After a 45-minute discussion Tuesday, the Sherburne County Board voted to give BWBR Architects the go-ahead to draw up schematic plans for the Government Center expansion project. The plans will cost the county $694,000. Last month, Doug Wild of BWBR and Patrick Sims, construction manager from Adolfson and Peterson, gave the board a price tag of between $36.7 and $44.5 million for the expansion project.

 

The project is centered around updating and expanding the courts with the addition of a three-story, 90,000 square foot courts building and renovating 135,000 square feet of existing space for county departments.

 

At that meeting, Wild and Sims said if the county wanted to get the best price from contractors, it would be best to make a decision by the end of the year to have the plans drawn.

 

Tuesday was the board’s last meeting of the year, and each commissioner weighed in on the decision.

 

Commissioner Rachel Leonard, who has been outspoken about saving taxpayer money, said she was still concerned about the cost.

 

“I never thought we weren’t going to do this, but I never thought it would have that price tag,” she said. “Forty-some million will be a harsh blow for our county.”

 

She said she wanted the architect to do everything possible to lower the cost.

 

“My mantra has always been to look at having a quality building, but look outside the box,” she said. “I can’t rely on promises. I can only beg you publicly to look at different ways to lower the cost.”

 

Commissioner Felix Schmiesing agreed it was a tough decision and a huge cost.

 

“I think we’re all feeling the same thing. I’ve heard you say before you don’t want a Cadillac,” he said to Leonard. “I don’t disagree with you. I want a Chevrolet, and it doesn’t have to be the best one. But I also don’t want us to get into a position where we build a Yugo. We’re trying to strike that balance.” 

 

Commissioner Ewald Petersen said the cost was high, but it would cost a lot more down the line.

 

“I don’t like the numbers necessarily, but we need to understand that we need the space not only for the courts. We need space for a continuing rise in the amount of employees that we have,” he said. “Do I like the numbers, no, but we have to face reality. I think now is the time.”

 

Commissioner Bruce Anderson said he was concerned that not everyone was on board with the existing concept of the expansion project.

 

“We have to look at everything and do it in a way that the board, the public and employees get the best product,” he said. “We need to have more discussion with the courts, the sheriff and department  heads. The county attorney, Health & Human Services -  these are all big players and there’s a lot of concerns from staff in those departments.”

 

Commissioner John Riebel said the decision to expand had to be made in order to keep county operations effective. 

 

“When I first got elected, I ran on a theory that this place has to operate like a business, and we consider our taxpayers our customers,” he said. “We have to have happy employees that help these customers of ours, who are the taxpayers, and if we aren’t doing that, we aren’t doing our job.”

 

Riebel said he was also concerned about the cost. But as a businessman, he felt the board had to look to the future.

 

“We can’t have good employees if we have a bad facility,” he said. “I’m not saying our facility is bad, but in 10 years, is it going to be the same thing?”

 

Leonard said she felt there were other ways to cut costs that weren’t being addressed, like renovating the existing courtrooms instead of converting them for other purposes.

 

“I always thought we would do something to add courtrooms,” she said, “but I hate the fact that we are just going to get rid of the ones we have, because somewhere along the line if you need more, you probably could have resurrected them.”

 

Doug Wild of BWBR said the main reason the courtrooms were being replaced was their size. He said the National Center for State Courts recommended larger rooms, but the current infrastructure won’t allow for it.

 

“The spans aren’t great enough to accommodate rooms without columns in the room, which begins to fly in the face of clear sightlines and security of the courtroom,” he said.

 

Wild also responded to Leonard’s request to find ways to cut costs.

 

“Knowing the goal is to get it (costs) down, that guides all the decisions in front of us and the engineering staff,” he said. “Our guiding light is to think outside the box and explore everything we can explore to get the cost down.”

 

Anderson said he was still concerned that the concept might change, and if it did, it would cost the county more money.

 

“The schematic design is based on what is being proposed today. That’s where I don’t support it,” he said. “I don’t want to be throwing money away by doing a schematic design based on these recommendations when they can change based on further discussion. Then you’ll be coming back to us again asking for more money for another schematic design because things have changed.”

 

Administrator Steve Taylor said he spoke with all the county department heads and most were comfortable with the concept.

 

“As far as the conceptual phase, overall they’re supportive of this design,  with the exception of the county attorney.” he said. 

 

The county attorney wants to be in a secure environment and closer to the courts, said Taylor.

 

“They’re valid issues,” he said. “I’ve also heard there’s concerns about moving forward, for example, adequate storage, are elevators big enough... security. Generally speaking, there was a comfort level, but they wanted to make sure there was a lot of communication and that we make decisions as a team moving forward.”

 

Schmiesing said he was also concerned, like Anderson, that if the plans changed the county would end up paying more.

 

“Are we fluid enough to make some adjustments to this plan as we go forward into schematic design?” he asked.

 

Wild said as long as there were no major changes, like the addition of a building, the cost for the schematic design wouldbe the same.

 

“For the scope that is in front of you today, the fees that we quoted, those are solid,” he said.

 

He also said it would be the responsibility of the board and county staff to make timely decisions during the process, and not change the plans at the last minute.

 

“Where it gets sticky is if we’re at the very end of the design phase and all of a sudden you want to take three or four functions from upstairs and put them downstairs,” he said. “That represents additional work for us.”

 

Leonard said as long as there was a continuing effort to reduce costs, she was in favor of moving ahead.

 

“I’m doing it on faith that the end price will come down,” she said.

 

She made the motion to approve the contract for the schematic design. Petersen seconded the motion and it passed, 5-0.