Legislature(2009 - 2010)HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/10/2010 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB326 || HB225 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 325 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 326 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL 326
"An Act making supplemental appropriations, capital
appropriations, and other appropriations; amending
appropriations; repealing appropriations; making
appropriations to capitalize funds; and providing for
an effective date."
HOUSE BILL 325
"An Act making capital appropriations for deferred
maintenance projects, equipment replacement, and
emergency repairs; and providing for an effective
date."
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET OVERVIEWS
1:39:25 PM
JAMES ARMSTRONG, STAFF, CO-CHAIR STOLTZE, pointed to a
prepared handout that lists side by side the Deferred
Maintenance Capital Requests and the Regular Supplemental
Capital Request (copy on file). He indicated that the
handout would make it easier to see the requests as each
department presents their requests. He pointed out the
backup in the binder and noted that Section 3 is the Capital
Budgets for the Regular Supplemental and on the
spreadsheets, starting on Page 11, Section 57. He added that
the last section in the binder is the Deferred Maintenance
Requests (FY10, HB 225 & HB 226 Governor's Supplemental &
Deferred Maintenance Budgets, Book 1, copy on file).
KAREN REHFELD, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET,
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, appreciated dealing with both bills
today. She remarked that the deferred maintenance bill is a
straight forward bill with the governor proposing $100
million to allocate across all departments listed on a 2-
page spreadsheet. She explained that the agencies will
explain where they are listed on the spreadsheet and
describe their projects then take questions from the
committee.
Mr. Armstrong stated that the bold listings on the
spreadsheet are the Appropriations and listed below are the
Allocation Requests.
1:43:38 PM AT EASE
1:47:03 PM RECONVENED
Mr. Armstrong clarified that the last Section in the binder
is deferred maintenance where most of the day would probably
be spent. He noted that in Section 3 there are four other
requests from three different agencies.
ERIC SWANSON, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION, ADMINISTRATIVE stated a request on Line 2 of
the Spreadsheet with $4,250,000 for deferred maintenance of
facilities in the public building fund. These facilities are
managed by the Department of Administration and are projects
that can be moved on quickly to address certain deferred
maintenance needs. He added that all the facilities are in
Juneau.
Representative Austerman asked if all the buildings in
Juneau were government buildings. Mr. Swanson responded that
was correct.
1:49:38 PM
Representative Gara asked how the working document prepared
by Representative Stoltze's office showing two deferred
maintenance requests related to the spreadsheet with
multiple requests. Mr. Swanson replied that the two requests
correspond to the lines in the bill. The longer lists are
the detailed list of the facilities in need. Ms. Rehfeld
explained there are two projects for the Department of
Administration in the bill that are broken down into
Facilities Deferred Maintenance and the Telecommunication
System deferred maintenance.
Representative Austerman noted that on Page 5 of the
deferred maintenance section there is a listing of nineteen
projects in Juneau.
Mr. Swanson reported that the request for the $4,250,000 is
for 7 projects recently identified. Representative Austerman
noted they do not match up with his information. Ms. Rehfeld
explained that Mr. Swanson was referring to specific items
for the first allocation of money. Mr. Swanson noted that
page 5 is the correct part of the original package request
submitted.
Representative Austerman asked if the committee had the most
updated list. Ms. Rehfeld noted that the committee does not
have the list being used by some departments. She explained
that Mr. Swanson was reading from a newer list identifying
the higher priority projects. She indicated that OMB would
be providing the newer list.
1:55:03 PM
Ms. Rehfeld apologized to the committee. She explained that
today's goal was listen to each agency's deferred
maintenance needs so that these higher priority projects
could be completed in the first year.
1:55:51 PM
Representative Fairclough thought it would be difficult to
see if the committee agrees with the prioritized listing
without the information in front of them.
Ms. Rehfeld suggested going through a few agencies to see if
the information meets the needs of the committee. She
believed most would be straight forward requests.
Mr. Swanson continued to his second request of $3 million
for deferred maintenance on the state of Alaska
telecommunication system. He stated that communication
towers located throughout the state have parts in need of
repair or replacement.
Representative Gara referred to the prior funding history of
$1.5 and $2.7 million and wondered why request is so much
larger (page 6).
Mr. Swanson answered that there are many deferred
maintenance projects on the list for SATS facilities in need
of serious repair and the department was taking the
opportunity to catch-up.
