CAPITAL PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD

Transcription

1 CAPITAL PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD Mintes of the Sixth Meeting of the 1999 Calendar Year October 12, 1999 The sixth meeting of the Capital Planning Advisory Board (CPAB) of the 1999 calendar year was held on Tesday, October 12, 1999 at 1:00 PM, in Room 327 of the Capitol. Representative Perry Clark, Chair, called the meeting to order, and the secretary called the roll. Present were: Members: Representative Perry Clark, Chairman; Bill Hintze, Vice-Chairman; Glenn Mitchell (representing James Codell); Bonnie Howell; Cicely Jaracz Lambert; Ken Walker (representing Norma Northern); Nick Schwendeman; Larel Tre; and Senator Ed Worley. LRC Staff: Pat Ingram, Mary Lynn Collins, Lola Williamson Lyle, and Phillip Smith. Chairman Clark annonced that Mr. Sam Newcomb, Taylor Conty Circit Clerk, has been appointed by the Chief Jstice to replace Mr. Jim Nealy, who has resigned from the Board. Lola Lyle was also welcomed as a new Staff Analyst for the Board. Senator Worley's motion to approve the mintes of the September 15 meeting was seconded by Mr. Hintze and passed by voice vote. Chairman Clark next asked CPAB Staff Administrator Pat Ingram to review the Information Items that were inclded in the members' folders. Ms. Ingram noted that several information items had been added, or revised, since the mailot. The first item was a report of the capital plan amendments that have been received to date from varios agencies (Finance and Administration Cabinet, Department of Military Affairs, Natral Resorces and Environmental Protection Cabinet, State Treasrer s Office, and Administrative Office of the Corts). The second item was a response from the Office of Financial Management and Economic Analysis (OFMEA) regarding qestions raised at the last meeting abot the proposed recommendation that wold transfer from state control certain facilities constrcted sing state bond fnds. The third item was an overview of the new Governor s Office for Technology created by Exective Order to consolidate all aspects of information technology into a single, centralized agency. The forth item was a

2 report of fnding being provided for the Department for Facilities Management to ndertake a feasibility stdy for the Cabinet for Health Services psychiatric hospitals. The fifth information item was a report of Dr. Thomas Clark s reqest to the Appropriations and Revene Committee for fnds for the Department for Libraries and Archives to develop a plan for the modernization of Kentcky s records management fnction. The final item was a report of a bdget hearing held at the Concil on Postsecondary Edcation (CPE) regarding the instittional bdget reqests, inclding their capital project proposals. Chairman Clark said the Board wold now resme work on the Statewide Capital Improvements Plan, beginning with frther discssion of the policy recommendations. The first proposed recommendation was entitled Cort Facilities Planning, Fnding, and Oversight. It read as follows: The Board endorses proposals of the Jdicial Branch which wold improve the process of planning, fnding, and oversight of cort facilities projects and rges that the 2000 General Assembly enact legislation, that the Jdicial Branch approve new rles, and that the Administrative Office of the Corts (AOC) develop procedres as needed to implement them. Those proposals, as otlined by Jdicial Branch representatives to the Capital Planning Advisory Board on September 15, 1999, are attached. The Board particlarly rges: 1) That the detailed analysis (i.e., comprehensive assessment) of existing cort space be completed prior to the next six-year capital planning process, and reqests that the Jdicial Branch provide periodic pdates on that analysis to the Board in 2000 and 2001; and 2) That AOC establish stringent gidelines that detail and mandate the procedres and standards to be sed in designing and constrcting new cort facilities. These gidelines shold recognize that different approaches can be sed to address differing needs of rral and rban areas while still providing appropriate cort space for each. (For example, small caseloads in some conties probably do not warrant having a fll array of separate facilities for both the district and circit cort.) The establishment of sch gidelines, with adeqate enforcement athority given to AOC and periodically pdated, shold eliminate the reqirement for conties to contract with the National Center for State Corts (NCSC) to review their projects. 2

