Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: My jacket, the little jacket.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: You got a hot punch?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: No. I just It's hot.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: It's hot. We have a bill here that deals with IDs for folks who are incarcerated again. We're live. There's a process there.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Are we live? We're live. We'll talk about that after.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So welcome to the Success Corrections and Institutions Committee. It's our first meeting back with a brand new session, and it is January. Think next Tuesday, January 6 is our 01:00 meeting. And we will be doing a lot more updates this afternoon, both with BGS as well as Department of Corrections with the new commissioner for that. So we have the Commissioner BGS with us, Wanda Manoli, and you've brought some folks with you. And I'm gonna turn it over to you. I'd like a really broad conversation on different things. We have a lot of moving pieces on our capital bill. And just to remind the committee, we do a two year capital bill. So last year when we left, we had an FY '26 and FY '27 budget. What we're going to be doing this year is what's called budget adjustment, which is a mid course correction, sort of. We know what we've put in for projects and dollar amounts for the FY 'twenty six. We're halfway through the FY 'twenty six budget year. We've bought projects in dollar amounts for FY '27. So right now, what we have before us is what we passed in May. When the governor gives his budget address towards the January, he will make probably, the governor will probably make some adjustments in those projects and dollar amounts, possibly for the FY '26, but most likely for the '27 budget. So at this point, commissioners, anyone from the administration is not at liberty to talk about any proposed changes to the capital budget until the governor proposes his budget. So right now, the framework that we're working in is what we passed in May. That makes sense to folks?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: And any potential policy that may go with that that language as well. So

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I should have probably warned the committee to have your capital bill in front of you for the spreadsheet. I apologize. I'm a little bit behind the eyeball because it's been, like, a busy Christmas season for me. And I haven't arrived at the state out there. So commissioner, I'm going to turn it over to you. I know we have some high profile projects, two of them in particular. The juvenile center for justice involved juveniles, which we had hoped to build a facility on state owned property for gems. That has not changed. And then we were hoping to move forward with some property in Essex to start our first step in the women's facility. And that has not changed. So those are the first two big ones and then other items. Commissioner, welcome.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: So thank you, madam chair and honorable members of the committee. I'm Wanda Manoli, commissioner of buildings and general services. Happy New Year. I will tell you, I feel like we just left, but that's okay. So it is an honor to be here with you today. I just want to quickly introduce my team because you will see them at different times. Emily Kosinski is my deputy commissioner, and she's doing a phenomenal job. And I'm so honored to have her working with me beside me. I have Joe Age. I know he's new to some of you. Joe is the director of our design and construction team. All of you know Joe. Joe's been with BGS over thirty years or close?

[Joe Aja, Director of Design & Construction, BGS]: Forty now.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Over forty years. Is one of our investments working through and and he he does a phenomenal job and I just I have really enjoyed my journey with Joe back in this

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: this What? Yes,

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: we are director. I also have Tabrina. Tabrina is our project Tabrina is I you know, kudos to Tabrina. She is the project manager, architect, lead for the AHS project, specifically the youth facility and the women's correctional facility. And I'm going to say this, she's never said it. She probably feels a little bit like a yo yo. It's gone up and down, up and down, and up and down. But she's been supporting AHS and VGS on these projects It has brought a lot of value and constant messaging and thought process to this. And Cole Barney, you've had the opportunity to meet last year. Cole is really my legislative affairs, special projects. Cole does everything, he does my Cole does a lot for us. And I had an opportunity, I think I shared with you, but when I was the commissioner of DMV, Cole joined my team and then I think I gave my notice within a month. Was it isn't that just so mean? I actually was fortunate.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I'm with you.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Yes. Because Cole has a wonderful background in political science. This is what a great way to learn, even with your degree, what it's like to be in the environment and to read

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: political science. So it's in the books.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: So I am here to do a very brief overview on the Women's Reentry and Correctional Facility and the Youth Stabilization Treatment Facility. Before we get into that, I just comment on a couple of things, if I can, Madam Chair. I think that, you know, there and if we can spend some time, even if it's just you and I and and maybe the team just sort of setting the course for the next couple of weeks on what are some things we could if you're going to utilize BGS during the transition to the new capital bill proposal or the amendment. I think there are some items we could come in and and talk about. And and so we could do that on this the side. We also you also have New person. New committee lead person. And just figuring out the relationship with Cole, and I apologize. I don't know your name.

