Commissioners vote to advertise for owner's representative as justice center delivery options debated

County legal counsel and staff gave a detailed briefing on construction-delivery methods for the proposed judicial center, outlining design–bid–build, construction manager as advisor/agent, construction manager as constructor or at-risk with a guaranteed maximum price (GMP), and a build–operate–transfer option. Counsel said the procurement and contract differences between methods are substantial and that choosing a method will shape future RFPs and contract language.

Commissioners debated the tradeoffs of shifting risk to private firms versus retaining control and emphasized the county’s limited capacity to act as a single decision-maker during construction oversight. "Every risk transfer that we undertake cost the taxpayers money and adds to the project," one commissioner said while urging careful consideration of who bears risk and at what cost. After debate, the board moved and approved a motion to direct Human Resources to advertise a job posting (minimum 7 days) for an owner's representative; HR said it would collect applications, prepare a proposed contract for council review and return with applicants within a couple of weeks.

The board also discussed forming an evaluation committee (including commissioners, county engineer and other county staff) to review proposals and recommended that the owner's representative, once hired, serve as the unified point of contact for project correspondence and decision-making during execution.