3 Mr. Hintze noted that development of this recommendation had taken a long time and asked whether the Jdicial Branch representatives in attendance today Ms. Lambert and Mr. Schwendeman had any comments on it. Relative to the last sentence in item #2, Mr. Schwendeman said it is advantageos to be able to point to a national standard when dealing with the local projects. Ms. Lambert said the phrase shold eliminate the reqirement for conties to contract with the NCSC was too strong becase AOC may want to contine sing the National Center to some extent. Mr. Hintze asked whether Ms. Lambert or Mr. Schwendeman had any alternative wording to sggest. Senator Worley said he thoght it was important to retain the involvement of the NCSC, bt that final athority regarding the projects shold rest with AOC staff. He said NCSC inpt had been particlarly important to the project in which he had been involved. Mr. Schwendeman said they wold like to get the NCSC involved in the projects earlier to confirm the space program before presenting reqests to the General Assembly, and then to have the NCSC review circlation and adjacency isses. The National Center might not be sed to do the space program analysis, rather it wold be sed to confirm work done by others. He said the NCSC charges are fairly minimal compared to total project costs. Chairman Clark sggested that the last sentence of item #2 be deleted. Mr. Hintze made a motion that the proposed recommendation, as amended, be approved; the motion was seconded by Senator Worley and approved by voice vote. Mr. Tre said he voted no becase he believes conties shold not be reqired to contract with the National Center. The next policy recommendation, entitled Enhance the Role and Athority of the Department for Facilities Management, was a revision of the recommendation discssed at the last meeting. The revised version read as follows: That the Exective Branch work to identify a more pro-active role and increased athority for the Finance and Administration Cabinet / Department for Facilities Management with regard to administration of the state s overall physical plant and that periodic reports be provided to the Board on the stats of this effort. The following items shold be specifically addressed: Determination of which state-owned bildings shold be managed and administered by the Department (rather than individal agencies), and how the transfer of that responsibility to the Department can be implemented; Development of categories and definitions for se by state agencies in evalating and reporting the condition of their facilities, and monitoring, 3

4 throgh the se of selective field adits, agency compliance with the se of these categories; Development of a database for se by state agencies to record and track all maintenance projects completed for each state-owned facility; and Establishment of standard and consistent policies to be sed by agencies managing state-owned facilities. The Board encorages that this effort commence immediately so that those changes which can be made withot stattory changes or additional fnding can be implemented as soon as possible, and so that any necessary stattory and/or fnding changes which may be reqired can be considered for recommendation by the Board for the 2002 General Assembly and the bdget process. The Board recognizes that efforts are already nderway relative to the transfer of office bildings crrently administered by the Cabinet for Families and Children to the Department for Facilities Management and rges that this process contine and that any additional fnding needed by the Department in conjnction with this transfer be provided in the bdget. Ms. Howell said the proposed recommendation provides the Finance and Administration Cabinet with gidelines needed to proceed in this effort; her motion that the recommendation be adopted was seconded by Mr. Hintze and approved by voice vote. The third policy recommendation, entitled Consider Transferring Responsibility for Senior Citizens and Child Day Care Centers from the State, was a revision based on discssion at the last meeting. The revised version read as follows: That the Governor and General Assembly give serios consideration and review to proposals by the Cabinet for Health Services (CHS) and the Cabinet for Families and Children (CFC) to transfer the senior citizens and child day care centers, constrcted with fnding from the Hman Services Constrction Pool, to the local entities operating those facilities. Ms. Ingram noted that the letter from OFMEA provided as an Information Item addressed this recommendation. Mr. Tre s motion to adopt the recommendation was seconded by Senator Worley and approved. The next proposed recommendation was entitled Revision of Information Technology Capital System Definition and Threshold. Ms. Ingram distribted a 4

5 replacement for the proposed recommendation in the members folders. Ms. Ingram said this proposed recommendation was a revision from the last meeting, to more specifically address the proposed stattory langage and definition of a system. It read as follows: That the 2000 General Assembly amend KRS to raise the threshold for a system to be considered a capital project from $400,000 to $1.0 million and to define information technology system to mean any initial prchase or major pgrade of hardware, software, implementation and development services, or digital data prodcts, or any combination of these items, as specified in an administrative reglation to be promlgated by the Governor s Office for Technology, for a specific bsiness prpose, and; That the 2000 General Assembly amend KRS 7A.010 to inclde information technology (IT) systems defined as any initial prchase or major pgrade of hardware, software, implementation and development services, or digital data prodcts, or any combination of these items, as specified in the administrative reglation promlgated prsant to KRS , and to establish a cost threshold of $1.0 million for a system to be considered a capital project for capital planning prposes. Mr. Hintze asked abot sing the term implementation and development services instead of conslting and professional services and said he liked the addition of the langage referencing any initial prchase or major pgrade. Chairman Clark introdced Dog Robinson, Exective Director for the Office of Policy and Cstomer Relations in the Governor s Office for Technology, to respond to the qestion. Mr. Robinson said referencing implementation and development services was intended to eliminate costs involved in activities prior to implementation of a project. Ms. Howell said this addressed a concern she had expressed at the last meeting. Mr. Walker asked if the implementation and development expenses were intended to inclde agency staff costs. Mr. Robinson said those costs are reflected in the Impact on Operating Bdget section of the capital bdget reqest form, not in the project cost. In response to Mr. Mitchell s qestion, Mr. Hintze said this change wold not be in effect for the pcoming bdget process. Mr. Robinson said many agencies already inclde all of these costs in their capital projects thogh they are not reqired by the crrent definition. Senator Worley s motion to approve the recommendation was seconded by Mr. Hintze and passed by voice vote. The final policy recommendation, entitled, Alternatives for Addressing the Need for Additional State Prison Constrction, was another revision based on discssion at the last meeting. It read as follows: 5