[Unidentified committee member]: Tate. Tate.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Tate. And so we're available to to do that after if you'd like or if there's a break.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Time on Thursday or Friday this week?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: I will make time for you. How's that?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Some openings on Thursday. I don't know

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: if we'll be so maybe if it maybe when you take a break, if we could touch on a couple of those items and then you could bring them back to your committee or or whatever. One is one that I think would be I'll just plant a seed in Springfield. So because we've been I don't think we're ready. We might be ready. The other thing is we could

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: be correctional facility in the property?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Yes. And I just wanna talk to you about I'm sort of and we could talk about it. I'm not sure. I'm looking at Joe. The other thing is one of the things we always do for your committee is we come in and we take the the capital bill last year and the projects that we oversee, and we start to give you an update on those. I don't think and that update includes the Joe does and his team do great PowerPoints, and it gives you the bullets, and it gives you the chart on the cash. We're just not done that yet, but that we might be able to figure out some of them we could do. And so done. So When we have some done, you know, where we just do the overview. Okay. So, that, we have the so let's get going. And if you can go to the next slide are you controlling, girl? Thank you. So, I think this is a summary, but the acts of 24 resolves number one sixty two, section 30 authorized the commissioner to purchase land and to design a correctional facility. The original the the full language talks about contingent authority to purchase land in the event that the Commissioner of Buildings and General Services and Consulting with Corrections is unable to identify appropriately state owned site locations for the replacement reentry and correctional facility. And you also put some criteria in there, in addition to the criteria of correctional. You said it needed to be near support services, programming, work opportunities needed to facilitate successful reentry into the community. I'm reading this to you. In a reasonable proximity that's key. In a reasonable proximity to the existing workforce to the to facilitate retention and continuity of of experienced staff and near existing and potential future public transit services. So as you know, we worked very, very closely with the community of Essex. And and I will tell you, and what we were working on them with was the request to change the zoning for two sites that were in Essex. So the state owned property in Essex met that criteria. It was the closest property that really met that criteria.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: But part of our criteria, not listed here, we need to look at state owned property first And then Transition if to purchasing property if we had to. But the focus to begin with was to look at state owned property across the state.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Well, we did using that criteria, which really sort of kept it in the Chittenden County area. Okay. So we worked, and I just want for all of you to know, working with the Essex planning team, were While we ended up not getting our zoning change, I just want to say that they very receptive. They asked really good questions. We responded to them. The community was good to work with. At the end of the day, in October 25, the Essex Planning Commission denied our state's request. What is important to understand is that within Essex, we property is zoned for use, right? Well, every community. And the only property that we owned in Essex that had zoning for correctional use was Woodside. So basically, we're asking them to do an overlay or review and extend that to the Essex property. And I think all of you read the news, and unfortunately, it didn't work out. So after that decision in October, BGS sort of reevaluated everything. And we said, Okay, what are our next steps working with corrections? And I'm just giving you highlights, madam chair. So we said, do we reengage with that ethics? And we talked about the advantages and the risk. Do we look at Windsor State Prison? Right? Because we're looking at everything. Well, it doesn't meet the criteria, and there's been other studies and other commitments and other thoughts around Windsor. So we said, well, that doesn't make a lot of sense. So then we went back to, can we rebuild at the South Burlington location where the woman's existing facility is? Because it meets some of this criteria, but not all of it. And there are advantages, but the risk really outweighed the advantages. And I want to highlight this one. The site is very limited. We would have constraints on how we would design. It would have to be a linear design. It would have to be multiple floors. We don't think we could get the outdoor activity area that they really need. And we were really questioning how the reentry program would align with a building like that. And the cost of potentially relocating, the shell game of where do you relocate the individuals that are currently under the jurisdiction of DOC over a two year period. Know, these are viable, but they're not the best interests of the program. And then we went back to do we look at a new site? Do we take the design and what we've invested in this project and all of the studies and everything, and we just look at a new site? And we also, just so you know, we talked about the split of a reentry program and the correctional facility. That's really an outcome of what you do. It's not a preference of DOC, and I don't want to speak to their detail on their programming. So using the site criteria and working with DOC and really talking about the programs and the importance, again, with this criteria, it's really a focus in Chittenden County for the most part.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So then I would think that the question before us as we go forward on the legislative act is twofold. Do we look at the site?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Pardon me? Do we look

