SENATE BILL REPORT

SB 5344

As Reported By Senate Committee On:

Ways & Means, April 2, 2001

Title:  An act relating to legislative building preservation and renovation.

Brief Description:  Providing funds for the state legislative building renovation.

Sponsors:  Senators Spanel, Fairley, Zarelli and Fraser; by request of Governor Locke.

Brief History:

Committee Activity:  Ways & Means:  4/2/01 [DPS].

SENATE COMMITTEE ON WAYS & MEANS

Majority Report:  That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5344 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass.

Signed by Senators Brown, Chair; Constantine, Vice Chair; Fairley, Vice Chair; Fraser, Hewitt, Honeyford, Kline, Kohl‑Welles, Long, Parlette, Rasmussen, Regala, Roach, Rossi, Sheahan, B. Sheldon, Snyder, Spanel, Thibaudeau, Winsley and Zarelli.

Staff:  Michael Groesch (7434)                                     

Background:  The Washington State Legislative Building was constructed between 1924 through 1927.  In the intervening 75 years, the use of the building has changed as the nature of legislative work has adjusted to the changing demands of society and the years of wear have taxed the facilities systems.

A predesign study for the renovation of the building was authorized in 1997 and submitted to the Legislature in January 1999.  The study recommended major system upgrades including improvement or replacement of electrical systems, drinking water and sewer systems, heating and air conditioning, and fire protection and security systems.  It was also determined that the exterior of the building was in need of repairs to prevent further water intrusion through roofs and walls.  Decorative stone work was found to be inadequately secured and in need of repair to prevent eroding and possible collapse.

It was also found that major earthquakes in 1949 and 1965 had severely stressed the building, but that repairs and improvements following those events had strengthened and stabilized the lower portion of the structure.  Further work was recommended in the drum, dome and cupola of the building.  These studies and recommendations were validated by the 2001 Nisqually earthquake.  Major structural damaged was limited and the major damage that occurred was largely contained within the drum and dome of the building.  Non-structural cladding was loosened, the dome shifted, and in some cases interior plaster and non-structural walls were broken.

In addition to the systems and structural improvements identified, the predesign highlighted the inadequacy of space within the building to handle the increased use by legislators, staff and the public.  The recommendation of the predesign was to provide additional space for legislative and public use by constructing an underground addition to the south of the building.

In 1999, House Concurrent Resolution 4410 created the Commission on Legislative Building Preservation and Renovation to review the predesign study and identify a plan and resources for the renovation of the Legislative Building.  The commission submitted its report to the Legislature in the 2000 legislative session and recommended a $105.5 million rehabilitation plan that included the construction of a capitol addition for surge space and space for growth.

The commission report included a recommended financing plan based on bond financing through the use of reimbursable general obligation bonds.  The bond repayments are from the timber revenues associated with the Capitol Building Trust.  The proposed financing package also includes expected appropriations from the Thurston County Capital Facilities Account which receives revenues from rent charged by the Department of General Administration on tenant agencies in state buildings.

The 2000 Legislature appropriated $3 million for the initial phase of the project and required a space use planning study as the basis for the planning and development of relocation space for the capitol.  The Department of General Administration was directed to complete a report to the Legislature on the recommendations of the study.  The Legislature also directed the State Capitol Committee, in conjunction with the Legislative Building Renovation Oversight Committee, to establish criteria and guidelines to guide the space use planning effort.  Revisions to the original commission report included: placement of new mechanical, plumbing and electrical systems; improvements to exiting, and plans for relocations and space use priorities.  Rehabilitation plan alternatives to construction of the capitol addition also were developed for consideration by the Legislature.

All the recommendations from the 2000 study projected that the construction phase of the renovation would begin in the summer of 2002 and the most optimistic date for completion of construction would be spring of 2005.

Summary of Substitute Bill:  The State Finance Committee is authorized to issue $82,510,000 of state general obligation bonds to finance the Legislative Building renovation and associated costs.  The bonds are exempt from the statutory debt limit to the extent that the bonds= payments are paid from the capitol building trust account.  The approved rehabilitation plan is described, a timeline for work is set forth, and the State Capitol Committee is required to develop further recommendations.

An appropriation of $81,681,000 is made from the proceeds of the bond sales.

Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill:  The bond authorization and appropriation are revised.  The rehabilitation project is defined, relocation costs included in the project costs, and earthquake repairs added to allowable project expenses.

The State Capitol Committee, in consultation with the Legislative Building Renovation Oversight Committee, must develop alternatives for space use and other issues.

Appropriation:  $81,681,000.

Fiscal Note:  Not requested.

Effective Date:  The bill contains an emergency clause and takes effect immediately.

Testimony For:  The bill will preserve the Legislative Building and upgrade system.  It will also provide for a safer, more functional building.  The bill also accelerates the renovation schedule and integrates earthquake repairs in a single project.

Testimony Against:  None.

Testified:  Patricia McLain, Lenore Miller, Department of General Administration.