Co-Chair Stoltze expressed his irritation in not having all
the information available for the committee. He wondered how
many other agencies have projects where the information has
not been provided to the committee.
Ms. Rehfeld responded that the information will vary between
departments. Some departments will be able to give a direct
list and others will need to refer to a second list that is
not presently available.
Co-Chair Stoltze instructed Ms. Rehfeld to present only
those departments where all the information was available
for the committee.
2:00:53 PM AT EASE
2:08:27 PM RECONVENED
Co-Chair Stoltze mentioned the departments that would be
heard during the meeting.
Ms. Rehfeld explained that she wanted to bring the list of
projects with the list of priorities. She indicated that
some agencies have done better job with backup material than
others.
2:09:53 PM
Mr. Armstrong interjected that the committee should refer to
Section 3 in the binder for the Department of Commerce &
Economic Development.
JO ELLEN HANRAHAN, DIVISION DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
& ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, noted that the supplemental request
of $2.1 million would complete the City of Kodiak Community
Jail Facility. The facility has space for all of Kodiak's
law enforcement programs, animal control, community
services, area regional dispatch, and regional emergency
operations. The city is experiencing a shortage of funds to
complete the project of the community jail (Section 3, page
1). She elaborated that if the facility is not completed
then the community will be operating out of two different
facilities with the police station in one building and the
community jail in another. This will increase the annual
operating costs by $1.3 million a year.
Co-Chair Stoltze asked if this is one of the SB 65 projects.
Ms. Rehfeld responded that was correct.
Representative Gara needed to know where this information
was located. Mr. Armstrong reiterated that it was located in
Section 3 of the binder. He explained that some agencies
have requests contained within the regular supplemental and
the deferred maintenance supplemental.
2:13:28 PM
Representative Austerman asked why the Department of
Commerce is carrying these funds through. Ms. Hanrahan
explained that the Department of Commerce is the named
agency because the grants to municipalities go through this
department. The request originated from the Department of
Corrections.
2:14:45 PM
ANA KIM, DIRECTOR, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT requested $1.7 million for
Mt. Edgecumbe High School deferred maintenance. She
indicated that this will complete the remaining maintenance
on the boys and girls dorms and drainage improvement at
Heritage Hall. She noted it should also cover asbestos
removal from the storage warehouse and demolition of an oil
paint shop building.
Representative Doogan asked if there will be an actual list
from the Administration for all the projects under the $100
million request. Co-Chair Stoltze answered it will be
coming. Representative Doogan asked when the committee will
receive this list. Ms. Rehfeld responded that the hope was
to have it already, but it will be sent to the committee
members as quickly as possible. Representative Doogan wanted
to make sure detailed information was forthcoming in order
to make decisions.
2:18:02 PM
Mr. Armstrong remarked that a spreadsheet arrived late the
previous evening, but corrections needed to be made by the
Administration before it could be handed out. He indicated
his intention to personally deliver the spreadsheet with an
explanation as soon as it is available. Representative
Doogan reiterated that it was needed.
2:19:23 PM
Ms. Rehfeld noted that the backup in the binder does
represent a significant amount of information. The new
spreadsheet will supplement this information with more
clarity.
Representative Gara elaborated that it was unrealistic for
the committee to know if the amount of money requested is
the right price for the project. He assumed that someone in
the department determines the amount is the most efficient
manner to get the project completed, but noted that the
committee must take this information on face value. He asked
who makes these decisions.
Ms. Rehfeld shared that state agencies have facilities plans
and managers who work on 6 year plan projects. Part of The
challenge is the funding for projects on an ongoing basis.
When a 6 year plan is made, there are professional estimates
made to determine costs. When the projects go out to bid,
these numbers might change. If the estimate comes in higher
than budgeted then the agency will do what they can with the
allotted money. She reiterated that the agencies bring forth
the best possible estimates for any project. Representative
Gara wanted to know how these projects were decided on.
Ms. Rehfeld declared that originally a large list of
projects from all the state's agencies with a $1.9 billion
backlog was given to the administration. The governor
proposed a $100 million a year five-year plan with the
intention of going as far down the list as possible. She
noted that the agencies were asked to list their highest
priorities.
2:24:24 PM
KRISTIN RYAN, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH,
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, requested $200,000
for the Environmental Health Lab deferred maintenance. She
explained that this would correct the deficiencies
identified during a federal inspection to seal the room that
handles contagious toxins. She noted that the Department of
Transportation provided the estimates.