6 That the Exective, Legislative, and Jdicial Branches contine to identify and tilize alternatives to incarceration and jvenile detention that are consistent with pblic safety, in order to redce the need for the constrction of additional prison and jvenile detention facilities; and That the three branches jointly ndertake a stdy, inclding the se of otside consltants, to thoroghly examine reasons for the state s actal and projected prison poplation increases and recommend ways to redce the projected growth rate. The Board notes that the state will need to fnd approximately $1.2 billion in prison constrction by the year 2014 in order to accommodate a projected deficit of over 16,400 prison beds. Mr. Tre asked that figres on operating costs for the additional beds be inclded in the recommendation. Senator Worley made a motion for approval of this recommendation as amended to inclde the additional figres. Mr. Mitchell seconded the motion, and it was approved by voice vote. Chairman Clark said the Board wold now begin its consideration of the project recommendations. Ms. Ingram said the two proposed recommendations follow the format sed in the last planning process, with one for projects proposed to be financed from state fnds and one for projects proposed to be financed from other than state fnds. Ms. Ingram said the state-fnded projects recommendation has three sections. The first section states that maintenance of existing state facilities shold be the highest priority in the capital bdget throgh fnding of varios pools (e.g., agency maintenance pools, stattory pools, and postsecondary edcation s proposed capital renewal and replacement pool). The second section of the proposed recommendation calls for varios other specific capital constrction and eqipment projects to be considered as the highest priorities after maintenance; that list of projects is to be determined by the Board today. The third section of the recommendation spports fnding for programs that provide assistance to non-state entities throgh grants or loans; the recommendation is not for specific fnding levels bt for reathorization of nexpended appropriations and/ or new athorization of fnds for based on the tilization of amonts previosly provided and docmented demands for ftre fnding. Mr. Tre asked if the postsecondary edcation capital renewal pool was only for projects nder $400,000. Mr. Walker said the CPE is proposing that the Capital Renewal Trst Fnd be sed for maintenance projects, capital renewal projects, infrastrctre projects, and bilding system replacement projects; it wold leave open the possibility that a project cold cost over $400,000, bt no project wold be fnded nless it was on the specific listing of eligible projects. 6

7 Senator Worley asked whether the niversity presidents had commented on the CPE staff recommended $2 for $1 (instittional to state fnds) match at yesterday s bdget hearing at the CPE. Mr. Walker said he did not recall exactly what comments had been made. He said maintenance and capital renewal is a significant isse for the instittions, and the $1 for $1 match reqired to access the Deferred Maintenance and Government Mandates Pool this biennim has worked well. The Concil is proposing a $30,000,000 pool of state fnds for ; a $2 for $1 match wold generate $90 million for projects, and a $1 for $1 match wold fnd $60 million of projects. Mr. Walker said redcing the match redces the nmber of projects that can be completed. Senator Worley said he did not believe the Board shold recommend a specific matching reqirement. He then made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Walker, to endorse the CPE s proposed criteria for allocating the fnds (condition of facilities, instittional effort toward fnding operations and maintenance of plant, and instittional implementation of a facilities maintenance standard) and to state that instittional matching fnds shold be reqired in order to access the state fnds in the pool. Noting that the Cort Facility Use Allowance Contingency Fnd was not inclded in the list of pools in the first section of this recommendation, Mr. Hintze said he thoght this was appropriate becase that fnd is sed for cost overrns on athorized projects rather than for maintenance projects. Ms. Ingram said a decision needed to be made on whether to inclde in the second section of the recommendation two new assistance programs proposed in the capital plans the Department for Local Government s Water Resorces Incentive Program and the Department for Libraries and Archives Pblic Library Facilities Program. Mr. Hintze said he wold not spport inclsion of the library program at this time becase it is not an established program, and they have an established priority in the archival area which needs to be the focs. In response to Mr. Tre s qestion abot state assistance for libraries, Mr. Hintze said there is a minimal grant program and a program which provides fnding on a per capita basis, bt there is not a bond-fnded capital constrction program. This wold be a change in policy. Senator Worley said the Water Resorces Incentive Program is different becase of the state s emphasis on the regionalization of infrastrctre for both sewer and water. This program wold allow the state to work with commnities toward this goal and wold be very beneficial to rral Kentcky. Mr. Hintze said the state has already invested significant resorces in a Water Resorces Development Plan. He added that CPAB has consistently pshed for coordination and cooperation across jrisdictional lines and this proposal is consistent 7

