Committee asks BGS to clarify wording after Senate adds “state leased” buildings to inventory bill

A committee member of the Successful Actions and Institutions Committee said on May 27 that Senate Judiciary voted S.109 out of committee with language that incorporates the committee’s courthouse provision and includes inventory and notification provisions, and that Senate amendments now add “state leased” buildings and change reporting language about land.

The change expands the inventory language the committee had drafted to include “state leased buildings and land,” but a committee member raised concern that the capitalization and wording are ambiguous — they could be read to mean state-owned buildings that are leased out rather than leased space the state occupies. “Because ‘State’ is capitalized, does that mean that we own the building and we are leasing it out?” the committee member asked. Jean, a committee member, said the statute should read “space leased by the state” to avoid confusion.

The amendment adopted on the Senate floor also narrows the test agencies must use when reporting land they no longer need. Under the version the committee had forwarded, each agency would indicate whether “any land is unnecessary for state purposes.” The Senate-floor amendment changes that to whether any land is “unnecessary for the statutory purpose of the agency,” a narrower, agency-by-agency standard that members said could limit transfers between agencies.

A committee member read language describing the inventory format that agencies would send to the commissioner of Buildings and General Services (BGS). Heads of agencies would report square footage available for use, square footage not in use, square footage used for storage, unfinished square footage, cost per square foot for rent and for operation and maintenance, and the source of funds for rent and operations, including act and section numbers. “Each head of each agency shall additionally indicate in its inventory whether any building is vacant, and whether any land is unnecessary for the statutory purpose of the Agency,” the member read.

Members discussed how the narrower test could affect projects that reassign property across agencies. One member asked whether property that is vacant for one agency’s statutory purpose (for example, a parcel held by an agency of human services) could nonetheless be needed by another agency (for example, natural resources or transportation). “If AOT has property and we are trying to build a facility on AOT property, is it gonna limit our ability to do that?” a committee member asked. Other members responded that the requirement is a reporting obligation and would not in itself prohibit transfers but expressed concern the narrower wording could reduce the inventory’s usefulness for cross-agency planning.

The committee did not take a formal vote; members agreed to wait until the Senate acts and the bill is transmitted to the committee before deciding whether to concur, concur with a further proposed amendment, or ask for a conference committee. The committee directed staff to ask BGS’s commissioner for clarification about the intended meaning of “state leased” (specifically, whether the phrase is intended to refer to buildings the state owns and leases out or to space the state leases from private owners) and to report back when the amended bill arrives.

The item remains pending on the Senate calendar; the committee said it will revisit the measure when the Senate acts and the language is sent to the committee for formal action.