Arapahoe County moves facilities master plan into consultant interviews
County staff told commissioners four proposals were received, two firms will be interviewed and a consultant could be selected by early to mid-July for the county’s three-year facilities master plan.
Arapahoe County has moved its long-range facilities master plan into consultant interviews, with staff telling commissioners Tuesday that the county received four proposals, plans to interview two firms and hopes to select a vendor by early to mid-July.
The county is framing the effort as a three-year process to map service and space needs over the next 20 years, not as the narrower supplemental budget package commissioners approved last week.
A June 16 board summary report says the county’s 2026 adopted budget already included funding for the facilities master plan in its five-year capital improvement plan. Accessible county records reviewed for this story did not state a specific dollar amount for either the overall project or the consultant contract.
County documents describe the work as a three-phase process: discovery and alignment in 2026, modeling and prioritization in 2027, and financial strategy with potential funding decisions in 2028. During the study session, staff described 2028 as only a potential ballot target and an “end target,” not a formal board commitment.
The project charter says the plan will identify and prioritize county service and space needs for the next 20 years, evaluate current and alternative service-delivery models, ensure equitable access across communities, define needed facility types and locations, and reduce leased space while better using county-owned properties.
The charter also says the county is responding to aging facilities, deferred maintenance, demographic shifts, an aging population and changing growth patterns.
Staff told commissioners the first year will be largely internal, with meetings planned with the board, county leadership and an 18-member advisory committee drawn from county departments and offices. Staff said 16 committee members had already been identified and the first meeting was expected in the second week of July.
Commissioners questioned whether a three-year process was too long and whether the board should more publicly signal that the timeline is appropriate. Staff responded that the county still needs significant data gathering, analysis, prioritization and cost development before any ballot question could be ready, while also saying some “early wins” could emerge in the first year or early in year two.
Still unresolved are which consultant will be chosen, what the contract will cost, and whether the county will ask voters in 2028 for borrowing, taxes or another funding mechanism. Public June 16 materials show the timeline taking shape, but they stop short of committing the county to a ballot measure or naming specific building projects.