8 with that emphasis. Mr. Hintze said this is a qantm leap beyond the Kentcky Infrastrctre Athority water and sewer programs which basically are reflections of local applications and federal fnd availability; this is state sponsored and regional in its otlook. Senator Worley said local governments crrently mst develop plans which involve regionalization and obtain Division of Water approval bt no fnding is available for that prpose. Ms. Howell sggested that the Board endorse the concept being proposed bt not the specific program which was sbmitted by the Department for Local Government. Her motion was seconded by Senator Worley and approved. Chairman Clark asked staff to distribte a proposed list of state-fnded projects which the Board may wish to consider recommending; it is based on projects appearing on at least three of the lists sbmitted by the members. Chairman Clark said in the members folders is a smmary of all of the projects identified on their lists. Ms. Ingram stated that in some instances the term project is sed to refer to mltiple individal projects that were groped together in the Chief Information Officer s recommendations (e.g., Radio Systems, Unified Criminal Jstice System, and Personnel System). Chairman Clark opened the floor for discssion of the proposed recommendation. Mr. Tre said he did not inclde new prisons on his list becase he feels that, as Jdge White has discssed in previos meetings, as long as prisons are being constrcted, the state will not address the root cases of the problem. Mr. Hintze said the Board risks being irresponsible if it does not address the needs given poplation projections based on crrent laws and policies, while at the same time rging the se of alternatives where they are appropriate. He said the projections are being reviewed and may change based on recent trends. Mr. Tre said he also felt the Eastern State Hospital (ESH) and Western State Hospital (WSH) projects shold not be recommended ntil more information is available abot ftre plans for the facilities. Mr. Hintze said he, too, wold hesitate to endorse these specific projects ntil more is known abot the ftre viability of the facilities. In response to Ms. Howell s concern abot the length of time it wold take to do the stdy, Mr. Hintze said emergency needs wold be addressed if they arise in the meantime. Mr. Tre s proposal that the ESH and WSH projects be deleted from the list and wording be added indicating the Board s relctance to recommend sch projects ntil completion of the Cabinet s stdy was accepted. Mr. Tre said he wold like for the Board to spend some time looking at programs that address qality of life isses, sch as the PACE (Prchase of Agricltral Conservation Easements) program. 8

9 Mr. Walker said while the proposed research bildings at the University of Kentcky and the University of Loisville were sbmitted with 100% fnding from state sorces, the CPE has contacted both abot the availability of other revenes to partially fnd the projects. His reqest that a notation abot this possible availability of other fnds be added to the recommendation was accepted. Mr. Hintze said this is not a comprehensive list of everything the Board wold like to have addressed, bt it still has a large price tag. He noted that the process had been somewhat complicated by others operating nder calendars that ran parallel to the Board s, bt the Board tried to obtain as mch inpt as possible and the recommendations were based on a lot of information. His motion to approve the recommendation for projects to be financed from state fnds, as modified, was seconded by Senator Worley and passed by voice vote. Ms. Ingram said the last recommendation addresses projects proposed to be financed from other than state fnds. She smmarized the proposed recommendation as follows: The Board recommends that the bdget athorize all projects proposed by state agencies and niversities to be financed 100% from Federal Fnds, Restricted Fnds, Other Fnds, or Road Fnds, with the following exceptions: Projects which will reqire the expenditre of significant additional state fnds for their operation and maintenance, Projects which will commit the state to fnd significant costs to complete the project after the available Federal Fnds/Restricted Fnds/Other Fnds/Road Fnds have been expended, Restricted Fnds or Road Fnds shold not be athorized for projects to sch an extent that agency programs or operations also fnded by that sorce wold be jeopardized, The top priority for the se of Restricted Fnds of the higher edcation instittions shold be projects to address life/safety and deferred maintenance needs for which state fnds are not provided, and A high priority for the se of Road Fnds shold be Transportation Cabinet projects to address life/safety and deferred maintenance needs. Ms. Ingram said two specific projects - Kentcky Information Highway (KIH) Expansion Upgrade and reathorization of the Transportation Cabinet Office Bilding - 9

10 are identified in the recommendation, becase some members inclded them on their lists of recommended projects. Ms. Ingram next directed the Boards attention to another section entitled Other Fnds. Ms. Ingram said this section, which is a blanket endorsement of the projects proposed to be financed from Other Fnds, wold not inclde cort projects. This is becase Other Fnds, as sed for cort projects are local bonds spported by statefnded se allowance payments. The Board considered cort projects as part of the statefnded projects recommendation. Ms. Howell s motion for approval of the recommendation on capital priorities proposed to be financed from other than state fnds was seconded by Mr. Hintze and passed. Chairman Clark annonced that the complete Statewide Capital Improvements Plan wold need to be approved at the next meeting in order to meet the stattory deadline of November 1. The next meeting was schedled for Tesday, October 26 at 1:00 PM. Senator Worley s motion to adjorn was seconded by Ms. Howell, and the meeting was adjorned at 2:50 PM. 10