Date: 04/23/2009
Final
Potential Impact of Senate Bill 09-290 on State Controlled Maintenance
COMMITTEE ON CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT
| Votes: View--> | Action Taken: |
| <none> | <none> |
08:05 AM -- Discussion About Potential Impact of Senate Bill 09-290 on Future State-Funded Controlled Maintenance
Representative Riesberg, chair, called the meeting to order without a quorum present. He explained that there are no action items on the agenda that will require a vote. Ms. Lisa Esgar, Deputy Director, Governor's Office of State Planning and Budgeting (OSPB) and Mr. Larry Friedberg, State Architect, Department of Personnel and Administration, came to the table to discuss the potential impact of Senate Bill 09-290 on future state-funded controlled maintenance. Senate Bill 09-290 changes the review process for cash-funded capital construction projects at higher education institutions and changes how various cash-funded projects are categorized.
Committee members received a memorandum prepared by OSPB, the Department of Higher Education, and the Office of the State Architect, summarizing concerns about the potential impact of Senate Bill 09-290 on future state-funded controlled maintenance (Attachment A). Ms. Esgar said OSPB supports the additional flexibility offered by the bill to higher education institutions for cash projects, but explained her concerns about the bill's possible impact on state-funded controlled maintenance. Ms. Esgar outlined the types of capital construction cash projects that exist under current law and the rules regarding future state-funded controlled maintenance for each type of project. Ms. Esgar said that she recommends that the bill be amended to remove the eligibility for future state-funded controlled maintenance for non-academic facilities built with cash funds. In response to a question, Ms. Esgar clarified the language in the existing bill and said that the committee did discuss the importance of allowing academic buildings to request moneys for operating and maintenance regardless of the source of cash funds. Mr. Friedberg explained the current statutory requirement that a newly constructed building not be eligible for controlled maintenance funds until 15 years after its completion.
08:15 AM
Mr. Friedberg gave a legislative history of how controlled maintenance has been funded in recent history. He explained various funding strategies developed by his office in order to set aside moneys for future controlled maintenance needs. He said that the state's inventory is both growing and aging and that the state has not had enough good years to set aside sufficient moneys in the Controlled Maintenance Trust Fund for controlled maintenance needs. He said his office promotes a strategy of self-sustainability for the state's infrastructure. Mr. Friedberg summarized his testimony and said a lack of available revenue, and a growing and aging inventory of state buildings, leads him to recommend against expanding the category of cash projects that are eligible for future state-funded controlled maintenance. In response to a question, Mr. Friedberg said it should be clear that Senate Bill 92-202 projects were intended to be self-sufficient and should remain self-sufficient and that Senate Bill 09-290 should be amended to clarify this intent.
08:23 AM
Senator Schwartz expressed a concern that student fees may be used to construct auxiliary facilities even though these facilities may not be eligible for future state-funded controlled maintenance. Senator Bacon said students approve fees for both academic and non-academic buildings. Mr. Friedberg addressed a question about LEED certification. Discussion ensued about the high performance certification program and existing statutory requirements for capital construction projects to comply to the program's requirements. Mr. Jeremiah Barry, Office of Legislative Legal Services, came to the table to address the committee about a possible amendment to Senate Bill 09-290 to limit eligibility for future state-funded controlled maintenance to only academic buildings. Mr. Barry also addressed a question about including language requiring cash-funded capital projects at higher education institutions to meet LEED certification standards.