TOM LAWSON, DIRECTOR, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF
FISH AND GAME, referred to three projects listed on lines 8,
9, and 10 of the deferred maintenance spreadsheet. The first
project for $850,000 was for infrastructure needs and
upgrades in statewide employee housing. He explained that in
areas where there are no housing opportunities for transient
and seasonal staff, the department provides the housing. He
pointed out the most serious needs were in Dutch Harbor and
Yakatat. The plan for Dutch Harbor would be to contract for
a modular to be shipped to the location. Mr. Lawson
continued that the Yakatat cabin does not have running water
so the plan would be to purchase a single family dwelling or
contract for a modular. He added that this method has been
used before and is very efficient.
Representative Fairclough asked why this is listed under
deferred maintenance and not listed in the capital budget.
Mr. Lawson responded that in a situation where there is
existing housing that is sub-standard the choice is for it
to be repaired, replaced or built. Representative Fairclough
believed this was capital not deferred maintenance project.
2:30:38 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze agreed that both sounded like capital
projects.
Representative Gara inquired that since these areas had few
employees was the department asking for single family units.
Mr. Larson agreed. Representative Gara noted that the cost
of the units could range from $300,000 to $600,000. He
questioned if that was the appropriate amount of money in
those areas. Mr. Lawson responded that he did not know. He
agreed that the figure could be high, but the department has
needs that exceed the money that is being requested. The
estimates are only ranges. Co-Chair Stoltze agreed that
seems high for a single family home, especially with no
land.
Representative Austerman agreed that the requested $850,000
seems vague. He believed the figures needed to be broken
down further.
Mr. Lawson continued that the second request for $700,000
was for upgrades to statewide storage and shop facilities.
He referred to a number of camps and offices throughout the
state where field equipment and fuel need to be stored. He
noted that these facilities will need to be upgraded or
replaced. He remarked that the department would start in the
communities of King Salmon, Yakatat, McGrath, and Haines.
Representative Austerman responded that the replacement that
is a capital, not a deferred maintenance issue.
2:35:08 PM
Ms. Rehfeld commented that the emphasis is on deferred
maintenance, but if an estimate to perform the upgrade or
renovation is too high, then the recommendation might be
made that it is cheaper to just replace the structure.
Representative Austerman agreed that it might be a better
idea to replace the structure, but emphasized that if that
is the decision then the department needs to return with a
different project list. Ms. Rehfeld responded that if there
is major renovation then it is in major maintenance, but
adding facility space falls under the construction label.
Mr. Lawson continued with the third project for $450,000 for
upgrades to the Kodiak Warehouse compound. This warehouse
needs a roof replacement and siding. This is a major
compound for in Kodiak.
Representative Doogan asked what is kept in the warehouse.
Mr. Lawson responded that the warehouse stores smaller
vessels, outboard motors, trucks, and maintenance equipment.
2:37:44 PM
ALISON ELGEE, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT
SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, listed
two requests that fall into the Pioneer Home program
throughout the state and non-Pioneer home facilities.
Included in the non-pioneer homes are the juvenile justice
facility, Alaska Psychiatric Institute, public health
nursing facilities, and other buildings throughout the
state. The projects listed extend beyond the appropriation
requested, but the projects are listed in priority order.
The money provided by the committee will be used in order
down the list until the money runs out.
Co-Chair Stoltze asked if they would be going through
projects from top to bottom on the list. Ms. Elgee indicated
that the lists are reviewed and reprioritized annually and
sometime the priorities can change. She noted the list
before the committee today is best information of the top
priorities.
Representative Austerman asked if the $4 million will only
take the department through the first four projects.
JENNIFER KLEIN, FACILITIES MANAGER, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH &
SOCIAL SERVICES, replied that the $4 million should take
them to number eleven on the list (Section 3, page 19).
2:42:48 PM
Ms. Elgee moved to the spreadsheet for HB 326 supplemental
requests (Page 12, line 60). This request will complete the
Medicaid Management Information System project. It was
identified last year in developing the budget for the
management information system. There is a process where an
approved planning document is reviewed and approved by the
federal government. The project receives 90 percent
participation on the part of the federal government,
therefore the funding reviewed for this project is a 90/10
split. Unfortunately an error was made failing to identify
that when the federal government approved that planning
document they indicated that there had been a previous
effort to develop an MMIS system that the federal government
already paid for once and stated they would not pay again.
