Grant County officials weigh $56.6M renovation vs. near‑$80M new jail in multi‑option presentation
Loading...
Summary
Contractors presented two options for Grant County's overcrowded jail: a renovation and 352‑bed addition with a base GMP of about $56.58 million (plus contingencies and allowances) or a new build near $80 million with greater future capacity; commissioners will present both options to county council before deciding.
Contractors for BW Construction presented detailed cost and schedule options Jan. 20 to the Grant County Commissioners for addressing the county jail, offering a renovated downtown option and a separate new‑build alternative.
Dustin Fry of BW Construction said the base renovation estimate — described as a guaranteed maximum price after current scoping work — would require about $56.58 million in additional funds to complete the project as presented, including major mechanical and electrical replacements and a new housing pod of roughly 352 beds. An alternate within that package would renovate an existing housing pod to add 46 beds for approximately $5.236 million more. Fry said the estimate includes contingencies and owner allowances for items not fully defined in the 90%‑level design documents.
As an alternative, BW presented a greenfield new build sited outside downtown that they conservatively estimated at just under $80 million for a base contract with 469 beds. Fry said the new‑build option would provide more room for future expansion — including an additional 116 beds of shell space — and would require a slightly smaller operating staff in BW’s staffing model (about 43.5 full positions on a 12‑hour shift model for a new build versus about 49 for the renovated option).
Fry emphasized tradeoffs: the renovation would allow reuse of the existing site and a shorter schedule, while the new build increases long‑term capacity and program space. He noted that the renovation pricing assumes the existing housing unit (the “dehome”) would be emptied during construction; trying to work around occupants would raise risk and cost. He also warned that subcontractor bid pricing is time‑sensitive and many quotes hold for only 30–90 days, which is why his GMP includes an escalation contingency.
Several commissioners said they view the project as necessary to provide safe working conditions and to avoid potential state intervention. One commissioner summarized the choice this way: the county can continue limited repairs to the current facility or choose a more durable solution that will support programming and reduce future emergency capital needs. A commissioner also noted that previous studies had produced estimates as high as roughly $110 million, and thanked BW for narrowing that range.
Next steps: BW said it will present the same materials to the county council the next evening. Commissioners were not asked to make an immediate decision; Fry said a Board‑of‑Trustees (BOT) agreement and council funding would be part of the path forward if the commissioners select a project. The presentation included a schedule that assumes approval and contractual steps in coming months and noted possible bond and financing steps during implementation.
The commission did not vote on a project at the meeting; commissioners said they would take the options to the county council for further discussion and funding decisions.