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: at the site criteria and change it or not? I mean, this came out of our committee back, I think it was probably in '23, '24, '23. '24

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: is when I believe you

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: put We did some work also in '22 and '23 on some of this. So do we look at this site criteria that we put in previous capital bills and tweak it, change it, throw it away completely, do something different? That's one thing. The other thing is do we limit it to sustain on property? Do we say, okay, now we go out and buy property?

[Unidentified committee member]: We expected that to get permission to buy.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yes. Yes. But do we just really just say, don't bother looking at state owned property anymore. Just go out and buy property. I think those are the two big pieces before us, this legislative session. Well, Madam Shabers, may wanna talk about this.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: So let me tell you where we're at because that's really important. Right? So based on that criteria and the work with DOC, we made the decision because of the authority that you've given us to pursue and develop an RFP and to go out and do a land search with that criteria. More and and so previously, we had we focus on state owned property, number one. And then we used a broker to kind of give us a list of other property that was out there that that we could kind of say, oh, this meets the needs or not. We have developed, we have not, we're in the process of issuing it. I don't think you've issued it yet. Correct, Rainer? So we have developed an RFP and we are seeking land options with all of that criteria and some other criteria that DOC has has set forth. And we're finalizing the RFP and we're getting ready for it to be posted. And you'll see so I thought it was important to show you how much money you've appropriated to this project and what we've expanded. And to demonstrate, we have a balance of $15,000,000, which we can use to purchase land, and we can use to take the design on a particular site and really start figuring everything out.

[Unidentified committee member]: Troy, can I just get a clarification on what the RFP is for? It's finding somebody to help you find the land?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: No, no. The RFP is what we've changed. So I'll just go back to make sure I'm clear. With the original language, we focused on the state owned. And we also just did a search with our brokers and property management. We used brokers to say, what do you have for sale? What's out there industrial that we could be developed or just raw land? What instead of just going to a broker and saying, give us a list of what's available, we're actually doing a request for proposals on specific needs for a correctional facility. So, that's the difference. So, it will be a bid. It will be a request for proposals for us to explore and to understand the detail behind them to move forward with potentially purchasing. So we've moved forward because of the authority you've given us that if we did find a piece of property and everyone agreed, we would go through the normal process of of procuring that because we already have the authority. And I was trying to show and here's the money that we have left that's available. I just want to say this is this is our estimated timeline on the next steps based on the request for the proposal is early April to complete review and negotiate on properties. And the other piece that I just want to point out, because I don't think we can quite get into it At the Justice at the Joint Justice Oversight Committee, there was some discussion on potential language around zoning requirements for critical state facilities. We're not in a position yet to talk if we're going to suggest that policy change, but we heard the committee and we have discussed it internally. I just can't tell you where that's at at this point.

[Unidentified committee member]: Can I just clarify? So this would state any land you buy would not necessarily have the zoning hurdles that we had with the most recent?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: No, it could. It depends on where it is. But the statute change? That could eliminate for requirements for critical state facilities, yes.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Where we could build regardless of their zoning.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: Right.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: That's right. So I think, I mean, I do believe that is going to be one of the items that this committee is probably going to want

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: to explore. Along with GovOps. I know that that proposal may be percolating in some bills that may be produced, but that would go to GovOps. Would not go to us because it deals with municipal laws. Yes. So, but it's a direct result of juvenile center and the women's correctional facility. And it's also the leftover, the Newberry. Kevin?