The federal government subtracted $4.5 million from their
participation in the particular development effort. This
left the project with a $4 million general fund hole. A
second issue arose with the coding of the MMIS environment.
This system is also under development in one of the Dakotas
where they are slightly ahead. They discovered in their
development a significant coding error that required
remediation. This has set the project back one year;
therefore the increased costs are for this extension.
2:45:50 PM
Representative Doogan noted that page 12 lists the request
for $6.2 million in general funds and $8.7 million in
federal funds for a total of $14,990,000. He asked if that
was correct. Ms. Elgee replied that is the amount of
supplemental funds being requested. Representative Doogan
asked if the additional fund requests and the lesser federal
funds are accounted for in these requests. Ms. Elgee replied
yes. Representative Doogan asked if these funds will finish
the project. Ms. Elgee replied yes, according to the best
information available today.
2:47:29 PM
GUY BELL, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT, reported one item for $1 million in deferred
maintenance for the Alaska Vocational Technical Center
(AVTEC). The vocational center operates 16 state owned
buildings, 11 of which are over 25 years old. The money
request is for maintenance staff and associated supplies for
maintenance of the facilities. Three maintenance staff from
capital improvement project receipts perform the day to day
work. The remainder of the funding is allocated to priority
projects including lightening, security and drainage
improvements to parking lots and facilities, hazardous
material abatement, residential and cafeteria facilities
equipment and improvements. Commissioner Bell noted for the
record that priorities change as things break down which
cannot always be anticipated.
Representative Austerman remarked that $310,900 of the
request for deferred maintenance was paying salaries for
some maintenance personnel. Commissioner Bell answered that
some of the maintenance staff are funded through the
operating appropriations and the remaining three are through
the capital budget. Representative Austerman asked if the
three on staff currently are paid every year through capital
funds. Commissioner Bell answered yes.
Co-Chair Stoltze agreed that was strange for employees to be
in the capital budget.
Commissioner Bell noted that this information is disclosed
in the operating budget request. In the past there has been
discussion for requesting general funds for these staff so
they become part of the base, but a decision has been made
to fund a component of the staff for review each year in the
deferred maintenance part of the capital budget.
2:52:13 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze maintained that historically even short
term employees are in the capital budget.
Representative Fairclough asked if the three employees
receive retirement. Mr. Bell answered yes as they are
permanent employees. Representative Fairclough asked if the
deferred maintenance was coming out of the general fund.
Commission Bell responded yes. Representative Fairclough
deferred to the co-chair to see if these positions need to
be removed from the budget. She asked how long they have
been funded. Commissioner Bell responded that he has been
with the department since 2003 and the positions have been
funded in this manner the entire time.
2:53:53 PM
Representative Gara referred to the HB 325 spreadsheets,
page 31, on the AVTEC request and noted that for FY2010 the
request is for $1 million but in FY2010 the requests jumps
to $45 million. He asked what the amount was for.
Commissioner Bell remarked that there are a number of older
buildings that need to be replaced or repaired. He mentioned
a 135 student dormitory that has reached the end of its
useful life. When this happens the question is if the
building should be renovated or replaced, and in this
situation the decision is to replace it. This has been
identified as a deferred maintenance project, not capital,
but he does realize the committee probably looks at this
issue as more of a capital project. He added that it would
be more expensive to renovate then replace.
Representative Gara asked that it seems like a lot of money
for maintenance for a building that will soon be renovated
or replaced. Commissioner Bell agreed that is an issue. He
argued that the facilities need to be maintained until they
are replaced. Representative Gara wondered how much of the
$560,000 goes for an interim patch for the residence and
cafeteria. Commissioner Bell deferred to Fred Esposito,
Director, AVTEC. Co-Chair Stoltze asked if Mr. Esposito was
on line, not hearing a response he moved on to the next
question.
Representative Austerman requested more information on the
actual use of the requested funds before any decisions could
be made.
2:57:57 PM
Mr. Armstrong remarked the in the Department of Labor's
short form there are FY2009 Actuals of $867,000 of CIP
receipts and AVTEC expended $168,700.
2:58:28 PM
LETA SIMONS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF SUPPORT SERVICES,
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, mentioned three requests on
the deferred maintenance list. She named the state parks
deferred maintenance, emergency repairs, and equipment
replacement at $3,480,000. She listed the state park areas
that would receive the funds.
