Legislature(2023 - 2024)SENATE FINANCE 532
01/27/2023 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Defferred Maintenance - Office of Management and Budget, Department of Transportation, University of Alaska | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
January 27, 2023
9:00 a.m.
9:00:54 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Hoffman called the Senate Finance Committee
meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Lyman Hoffman, Co-Chair
Senator Donny Olson, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Click Bishop
Senator Jesse Kiehl
Senator Kelly Merrick
Senator David Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Neil Steininger, Director, Office of Management and Budget,
Office of the Governor; Jason Sakalaskas, Director,
Facilities Services, Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities; Chad Hutchison, Director of State
Relations, University of Alaska.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Alesia Kruckenberg, Director of Strategy, Planning and
Budget, University of Alaska.
SUMMARY
PRESENTATION: DEFFERRED MAINTENANCE - OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT
and BUDGET, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, UNIVERSITY OF
ALASKA
Co-Chair Hoffman discussed the agenda.
^PRESENTATION: DEFFERRED MAINTENANCE - OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT
and BUDGET, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, UNIVERSITY OF
ALASKA
9:01:32 AM
NEIL STEININGER, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET,
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, introduced himself.
JASON SAKALASKAS, DIRECTOR, FACILITES SERVICES, DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, introduced
himself.
Mr. Steininger discussed a presentation entitled "Deferred
Maintenance, Senate Finance committee, January 27, 2023,"
(copy on file).
9:02:18 AM
Mr. Steininger turned to slide looked at slide 2, "Deferred
Maintenance Overview":
Deferred maintenance is maintenance or repair projects
that have been delayed or postponed due to lack of
funds within an entity's normal operating budget
cycle.
State of Alaska property portfolio:
• 2,400+ facilities (includes University)
• 20 million square feet of space
• 15 State Agencies
• Type varies by Agency
9:03:38 AM
Mr. Steininger spoke to slide 3, "Funding Recommendations
and Targets":
There is no one definitive rule on the level of
preventive maintenance necessary to avoid deferred
maintenance, but a 2012 National Research Council
publication references a range of 2-4% of replacement
cost value.
FY2021 replacement cost value (excluding University):
$7,678,370.1
1% = $76.8 million
2% = $153.6 million
4% = $307.1 million
9:05:02 AM
Mr. Steininger referenced slide 4, "Governor's Budget
Maintenance Funding," which showed a table of FY 24
Governor's budget maintenance funding totaling
approximately $13 million.
FY2024 Capital Bill
Corrections Statewide Security Doors and Windows DM
$1,000.0
UGF
Courts DM
$3,050.0
Alaska Capital Income Fund
Fish and Game Sport Fish Hatcheries DM
$1,000.0
UGF
Fish and Game Vessel and Aircraft DM
$500.0
Alaska Capital Income Fund
Statewide DM
$29,283.6
Alaska Capital Income Fund
FY2024 Capital Total
$34,833.6
FY2024 Operating
Maintenance and Operations All Agencies
$77,783.2
Various
FY2024 Operating Total
$77,783.2
Capital and Operating Total
$112,616.8
9:06:45 AM
Mr. Steininger turned to slide 5, "Statewide DM
Appropriation by Agency," which showed a table that was a
historical lookback of deferred maintenance appropriations
by agencies for the previous six years. He explained that
the reason the total was so low in FY 21 was because of the
Covid-19 Pandemic. In that year the legislature adjourned
early and there had not been a full capital budget. The
following year made up the difference for the lack of
funding in FY 21. He highlighted that DOC received a large
amount each year due to its complex facilities. He pointed
to significant amounts also went to the University. He
mentioned large amounts for family and Community Services,
which maintained Pioneer Homes and Juvenile Justice
Facilities.
9:08:36 AM
Mr. Steininger considered slide 6, " Backlog $703,493.1
(excluding University)," which showed a bar graph
illustrating the backlog of deferred maintenance. He cited
that there were backlogs in approximately $7 million. The
number excluded the University, which would provide an
update later in the meeting. He highlighted that DOT&PF had
the largest backlog, with DOC following second. He noted
that DNR had a lot of remote field sites that required
maintenance.
9:09:39 AM
Mr. Steininger relayed that he would turn the presentation
over to Mr. Sakalaskas.
