Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Hospital Capital Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Appropriations subcommittee debates $300M–$330M state hospital project, considers moving construction oversight to OMB
Summary
Committee members debated whether the proposed state hospital — budgeted between $300 million and $330 million — should remain in the Human Services budget or be moved to the Office of Management and Budget for construction management; members also discussed alternate bid items and long-term bed needs.
Senators in the Appropriations — Human Resources Division spent a lengthy portion of the meeting debating the State Hospital capital project, its scope and price tag and whether construction oversight should be managed in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) rather than within the Department of Human Services (DHHS).
Committee members summarized the competing price points: the design team initially estimated about $330 million; the governor recommended a $300 million budget and the House left it at $330 million. Chairman Deaver told senators he did not believe the project could be completed for less than $300 million without costly redesigns or construction delays.
Senators raised several project-level questions: what items were deducted from the base bid to reduce costs (example: kitchen and laundry removal, a service road), whether removing 24 beds (a reported $8.8 million deduction) or adding 24 beds in Grand Forks (about $16 million) was wise, and whether postponing additions would make later work more expensive. "If we attempt to [build it for less than $300 million] it would require a redesign construction delays that would make a $285 million hospital something above $300 million," the chairman said.
Lawmakers discussed shifting construction management responsibility to OMB, which has staff experienced in large capital projects, while DHHS would remain the program owner responsible for clinical services and hospital operations. Several senators said moving the construction oversight to OMB would be appropriate; others wanted to keep the steering-committee language in the bill to preserve DHHS input.
Some senators urged the committee to focus instead on where the state lacks beds and services (forensic beds, secure adolescent psychiatric placements, nursing-home psychiatric support), arguing that additional community-based capacity might reduce demand for a large state hospital expansion. Senator Mather said the most pressing gaps were beds for very ill people needing 24-hour supervision and adolescent psychiatric residential options.
The subcommittee did not adopt a final dollar figure. Members agreed to remove the $330 million item from the DHHS funding long sheet for the Senate draft so leaders and OMB can weigh the project while the House position remains at $330 million. Senators said the decision could be revisited in conference committee and noted a steering committee should remain part of the conversation even if OMB takes construction management.
Ending: The hospital project remains unresolved; senators asked staff to show the long-sheet impact with and without the project and to coordinate further with OMB and the leaders who will negotiate the final capital package.