Representative Fairclough asked if the Department of
Transportation gave these estimates. Ms. Simons responded
that the department has their own engineers who provide the
estimates. Representative Fairclough questioned at what
level of design detail the projects were estimated. Ms.
Simons deferred to James King for the answer.
JAMES KING, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION (via
teleconference), responded that there has been a long
process evaluating and determining deferred maintenance
needs and their engineers have looked at these projects to
verify they are deferred maintenance and have provided costs
estimates. He added that about 40 percent to 50 percent are
design. Mr. King explained that the department is
comfortable with the numbers, but the actual bid numbers
might come in more or less.
Representative Fairclough asked the administrative overhead
costs on these projects. Mr. King responded that it is
variable depending on the project. There may be a greater
process for some projects that would result in a 25 percent
or higher administrative costs.
Co-Chair Stoltze questioned if there was a percent range.
Mr. King stated that the high would be 25 percent and the
low would be zero.
3:06:50 PM
Vice-Chair Thomas wondered what the improvements were for
the Chilkat State Park in Haines. Mr. King reported that the
road is no longer gradable because the top material has
eroded and many campsites have become unusable and need
improvements.
Vice-Chair Thomas welcomed the road improvements and voiced
his concern that the Department of Transportation does not
maintain the road.
3:09:38 PM
Representative Doogan noticed that approximately one third
of the money is unallocated spending and wondered if the
money would be given to the agency with just the hope they
do the right thing without having more precise information.
Ms. Simons responded that health and sanitation projects are
evaluated in the spring to see what might need to be dealt
with after the winter. Representative Doogan stated that
this was a new category of deferred maintenance where
projects are to be named later. Ms. Simons responded that
the projects are not listed because the priority will be
accessed year to year.
Ms. Simons continued that another request of $330,000 was
for the Division of Agriculture Plant Material Center for
$330,000. This is a production farm, feed laboratory and
research facility that support the agriculture industry in
Alaska. This request will help eliminate the flooding near
the main buildings and greenhouses, replace outdated
equipment, provide paving and drainage, upgrade a spray rig
and purchase a medium size tractor.
3:14:02 PM
Representative Austerman remarked that some requests, like
the new tractor, look like capital projects. Ms. Simon noted
there is a question of what is deferred maintenance. The
department defines deferred maintenance as something
currently being used and necessary for operations that now
needs to be replaced or upgraded.
Representative Austerman observed there are outdated and
rusting machinery in rural areas that cannot get funded or
replaced because it does not make it into the capital list.
He did not consider the replacement of a tractor as deferred
maintenance. Representative Doogan asked if there is a
functioning definition of deferred maintenance.
Ms. Rehfeld declared there are several definitions of major
maintenance. She asserted that the governor was clear in his
budget regarding the necessity to protect current state
assets. The lists presented by the agencies will be refined
over the 5 year program. She reiterated that part of the
issue is if replacement is a better value than renovation.
Representative Doogan appreciated that refined information
will be forthcoming, but added that $100 million in requests
are in front of committee now and more information is needed
when it comes to appropriating this money.
3:19:25 PM
Ms. Rehfeld agreed but suggested that when looking across
the departments at the variety of projects from buildings,
roads, facilities, vessels, and airports there will be
different definitions that need to be looked at.
Representative Gara recalled that the administration's
position was that deferred maintenance should be funded
quickly so that the immediate projects could be started as
rapidly as possible with the rest being done later. He
emphasized that this budget was filled with projects that do
not need to be accomplished before the rest of the budget is
completed. He referred to the DNR request for $190,000 for
the Mt. McKinley Meat Plant. He failed to understand why the
project requests needed to be done before other capital
projects. Ms. Rehfeld stressed that the governor's interest
is to get the deferred maintenance on the table to help put
Alaskans to work.
Co-Chair Stoltze agreed more scrutiny might be necessary
when examining the deferred maintenance budget.
Representative Austerman maintained the need for clarity on
the process.
3:25:07 PM
Representative Gara asked if the governor's intention was to
get projects running a month earlier than other projects
maybe it would be useful to have the administration present
a list of the actual projects that need to be out on the
street a month early.
Ms. Simons continued with the last line item of $190,000 for
the Mt. McKinley meat plant machinery and efficiency
upgrades.