9:09:55 AM
Mr. Sakalaskas informed that he would cover the approach
used by DOT to identify and prioritize deferred maintenance
projects and needs. He displayed slide 7, "Statewide
Funding Approach":
Allocation process
• OMB facilitates the collection of agency deferred
maintenance lists
• State Facilities Council reviews and prioritizes
deferred maintenance projects across executive
branch agencies
• Facilities Council deferred maintenance workshops
anticipated February through June, with goal of
Statewide prioritized list to OMB June 2023
• Projects to be prioritized based on combination
of significant factors including facility
importance, building system, and urgency to
create a *Project Index Value (PIV).
9:11:38 AM
Co-Chair Olson asked to go back to slide 6 and referenced
the two columns for DOT. He asked Mr. Sakalaskas to explain
the differences between the two columns.
Mr. Sakalaskas explained that the first column reflected
DOT assigned buildings. The second column represented the
DOT Public Building fund and was part of a separate
investment.
Co-Chair Olson found it concerning that DOT had such a
deferred maintenance backlog, considering it was
responsible for airports and aviation in rural Alaska. He
cautioned that airports in rural areas falling into
disrepair was a safety issue.
Mr. Sakalaskas explained that aviation facilities in rural
areas were included in the backlog.
Co-Chair Olson was concerned with maintaining rural
airports which received heavy snow and ice formation, which
made it difficult to stop an airplane. He mentioned less-
than-pristine road graters, and asked whether equipment
needs in rural locations were included in the DM backlog
for DOT&PF.
Mr. Sakalaskas stated that the facilities needs were
included but not equipment.
9:14:05 AM
Mr. Sakalaskas highlighted slide 8, "Project Ranking
Formula":
• Project prioritization a combination of the below to
create a Project Index Value (PIV):
PIV = (MAI) x (System Factor) x (Need)
• MAI - Mission Alignment Index, alignment of
facility to an Agency's mission
• System Factor - Scale related to various building
systems and their impact on building
• Need - The urgency and criticality for
replacement
• If known, other attributes are also considered such
as anticipated return on investments, any matching
funds, or eligibility as a financed energy savings
performance project
9:15:15 AM
Mr. Sakalaskas looked at slide 9, "Mission Alignment
Index":
• Mission Alignment Index (MAI) identifies the
relative importance of a facility in relation to an
agency's primary mission. Besides how critical the
facility is to the agency mission it considers:
• How capable is it to deliver services
• How utilized is it, how many people, citizens
or state services does it impact
• Availability of other facility options at that
location
• The most critical facilities of an agency are
directly aligned with the agency's purpose to exist
• Amongst multiple critical facilities within in
an agency, there are still varying degrees
• Allows better risk management to programs, and
guides investment and divestiture decisions
• Determined by the agency. Periodically revisited.
9:16:42 AM
Senator Bishop asked where, under the three categories of
the project formula, one would find life-safety and
health.
Mr. Sakalaskas relayed that life-safety would be placed in
the system factor and would be a critical component.
9:17:25 AM
Mr. Sakalaskas addressed slide 10, "Mission Alignment Index
Examples":
Critical:
• The Agency cannot meet its mission without this
facility. There are no viable workarounds
Index Scale 0.75-0.9
Facility: Key Maintenance Station, Correctional
Center, Hangar, School, etc.
Important:
• Would impact the Agency's mission if
unavailable. Possible workarounds
Index Scale 0.5-0.74
Facility: Cartain Office Buildings
Supportive:
• Would possibly impact the Agency's mission if
unavailable, but other options available
Index Scale 0.25.0.49
Other / Non Mission Critical:
• Would not have an effect on the Agency's
mission if unavailable
Index Scale 0.0-0.24
Facility: Certain Warehouses or Storage Buildings
9:18:22 AM
Mr. Sakalaskas advanced to slide 11, "Systems & Needs
Examples
Life, Health, Safety, Structure
• Sprinkler, Fire Alarm, Structural,
• Including Life, Health, Safety issues caused by
envelope, mechanical, electrical, or other system
failures
System Factor - 0.75-1.0
Envelope and Shell
• Roof, Exterior Walls and Windows
System Factor 0.5-0.74
Mechanical, Electrical, Conveying, Process
HVAC, Plumbing, Power, Lighting, Elevators,
Escalators, industry specific systems
System Factor 0.5-0.74
Interior, exterior grounds, other
• Interior Doors, Walls, Floors, Finishes
System Factor 0.25-0.49
Need
5 Critical
-Corrects critical life safety or code hazard
-Imminent failure, requires immediate action to
return facility to normal operations
4 Important, not yet critical
-Requires action within next 5 years to stop
intermittent interruptions
-Corrects deterioration or potential safety
hazards
3 Necessary
-Require appropriate attention to preclude
deterioration or potential downtime
9:20:20 AM
Senator Kiehl asked how DOT balanced between and among the
different missions of different agencies.
