Show summary Hide summary
Cheyenne city leaders voted Monday to approve an $867,050 expansion of design work tied to a long-planned municipal building overhaul, a move city staff say is necessary to keep the schedule on track but that critics warned short-circuits competitive bidding and raises fairness concerns. The decision immediately affects where city employees will work during construction and taps the city’s general fund reserves to pay for the extra design scope.
The City Council’s modification expands the existing agreement with Plan One Architects to include two satellite projects: moving the City Council Chambers into the former senior center and renovating the second floor of the municipal court building. City staff argue these steps must precede the main municipal building renovation so displaced staff have temporary space.
Scope, schedule and funding
Public Works officials described the three sites as interconnected phases of a single campus project that require coordinated management. They say having one firm oversee all the pieces will reduce scheduling conflicts and simplify logistics during construction.
Detroit launches supervised youth hubs after spike in unsanctioned teen gatherings
Longevity influencer adopts extreme daily habits: experts weigh risks and benefits
- Contract increase: $867,050 added to the current architect agreement.
- Covered by: general fund reserves.
- New design work: relocation of Council Chambers; second-floor court renovations.
- RFP timeline estimate: Purchasing staff said issuing a formal Request for Proposals could take roughly 3–6 months.
- Risk of delay: City officials warned postponing work could raise project costs by an estimated more than $800,000 if the overall schedule slips a year or more.
Council debate: fairness vs. momentum
Several council members objected to awarding extra design work without opening the opportunity to other local firms, saying the move denied competitors a chance to bid. Councilor Lawrence Wolfe cited communication from a local architect and argued the city should favor a transparent procurement process.
Councilor Michelle Aldrich framed her objection around optics and equity, calling for adherence to standard Request for Proposal procedures rather than expanding the current architect’s scope without competition. Two other councilors, Mark Moody and Pete Laybourn, joined Wolfe and Aldrich in voting against the modification.
Defenders of the decision said a pause to run a new RFP would stall the entire renovation. Mayor Patrick Collins warned that delaying the start of work could drive costs higher, while Councilor Tom Segrave said it is rare for large, multi-building projects to switch architectural teams midstream and noted the municipal building’s original contract had already been competitively bid.
What this means for residents and local firms
For taxpayers, the change reallocates reserve dollars to cover unplanned design costs now rather than potentially higher construction prices later. For local architects and consultants, the vote highlights a trade-off: keep a single firm to protect continuity and schedule, or open new work to competition and accept the cost and time of restarting procurement.
City staff maintain the integrated approach reduces risk by keeping one manager responsible for sequencing and timing across all three buildings. Purchasing officials estimate the competitive process alone would extend pre-construction by months, a timeline proponents say would freeze other project activity.
The council approved the modification after the debate. The motion passed despite the four dissenting votes from Wolfe, Aldrich, Moody and Laybourn.