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: And because you're moving in this direction, I would assume, but I don't like to assume that there are no government owned facilities or properties that could be usable if we tweak the requirements.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: So I think that goes back to we looked at that once we were notified by Essex. And so the one prop so we looked at two state properties. We looked at Windsor, and Windsor doesn't meet the criteria. It's the email when talk about it. And through this committee over the years, you've directed Buildings and Generals to do multiple best use studies of that site and that facility and in partnership with ANR. And so we stepped away from that up because I think there are And the chair probably could talk about it more specifically. Other feelings and obligations or commitments maybe on that property. And then the other state owned is the existing site.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: So going out, we're gonna end up with two white elephants. We're going to have the existing state land with building on there that's

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: I would suspect once we had a new facility and we took occupancy that you would be selling that property. And

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: asking about

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: the current Yes. That's the South Bennington facility. You this committee or others could redirect that property to be used for something else or potentially sell it. We haven't come to that conclusion at this time.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: No. I understand that. But, I mean, that would be

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: the But I don't think it would be a a white elephant.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: No. Because the land is prime. It's not the building. It's the land. Yeah. Where it's located. So we have some more questions, Conor and then Joe and then Will.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Good to see you, commissioner.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: It's wonderful to see you. And I'm not sick. I'm I have allergies. Awesome.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: This building. I totally understand.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Yes. So, like, you know, just with the adjusted timeline, I know it won't be too accurate. Like, what's the best case scenario for when can we close Chittenden, you know, if everything goes according to plan?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Well, so if the if we're successful with the RFPs negotiating on new property, our goal would be to have that wrapped up in April. And I believe it's a twenty four month project. I'm looking at just roughly.

[Tabrina (BGS Project Manager/Architect)]: So we estimate about three to five years permitting process. And that in addition, design would about two years would take place at

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: the same time with two years.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Okay. So, that didn't that wasn't clear. So, between with having land and doing all of our design documents and everything, I think four years is probably

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Four to five.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: If all goes well.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: If all goes well. And I think what was just confusing is that we just threw in the permitting. And and we said three years for permitting. And so I can't say to you that I I I'm not saying to you, I know that it's three years. It depends on where the land is. It depends on what we're going to need for permitting. So the worst case scenario, Sabrina, is Yeah. Gotta be, is you could have a three year permitting process. That between act two fifty local permit, all all of our permits. Mhmm. Is is that or you're doing the worst case scenario? Yes. She's doing the worst case scenario. So let me give you some perspective here. Maybe Four years is the average represent Let me

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: count this. We started work on this in prior to COVID. 2018. 2019, we started putting money in to start repeat '18, we started saying we gotta replace the Chittenden facility.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: That's 2016. I was still here, you were talking about it.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah. But we actually put money in the capital bill to start that process. It got wait a minute. It got taken away, part of it, in the senate. We've been working on this since 1718. And here we are, eight, nine years later.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: So,

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: you know, It is what it is. Joe whoops. Joe and then Well

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: So going back to Essex and specifically, is this Essex Town or Essex Junction?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Essex Town.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: So it didn't get past the planning commissions?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: No. No.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: And so

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: But and what didn't get past is the I'm gonna use the word change of use, which my team gets very frustrated, but really taking the existing and shifting that the use to the new site.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: So was it already discussed? I I don't know how big the former Woodside site is.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: We've already converted that to the six of the residential.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: But the but I don't know how many total acres the site is.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: There's, like, six?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah. Not very big.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: But there's

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: no there's no extra acreage to swap the land swap.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: So about six acres of land, I believe. About 10. But massive wetlands is totally built out. Okay.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: So my question was going to be if you could swap change of use, and that's not it.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: And in reality, I don't think and even if we could, I think it's we, you know, we are customer driven, and we try to when we make an investment in a facility of this type, programming is really important. And when we built the woman Well, we took a men's correctional facility and converted it to a woman's. Having the the programming is is somewhat different, but those the existing site in South Burlington and Woodside today, if we if it were available to try to build what is needed for the services that we're trying to acquire as a you know, provide, the site has limitations.