Mr. Sakalaskas stated that the formula was designed with
the intention of striking the balance. He said that the MAI
was the tool used within agencies to identify priority
projects.
9:22:08 AM
Mr. Sakalaskas looked at slide 12, "Examples From Last
Prioritization Cycle:
• Mission Alignment Index Determined by the
owning department. In this example, each is a
critical building essential to serving the
mission of the respective department.
• System Factor Average of the inputs from each
member of the Facilities Council
• Need Average of the inputs from each member of
the Facilities Council
• Project Index Value Calculated and ranked for
over 100 projects from the last ranking cycle
Final prioritized list was reviewed and approved by
Facilities Council, then shared with OMB to
inform the recommended deferred maintenance
allocation.
9:23:17 AM
Mr. Sakalaskas showed slide 13, "Deferred Maintenance
Project Implementations":
General Processes
• Typical project efforts may include planning,
design and construction phases with varying
durations depending on scope and intensity
• Projects offer opportunities for local and
statewide design professionals and contractors
through the State's procurement processes
• Typical project cost impacts may include economic
markets of contracting, commodity prices, scope
increases due to unknown conditions or hazardous
materials.
o Projects can come in both under or above
estimates. In some cases the state has seen
bids exceeding estimates by ranges of 65-113%
o These challenges are shared within Facilities
Council forums and used to help inform future
projects
9:25:05 AM
Senator Wilson asked Mr. Sakalaskas to discuss possible
supply chain issues.
Mr. Sakalaskas affirmed that the department had seen supply
chain issues, and there were "long lead" items under
discussion within the Facilities Council. The Facilities
Council was trying to take critical items into account
early in the process as to not hold up project delivery.
Senator Wilson asked about Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act (IIJA) funds and asked whether any of the funds
could be used for the deferred maintenance backlog.
Mr. Sakalaskas responded that he was not familiar with the
topic.
Mr. Steininger interjected that most of the IIJA funds were
used for new projects and not necessarily for deferred
maintenance of existing facilities.
Senator Wilson noted there were new infrastructure projects
listed on the DOT list. He wondered whether any of the
projects were eligible for IIJA funds.
Mr. Steininger agreed to look at specific projects and
summarized that the federal dollars were for energy
projects or surface transportation programs. He said that
opportunities to use the federal funds for DM would be
explored.
9:28:49 AM
Co-Chair Olson asked what measures had been taken to ensure
that the estimates for projects were realistic.
Mr. Sakalaskas explained that much of the cost pricing data
was based upon historic cost pricing with projects and
delivery. He commented that contractor prices were coming
in high, and trends were being examined.
Co-Chair Olson thought that project budget projections that
were wildly different from the real bottom line were
irresponsible and a sign of incompetence.
9:30:28 AM
Senator Kiehl mentioned that he had not seen consideration
of a project's impact on operating maintenance costs going
forward. He asked whether there was a prioritization
process that examined the savings of one project over
another.
Mr. Sakalaskas said that the facilities Council had
discussed the matter. He said that high priority needs were
being considered with the limited available funding.
Senator Kiehl referenced the slide title "Statewide Funding
Approach," and pondered that the $35 million for FY24 would
get to the 1 percent to 4 percent range. He asked what the
statewide funding approach was and suggested that the
administration's proposal should align with the
presentation.
Mr. Steininger explained that the funding that was
available for deferred maintenance was clearly "pretty
constrained," which was a result of the states fiscal
situation. He posited that there were no available funds
to address every need that came to OMB. He mentioned the
Alaska Capital Income Fund, which was the state's primary
mechanism for funding deferred maintenance. The fund was
populated by a ring-fenced portion of the Permanent Fund.
He noted that an earlier slide showed a couple of projects
outside the CIF funding, which the administration had felt
were necessary.
9:34:21 AM
Senator Kiehl thought it was incumbent upon the Senate
Finance Committee to find resources to avoid disaster. He
noted that there was about $34 million in spending from the
CIF on slide 4. He asked Mr. Steininger to address the fund
source for the fund.
