissioners through typical contractor markups and contingencies (20% locality markup, 6% general conditions, ~2.5% general requirements, bond/insurance, fees, design contingency and an escalation allowance). He cautioned that the number of competitive bids will affect estimate accuracy and that limited bonding capacity among local contractors may shape teaming arrangements; he listed several firms that may pursue or team on the work.
County commissioners moved and approved a motion to issue the RFP. The roll-call vote included commissioners recorded as Carlson, Trost, DePlein and Owen voting yes.
Why it matters: The project replaces an aging facility that county leadership said no longer fits the community’s needs. If constructed, the facility will affect county capital spending and procurement choices for years.
Cost-note and transcript ambiguity: the presenter provided multiple line-item figures (Massengill cited a $101,000,000 figure for the building, site and off-site figures that sum to about $117,000,000 before markups) and then referenced post-markup totals in the presentation. The meeting record contains inconsistent post-markup numbers (the transcript includes both "1.41" and "1.67" statements in the cost discussion). The commission vote authorized proceeding to solicit competitive bids; a final, all-in contract award will follow contractor proposals and county evaluation.
