Legislature(2001 - 2002)
04/11/2001 01:44 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 95
An Act relating to control of space in the state
capitol and other buildings occupied by the legislature
and its agencies; and providing for an effective date.
DAVE STANCLIFF, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN, stated
that HB 95 is a bill to bring the entire capital building
under the management by the Legislature. He noted that at
the present time, the Legislature occupies and controls by
law all but the Governor's floor of the State Capitol
building.
Mr. Stancliff noted that that the bill would allow the
Legislative Council to create more space in the building for
the public. He added that the bill would not cause any
fiscal impact, as it would be an "internal transfer" of
authority to Legislative Council. He pointed out the fiscal
note submitted by Department of Administration. Mr.
Stancliff stated that the fiscal note is not appropriate
since the bill does not cause any expenditure to occur at
present time.
Representative Davies noted that the purpose of the bill is
to create more room in the Capitol Building. He asked if
the intent really was not to "do anything", and if so, why
should the Committee be considering it and why should the
bill be passed. Mr. Stancliff responded that the bill would
create a step that would allow the Legislative Council to
address these concerns. He pointed out that Representative
Ogan, in the House State Affairs Committee, indicated that
it was not his intent to move the current Administration.
He noted that he would hope that an orderly transition would
create a more appropriate time to discuss the matter.
Representative Croft inquired what "Move It or Loss It"
means. Mr. Stancliff replied that the capitol move issue
ties in with how well served the public feels with the space
of the Capitol Building and how efficiently the Legislature
operates. The theory is that the better off in both process
and accommodation of the public, the less apt Juneau would
be to loose the capital.
JIM DUNCAN, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION,
stated that the Governor and the Administration does not
view a relocation of the offices as a priority of the use of
State dollars at this time. Until other spending priorities
are addressed, the concern should not be considered.
TAPE HFC 01 - 82, Side B
Commissioner Duncan added that if the bill should pass, it
would cost money to make the changes. He stressed that the
cost must be determined for that relocation. To relocate
one office, the Governor's office, other offices would have
to be relocated to compensate for that change. The
Department of Administration fiscal note reflects cost of
relocation of all agencies involved and includes capital
costs for renovation and improvements.
Commissioner Duncan noted that the capital costs would be
approximately $8.8 million dollars to renovate and upgrade
th
the 11 floor of the State Office Building (SOB). Included
in that cost would be new construction costs for the Court
Plaza Building to make it suitable to relocate a major
department. In addition, certain parts of the agencies such
th
as the Lt. Governor's offices could not fit into the 11
floor of the SOB, so space would have to be leased to cover
costs of those business that would no longer fit.
Commissioner Duncan ascertained that there would be an
ongoing lease space cost of approximately $1 million dollars
per year. The fiscal note adequately reflects those costs.
Commissioner Duncan stated that the Governor does believe
that there are higher priorities for the use of those monies
at this time. It is imperative that the Legislature
understands that there are costs associated with the
proposed legislation.
Representative Davies pointed out that Mr. Stancliff stated
that the intent was to "perhaps" wait until the next
Administration. He questioned if the Administration had
concerns that Legislative Council would be in charge of the
space currently occupied.
Commissioner Duncan reiterated that it is important and the
Administration wants the Legislature to understand the full
costs associated with the move. He stressed that it is not
possible to relocate offices without substantial
renovations. He reiterated that the Administration does not
believe that this is a priority.
Representative Davies asked what would happen if the bill
was passed without a fiscal note and the entire State
Capitol would be under the control of the Legislative
Council. Commissioner Duncan acknowledged that would be a
huge problem and that is imperative that the fiscal note
accompanies the legislation.
Representative Hudson questioned how long the Legislature
and Governor has shared the current building. Commissioner
Duncan stated that it has been since 1906. He spoke in
support of financing the move of the third floor if the
Legislature allocated the $8.8 million dollars.
Representative Hudson maintained that the legislation is an
attempt to appropriate control. He stated that it was not
good public policy. He maintained that the building should
be co-managed until an alternative is found.
Representative Hudson suggested that the legislation is a
"power grab". He reiterated that he would support the move
if the funding was forthcoming.
Representative Hudson MOVED to TABLE HB 95.
HB 95 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|