Mr. Steininger explained that the amount in the CIF varied
from year to year and was appropriated from an estimate. He
said that when crafting the budget, the amount appropriated
from the CIF was equal to the estimated amount projected by
the APFC.
9:35:49 AM
Senator Kiehl asked whether the fund was going to a
negative balance in the current fiscal year or the
following fiscal year.
Mr. Steininger relayed that if less than the estimated
funds were in the CIF then there would be less funds
available for bills. He explained that there were
mechanisms in place to assure the state didnt bounce any
checks.
9:36:58 AM
Mr. Steininger showed slide 14, "Appendix."
Mr. Steininger turned to slide 15, " State-Owned Facilities
Count by Agency," which showed a bar graph.
9:37:31 AM
Mr. Steininger considered slide 16, "State-Owned Facility
Space by Agency," which was a bar graph that showed square
footage of facility space for each agency. He commented
that the University had the most total square feet in
assets over all other agencies.
9:38:01 AM
Mr. Steininger displayed slide 17, "State-Owned Disposed
Assets":
• Department of Health and Social Services Ketchikan
Youth Center returned to the City
• Department of Health and Social Services Nome Youth
Facility in-progress
• Department of Natural Resources sold facility
associated with the Agriculture Revolving Loan Fund
• Department of Military and Veterans Affairs divested
15 Army National Guard facilities with 50 others
planned or in progress
• Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
transferred the Telephone Hill property to the City
• Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
sold two facilities from Kulis Anchorage
• University of Alaska reduced space through property
sales, elimination of leases, and demolition
9:38:26 AM
Senator Wilson asked Mr. Steininger to provide a list of
facilities that had been sold over the last 3 years.
Mr. Steininger replied in the affirmative.
Senator Bishop asked how long Mr. Sakalaskas had been in
his current job.
Mr. Sakalaskas relayed he had been in the position since
the beginning of December 2022.
Senator Bishop assumed that Mr. Sakalaskas was prepared to
conduct a systemwide review to assess efficiency and
effectiveness of department practices.
Mr. Sakalaskas affirmed that such a review was a top
priority.
Senator Bishop asked for the number of unfilled positions
in the agency. He also asked about a building that had
collapsed due to snow load and asked whether precautions
were being taken to avoid such an accident in the future.
Mr. Sakalaskas agreed to provide a vacant position count
for his division. He said that snow loads were being
monitored throughout the division.
9:40:36 AM
Senator Wilson asked about the computer management system
for facilities.
Mr. Sakalaskas relayed that the division was working to go
live with several components and had extended delivery in
certain components. He said that other components of the
system were being developed.
9:42:44 AM
AT EASE
9:44:49 AM
RECONVENED
CHAD HUTCHISON, DIRECTOR OF STATE RELATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF
ALASKA, addressed a presentation entitled "University of
Alaska - Empower Alaska," (copy on file). He referenced
two documents including a priority list of deferred
maintenance prepared by UA Director Pat Pitney (copy on
file), and UA Red Book.
Mr. Hutchison relayed that the presentation would address
the DM priority list for the University.
9:46:33 AM
Mr. Hutchison looked at slide 2, "UA Facilities," and
relayed that the University had traditionally had a large
backlog of deferred maintenance:
A reliable funding source is required to maintain UA's
facilities and infrastructure across the state. Due to
many years of unfunded deferral of critical projects,
there is an increasing risk and evidence of building
closures, and a deferred maintenance/renewal &
repurposing (DM/R&R) backlog that has grown to over
$1.5 billion.
UA Facility Profile
• Serve academic, research, and community service
mission
• Facility type varies from residential housing,
general offices, and classrooms to complex
laboratories
• 394 facilities, spanning 7.9 million square feet,
average age is 35 years
• $4.9 billion inflation-adjusted value and $1.5
billion backlog of deferred maintenance and renewal
projects
UA Facility Stewardship
• Leverage shrinking maintenance operations budgets to
lengthen the service life of buildings beyond the
typical age for major renewal, focusing on renovation
and renewal where viable
• Decrease overall footprint, through efforts to move
from leased to owned facilities and sell or demolish
underutilized facilities
UA Facility Funding
• Due to the lack of sufficient maintenance funding
UA's backlog of projects continues to grow
• There have been numerous unplanned closures causing
significant hardship on student learning and research
activities, as well as the associated lost
productivity of university students,
faculty/researchers, and staff
• Within a couple of years, UA can plan and execute
$35-$50 million a year on deferred maintenance,
renewal and repurposing projects
9:50:21 AM
Co-Chair Hoffman asked about the new power plant at UA.
