Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Design Build Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board backs design‑build procurement for bond‑funded projects, contingent on voter approval
Summary
The board approved a resolution to use the design‑build method for bond‑funded school projects if voters approve the bond; administrators said design‑build can shorten delivery timelines and an RFQ is ready pending statutory justifications under "1431 128-1A."
The Person County Board of Education approved a resolution endorsing the design‑build project delivery method for planned bond‑funded projects, while making selection contingent on voter approval of the bond.
Presenters walked the board through procurement alternatives — separate‑prime contracting, single prime, construction manager at risk and design‑build — and explained statutory compliance requirements. As staff summarized, design‑build is "a single contract with one entity" that can reduce owner oversight burden and enable phasing: "It allows you to do some of that as you curve forward," an administration presenter said when describing how design‑build can compress schedule phases for large projects.
Administrators said they had prepared an RFQ and included required statutory justifications referencing the statute noted in materials as "general statute 1431 128-1A." They also said the district faces timeline constraints under the facility 2030 plan and cited infrastructure needs, including water and abatement work, that would benefit from a delivery method able to move design and construction forward in overlapping phases. Staff emphasized provisions in the draft RFQ to encourage small‑business participation and to evaluate builder expertise and capability.
Board members asked clarifying questions about owner representation and tradeoffs among delivery methods; staff explained that unified design‑build teams reduce disputes between separate designers and builders but require detailed specifications up front. The board moved, seconded and approved the resolution by majority voice vote, with the action explicitly conditioned on the passage of the bond that would fund the projects.
Next steps described by staff include finalizing the RFQ language, ensuring the RFQ documents address the four statutory questions cited, and returning to the board with procurement timelines should the bond referendum pass.
The resolution does not commit the district to spending beyond the condition of bond approval and will trigger further board review once funding is available.
