Architects and state officials urge earlier planning, longer horizons to speed Montana capital projects (House Bill 5)

The American Institute of Architects (AIA) Montana and the state Architecture & Engineering Division told Appropriations Subcommittee F that earlier involvement of design teams and a longer project horizon would improve outcomes, reduce late-stage cost changes and help the state meet energy and longevity goals for capital projects included in House Bill 5.

Nicholas Smith, AIA Montana president, described the group as representing about "450 architect members" across the state and said architects want to deliver "the best buildings for the public possible." Tony Houts, an architect who works on state projects, urged a longer planning window: "If we can see 4 years instead of 18 months, it's helpful," he said, arguing that a predictable pipeline gives designers and the construction market time to plan and bid projects more efficiently.

Russ Katherman, chief of the Department of Administration's Architecture and Engineering Division, explained current constraints: state statute requires agencies to route hiring through the Department of Administration and "we don't hire firms unless there's an appropriation." He told the committee predesign and programming work often must be done after appropriation and that developing programmatic needs with agencies can take "6 to 9 months." Katherman also said state projects have an energy-performance requirement: "we have to beat the energy code by better than 20% on our projects."

Committee members pressed practical questions. Representative Rosenwag asked whether architects manage state projects after appropriation; Katherman clarified that appropriations go to agencies, and that State A&E and agency building committees work with architects to define scope and user needs. Senators and representatives asked about procurement, whether the state can adapt out-of-state plans to shorten delivery time, and whether standardization of common building types could shorten timelines and lower cost. The panel discussed corrections projects specifically; members raised public-safety concerns tied to long delivery times for prison capacity expansion.

Architects recommended stronger early-stage goal setting (functionality, longevity, operating costs and aesthetics where appropriate) and better alignment between agencies, the Department of Administration and the Legislature so projects match legislative intent. The Department of Administration told the committee it would present a detailed House Bill 5 overview at the next hearing and follow up on recommended process improvements.