Mr. Hutchison responded that the power plant was providing
good value for the University.
9:50:49 AM
Mr. Hutchison spoke to slide 3, " Capital Budget DM/R&R
Funding History Unrestricted General Funds & Backlog,"
which showed a bar graph illustrating a direct correlation
between funding and the DM backlog. He noted that the green
line was the UA minimum request. The red line represented
deferred maintenance and the R and R backlog. He observed
that over time, when the state appropriation was lower, the
backlog increased. He noted that the backlog was $1.5
billion.
9:52:31 AM
Mr. Hutchison referenced slide 4, "FY24 Capital Budget
Summary":
o #1 Deferred Maintenance/Renewal & Repurposing
(DM/R&R) - $17.5 million UAA heating, mechanical, and
electrical system improvements
o #1 Facility Modernization - $2 million space
renovation for WWAMI expansion
o Other important requests - $54.8 million DM/R&R, UAA
COH workforce demand and learning commons, UAF student
affairs center, and UAS lab consolidation
Mr. Hutchison referenced the FY 24 Priority Deferred
Maintenance document and discussed the requests highlighted
on slide 4.
9:54:32 AM
Mr. Hutchison showed slide 5, "UA Highest Priority Capital
Projects,":
$17.5 million UAA heating, mechanical and electrical
system improvements - including the Professional
Studies Building (PSB), the Wendy Williamson
Auditorium (WWA), the Social Sciences Building (SSB),
and the Consortium Library to prevent critical
failures and provide energy savings through increased
efficiency. PSB and WWA are connected facilities, and
they share some of the infrastructure scheduled for
replacement as part of this project. All four
facilities were constructed in the early 1970s and the
infrastructure is beyond its useful life with a high
risk of failure.
$2 million UAA COH WAMMI Facility Renovation at Sally
Monserud Hall- renovated to expand the College of
Health's ability to educate more students to fill
high-demand workforce needs. This renovation supports
the WWAMI program expansion.
$6 million grant Alaska Leaders Archive Renovation at
UAA/APU Consortium Library renovation to create an
expanded archive, enhanced academic and conference
space, and a public-facing museum for the Alaska
Leaders documents. The Alaska Leaders' Archive will
preserve and promote the legacy of public service and
leadership in Alaska.
$2.5 million grant potential UAF University Park -
renovated to support an Early Childhood Development
Center, expanding childcare options for employees and
student parents.
Mr. Hutchinson stressed that the last two items were
receipt authority.
Mr. Hutchison considered slide 6, "UA Deferred Maintenance
Projects,":
Due to many years of unfunded deferral of critical
capital projects, there is increasing risk and
evidence of building closures. There have been
numerous unplanned closures causing significant
hardship on student learning and research activities,
as well as the associated lost productivity of
university faculty/researchers, and staff. Priority
projects at the universities include:
$3.6 million UAS's roof repair/replacement - including
Technical Education Center (Juneau), Southeast Alaska
Maritime Training Center (Ketchikan), and Sitka Hangar
(Sitka) which have roofs that are leaking or
experiencing other function issues requiring
replacement or significant repair.
$11.3 million UAF's top projects address student
safety across campus - providing a safe and compliant
campus for everyone is the top priority, yet the aging
campus requires large upgrades to reduce risk and
prevent injury. Safety and regulatory compliance
projects provide updates to building features meant to
protect the occupants and reduce risk to students,
staff, and faculty. Work includes updating ventilation
to ensure sufficient fresh air is supplied to active
laboratories, replacing fire alarm systems, correcting
emergency egress paths, and creating accessible
buildings which include replacing elevators.
9:57:45 AM
Mr. Hutchison displayed slide 7, "UA Facility
Modernization":
UA continues to look for ways to make the best use of
existing space. Several facilities, in need of
complete modernization, have been included for
consideration in the FY24 capital budget.
$8 million UAA Health Workforce Diversity Expansion
and Library Learning Commons - renovate Sally Monserud
Hall for critical health workforce training and
relocates the learning commons into the UAA/APU
Consortium Library.
$12.5 million UAF Lola Tilly - modernized to create
a more welcoming, centralized area for student affairs
and public-facing functions.
