Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities Field House topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trousdale County board approves $4.099 million bid for new athletic field house after heated debate
Summary
After months of planning and debate about costs and safety, the Trousdale County School Board voted to accept a $4,099,000 low bid from FTM Contracting for a new athletic field house; one board member opposed the measure.
The Trousdale County School Board voted to accept a $4,099,000 low bid from FTM Contracting to build a new athletic field house, approving a project supporters say is needed for player safety and long-term facility resilience.
Board discussion centered on competing priorities and cost. Coach Gregory, who addressed the board at the podium, described the current field house as “outdated” and said cramped, hot conditions and degraded restrooms amount to a health and safety concern for student athletes: “These kids deserve a little bit better than what it is right now,” he said. The board heard that the existing structure dates to the 1960s and has recurring sewer and floodway-related problems that limit feasible upgrades in its current footprint.
District staff and the architect recommended awarding the contract to FTM Contracting, citing bid evaluations and prior work FTM has completed for the district. A district administrator told the board the lowest qualified bid’s substantial-completion schedule is roughly 330–355 days and urged the board to accept the recommendation so work could begin.
Board members raised fiscal concerns about the final price and long-term tradeoffs. One board member said the $4,099,000 figure “does not allow me to lay my head on the pillow at night and sleep,” urging the board to consider less costly options before committing. Others countered that long-term durability and addressing an ongoing public-health issue justified the cost. A second board member noted contingency and maintenance funds are available and said deferring the work risks higher prices later.
The motion to accept FTM’s bid was made by a board member and seconded; the chair called for the vote and noted that the motion carried with one dissent: “all ayes except for Miss Bolton.” The board recorded the motion as carried and directed staff to proceed with contract finalization and preparatory work for the related restroom renovations.
Next steps: the district will begin contract negotiations with FTM and continue planning for the separate restroom renovation project, which district staff said can proceed in parallel planning while the field house is under construction.
(At the meeting the architect’s recommendation and district administrator’s concurrence were the principal bases for the award; exact vote counts beyond one dissent were not specified in the transcript.)
