Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Physical Security topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BGS warns current $250,000 annual security appropriation falls short; seeks added FY27 funds
Summary
Buildings & General Services told the committee that rising costs and an expanding list of security upgrades mean the typical $250,000 annual appropriation is insufficient. BGS requested additional FY27 funding (administration proposed $250,000 bonded plus $225,000 cash) and warned that lacking capital would shift costs to operating 'fee for space' budgets.
Deputy Commissioner (identified in the transcript as Elite Casiki) told the House Corrections & Institutions Committee that Buildings & General Services is seeing growing demand and higher costs for physical security upgrades across state buildings and is proposing additional capital funding so these costs are not shifted into operating budgets.
"The reason ... for increased funding to physical security enhancements is really because we have a demonstrated increased need for security enhancements as well as the cost of those enhancements," the deputy commissioner said, citing common projects such as badge readers, cameras and fortified glass. She said BGS has overspent its typical annual capital appropriation of $250,000 in recent years and has been shifting some costs to fee‑for‑space operating accounts.
Officials laid out that the administration proposed adding $225,000 in cash to the existing program and including $250,000 in bonded funds for FY27; staff noted that a January spreadsheet showed a combined total (bonded plus cash across two years) of roughly $725,000 in the pipeline, and that anticipated priority projects total roughly $455,000. BGS gave examples — camera upgrades at remote welcome centers (~$75,000) and other site upgrades — and said some projects are urgent because they address employee safety in spaces without physical presence.
Committee members asked how BGS would prioritize if they received less than requested; BGS said it would triage projects by risk, use remaining funds for the highest priorities, and in some cases continue to shift costs to fee‑for‑space. The agency also said it is reviewing recent fee‑for‑space charges to identify costs that might properly be reclassified to capital funds.
Next step: Committee will consider BGS follow‑up memos and may retain funding language in the capital markup; BGS will continue to refine a list of priority security projects and updated cost estimates.