$1 million UAS Natural Sciences - relocate
laboratory programs from the Natural Science Research
Lab building to the Anderson Building, bringing all of
our Natural Sciences students, faculty, and staff into
one area for better continuity, economy, and synergy.
9:59:03 AM
Mr. Hutchison showed slide 8, "Appendix."
Mr. Hutchison looked at slide 9, " UA FY24 Capital Budget,"
which showed a table of the Board of Regents request versus
what was included in the Governors proposed budget.
9:59:41 AM
Mr. Hutchison showed slide 10, "FY24 Priority DM/R&R
Projects," and noted that the following slides showed the
same information as the document authored by President
Pitney.
Senator Merrick recalled that the legislature had
appropriated funds for drones the previous year and asked
if the funds had been expended.
Mr. Hutchison replied that the funds were in the process of
being expended. He relayed that exact total spend amounts
would be made available.
10:01:40 AM
Senator Wilson was concerned that some of the backlog
listed was for buildings that were not very old. He asked
for a list of yearly maintenance activities spending.
Mr. Hutchison expressed that Senator Wilson's point was
well taken. He relayed that the Leadership Archive had high
value as it related to the preservation of history. He
noted that the president recognized that there were
maintenance issues in many buildings and had prioritized
the list by the highest need.
10:03:48 AM
Senator Wilson thought it seemed that there was no funding
for ongoing operational issues and costs. He expressed
concern about the way the UA maintenance budget had been
applied over the years.
Mr. Hutchison pointed out that the Leadership Archives
project was paid for with federal funds.
10:04:49 AM
Senator Bishop asked whether the Board of Regents had a
deferred maintenance committee that vetted projects for
prioritization.
Mr. Hutchison relayed that there was a vetting process that
occurred through which the proposed items were discussed.
The ultimate list was compiled by President Pitney.
Senator Bishop referenced slide 3 and asked for the total
outstanding bonded debt.
Mr. Hutchison deferred to Director Kruckenberg.
10:06:15 AM
ALESIA KRUCKENBERG, DIRECTOR OF STRATEGY, PLANNING AND
BUDGET, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA (via teleconference),
estimated that it could be fully paid for but was not sure.
She agreed to provide the information to the committee
later.
10:06:45 AM
Co-Chair Olson asked whether the UA system had too many
facilities and whether some should be sold or liquidated.
Mr. Hutchison relayed that there were some items, some
laboratories, and some research environments that required
specific square footage. He said that divestment from
assets was always under discussion. He discussed enrollment
declines, which had been significant over the previous ten
years.
Co-Chair Olson was concerned about information on slide 2
when Mr. Hutchison indicated that the University was moving
away from leasing and towards ownership of buildings. He
asked about the rocket launch facility in Kodiak, and asked
how many other Universities in the nation were involved in
similar projects.
Mr. Hutchison agreed to provide the information.
Co-Chair Olson thought that the project had not lived up to
its projected potential.
Mr. Hutchison agreed to provide an update on the project.
10:10:29 AM
Senator Kiehl followed up on Co-Chair Olson's comments
about facilities that had been divested compared to
facilities that were purchased.
Mr. Hutchison did not have the information at hand but
agreed to provide the information.
Co-Chair Hoffman discussed housekeeping.
ADJOURNMENT
10:11:54 AM
The meeting was adjourned at 10:11 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| FY2023 Deferred Maintenance Backlog Combined 012323 1.pdf |
SFIN 1/27/2023 9:00:00 AM |
|
| FY2023 Deferred Maintenance Backlog Combined 012323 2.pdf |
SFIN 1/27/2023 9:00:00 AM |
|
| FY2023 Deferred Maintenance Backlog Combined 012323 3.pdf |
SFIN 1/27/2023 9:00:00 AM |
|
| FY2023 Deferred Maintenance Backlog Combined 012323 4.pdf |
SFIN 1/27/2023 9:00:00 AM |
|
| FY2023 Deferred Maintenance Backlog Combined 012323 5.pdf |
SFIN 1/27/2023 9:00:00 AM |
|
| 012723 OMB DM Overview SFIN.pdf |
SFIN 1/27/2023 9:00:00 AM |
|
| 012723 UA FY24 Capital Overiew SFin .pdf |
SFIN 1/27/2023 9:00:00 AM |
|
| 012723 FY24 UA Capital Budget One Pager 12.12.2022.pdf |
SFIN 1/27/2023 9:00:00 AM |