Subcommittee F vets House Bill 5 major-repair priorities; Department asks to raise project threshold and streamline permitting

The Montana LegislatureSubcommittee F met in Helena and continued review of House Bill 5, the departmentof administrationmajor repair and capital priorities package, hearing detailed presentations on dozens of projects and a request to change statutory reporting thresholds.

Department staff told the committee the long-range program and project lists are prepared to comply with statute and cited the statute number the department used in assembling the packet. "This is our interpretation of statute... you'll see the reference there in 17 7 2 0 3," a Department of Administration staff member told the panel. Randy Stevens, planning manager, State Unit Division, Department of Administration, then walked the committee through the prioritized major-repair requests.

Why it matters: House Bill 5 funds repairs and replacement work across state-owned buildings. Subcommittee direction will shape which projects move forward this session, affect near-term bids and scheduling, and determine how the state manages deferred maintenance on campuses, veterans homes, prisons, care facilities and the capital complex.

Department request and priorities The Department asked the subcommittee to raise the statutory reporting threshold the department uses to identify single projects. "...in House Bill 5, this session, we're asking that limit to be raised to 300," a Department of Administration staff member said during the presentation (units not specified in the transcript). The staff explained raising the threshold keeps smaller projects out of the "major repair" list and focuses the program on the largest needs.

Committee members heard a long list of prioritized items the department identified as major repairs. Top examples the department highlighted include the completion of fire suppression work in Montana Hall at Montana State University, door access controls and additional security cameras at the Lewistown nursing care facility, mechanical and ventilation upgrades at Missoula Westincluding accessible restrooms, and fire-alarm or suppression upgrades at multiple university and corrections facilities.

Several members questioned the scope, timing and cost of individual requests. Representative Vinton asked for square footage on an historic pathway tied to an entry plaza project so he could compare probable bid estimates. Representative Tuss pressed to understand why some appropriations from the last session had not yet been spent; Department staff said the Warm Springs work (identified as MR16) remains in design and that the department had prioritized mandated compliance and water-line work ahead of other repairs. The transcript notes a prior appropriation of $2,900,000 for MR16; staff said work is planned but not yet completed.

Permitting and potential statutory changes Members raised permit timing and fees as a recurring problem for state projects. Staff described wide variation in local plan-review timelines and fees: for five similar academic buildings in different jurisdictions, one permit took three months, another five months, and combined permit costs exceeded $450 (transcript citation). The Department told the committee it supports Senate Bill 33, which would allow state projects to work directly with state building-code authorities (Department of Labor and Industry) rather than seeking separate local jurisdiction approvals; staff said they expect the change to produce more predictable fees and faster permitting.

Other project-level notes - The department showed a facility condition estimate of roughly 11,000,000 square feet of state facilities and said a realistic cost-per-square-foot estimate for condition assessments is in the 2025 range per square foot (transcript: "20 to 25' a square foot"). - McCall Hall at Montana State University was recommended for removal; an abatement estimate was presented in the packet and cited in the hearing (transcript: "about $250"; units not specified in the transcript). - Several projects were described as continuations of prior-session appropriations where consultants are in place and additional phases remain in design or procurement.

Committee next steps and direction The subcommittee recessed after questioning but indicated it will make a recommendation to the full committee. "We will make a recommendation to the full committee. We'll amend the bill and send it up to the full committee," Chair Fitzpatrick said during the hearing process. No formal roll-call votes on House Bill 5 were recorded in the transcript excerpt.

Quotes and attributions in this article come only from speakers identified during the meeting report and from committee staff testimony recorded in the transcript.