3:28:19 PM
MICHELLE RIZK, BUDGET DIRECTOR, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA
FAIRBANKS, stated that the University of Alaska maintains
400 buildings, with an average age of 31 years, and with 6.7
million square feet. The deferred maintenance bill includes
$37.5 million for the annual requirement to maintain
existing facilities and reduce additional deferred
maintenance needs. The money would be spread among the
state's campuses and a list has been submitted to the
committee.
3:31:11 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze wondered how many buildings were at each
campus.
Ms. Rizk replied that the University of Alaska Fairbanks has
242 of the 399 buildings. The blue book list details how
funds would be distributed. She continued that the
University of Alaska Anchorage has 53 buildings and the
University of Alaska Southeast has 34 facilities.
3:32:37 PM
Representative Doogan requested from Ms. Rizk a list of
priorities for clarification. He asked if the first $37.5
million in projects would be completed first. Ms. Rizk
clarified that the most critical parts of each project would
be handled first.
Representative Doogan asked how the $37.5 million is divided
up among the campuses. Ms. Rizk responded that she has not
told the committee that information, but it is listed on the
sheet that the committee will receive.
Vice-Chair Thomas questioned the capital budget with $25
million listed for schools which is for deferred maintenance
and wondered why it was not listed with the $100 million
deferred maintenance list.
Ms. Rehfeld replied that the legislature will make decisions
about what should be included in this package. She recapped
that the governor's intention was to focus on state and
university facilities with $100 million a year for the next
five years. Schools would not necessarily be part of that 5-
year plan, but were traditionally addressed through the
capital budget process. She agreed that the problem may be
in defining deferred maintenance projects.
Vice-Chair Thomas argued that every time schools come
looking for major maintenance money it is to the legislature
and he felt the $25 million for the schools should be added
the governor's $100 million deferred maintenance budget as a
higher priority.
3:38:00 PM
Representative Gara wanted to make sure the $37.5 million
request for the next five years was the university's
priority. He noted that dormitory space at the university is
a problem that should be addressed. He asked if the list for
the $37.5 million ranks ahead of some new construction
projects. Ms. Rizk responded that the Board of Regents
overall number one priority is maintaining existing
facilities and deferred maintenance. The board has only one
new construction priority, the Life Sciences Building.
Representative Gara questioned if the science building being
funded was for the Anchorage building, not the one being
replaced in Fairbanks. Ms. Rizk agreed it was for the
Science Building in Anchorage.
Co-Chair Stoltze appreciated the dilemma of building new
facilities, but the reality is that repairs might be needed
on the existing facility.
Representative Fairclough asked how much deferred
maintenance money was provided to the university. Ms. Rizk
responded that $3.2 million was allocated even though the
Board of Regents requested $50 million. Representative
Fairclough questioned if inside the university's budget
there is a fund that holds deferred maintenance money. Ms.
Rizk replied that the capital funds are separate.
Representative Fairclough inquired if any money was left
from last year's allocated funds after completing projects
and, if so, how much. She added that the university was
asking for $37.5 million, but she had been told in previous
years that $50 million would never meet the needs of
deferred maintenance projects.
Ms. Rizk responded that the Board of Regents distributes the
funds to specific projects. There is a fund established for
each specific project and five years to spend the money.
There are times were there may be a balance in that fund.
Representative Fairclough asked if the balance transfers to
a new project or is there a larger account for funds
available to be used for projects by the university.
Ms. Rizk maintained that the funds were allocated to a
specific project. Representative Fairclough wondered if the
project runs under and funds are remaining, would the money
sweep back to the general fund or is it reallocated to
another project. Ms. Rizk declared that the Board of Regents
approves projects, but if a balance is left, then the
university would look at other deferred maintenance projects
that had not been funded and would bring this information to
the board and ask to use the remaining funds for the next
need on the list.
3:44:21 PM
Representative Doogan questioned if he was correct that the
amount each agency received was related to the square
footage of its facilities. Ms. Rehfeld agreed that it was
allocated by the square footage.
Representative Doogan argued that the expenditures are not
for square footage in many places since the requests were
not always for a building or facility.
Mr. Armstrong stated he would get the spreadsheets in the
blue book referenced by Ms. Rizk to the committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB325 HB326 Stoltze Handout.pdf |
HFIN 2/10/2010 1:30:00 PM |