[Unidentified committee member]: No. No. I I I understand that. I just didn't know if there's enough extra acreage at

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: what side or maybe you could swap.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: No. We would've we probably would've gone there.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: The minimum acreage you need for the women's facility?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: I don't know if we necessarily have said a minimum, but we are looking at about 20 acres because you as you know, you want expansion. You want the ability to do whatever you need to do on that. We have outdoor outdoor activities. Will?

[Rep. William "Will" Greer (Member)]: I can't find the exact sheet that had the ten year projection timeline on it, but my question had to do with the $16,000,000 that have already been appropriated. Is that in addition to the $90,000,000 that we were No.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: That would go towards it.

[Rep. William "Will" Greer (Member)]: Okay. So this is all for the RFP for the land acquisition?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: This is for design. This is for land purchase. This is for multiple pieces. But really what happens, we're successful and we're all in agreement, this 15,000,000 would start to get spent very fast. And once we make that decision that this is the piece of property, this is where we're gonna go, that's when you're gonna see your future capital bills impacted to come up to there was 90 at one time. And I'm just gonna say this as your commissioner. Those are estimates at a point in time. If that $90,000,000 was estimated in 2023

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: It's state owned property.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: It it it but even the we can't guarantee the cost would be 90,000,000 today.

[Rep. William "Will" Greer (Member)]: And then my second follow-up question about Essex. So I remember having read that they find that you do the change of change of use. Is there an ability for them to go back and review that, or is it kind

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: of a done deal? So we looked at I can tell you the advantages and the risks that we did. You know, we had selected the site. We could have continued with the design, and we might have seen potentially if the money was appropriated, you know, what we looked at it is we probably actually would delay we would gain a year if we went to the Essex site in this time frame of four to five years. The risk is they still could deny our request. And our Yeah. Person working with Essex took about a year. There was a change in leadership. There was a change in in the planning commission. You know, we had to realign and be on the same page. We had a change in commissioner of corrections. We said it could be we've been perceived that the state wasn't listening. And I will tell you, as your commissioner of buildings and general services, we worked really, really hard to hear their questions. They gave us written questions, and we responded to those openly and honestly. I think part of, and this is me sharing with you, part of our challenge, and for the members that have been here for a while, the last time we did a correctional facility was the Springfield Correctional Facility. I'm sorry, Madam Chair. But at that time, we have a process where we partner with the legislature, the administration, and the community, and we come up with an MOU, an operating MOU because we are placing a correctional facility within a community. And we have these agreements with every community. And you go through things where you talk about transportation or sidewalks or maybe the water and sewer plant need to be expanded. And you come to an agreement of what we're going to invest in outside of just building the building. But then everything's dependent on appropriations and everyone has to agree. This process is known, and what I experienced with the youth facility and with the correctional facility is that they want that agreement now. And we said, we're willing to come to the table, but right now we just gotta get the change of use in place. Because if you're not gonna give us that, then that's an enormous amount of work because after that permit, we still have to go through all of the other permitting processes. And that's where we sat and negotiated. So I think, you know, when we worked with Essex, they were asking us all the right questions. They were putting on the table all of the things that were important for them to understand and know and how we would impact. We just didn't have the answers yet because we were just trying to move towards getting this use change so we could start truly exploring that facility. So when I say I think that we weren't listening, we were listening, it's just what comes first. Do we now, because permitting has changed so much since we built Springfield. Because as part of it, do we re do we try to engage in this up front? And there's risk with that. I'm gonna say to you as the representatives of the state, it's hard to make a commitment on something that you really don't know what's gonna be the cost for three or five years down the road. And, you know, Emily and I and I'm looking at her. Her and I have really discussed with moving forward with, you know, this RFP, some ideas of how we can engage early and really outline what that process is going to be. And that's part of our commitment to you instead of waiting until we get there and then they start asking for it. So that was a long answer. I think it was a little passionate. You know, I mean, it's important communities want to know this. I'm just this is a critical structure for the state of Vermont, and we've got to find a way for all of us to partner in this. It can't just be BGS standing over here in DOC. You know, it's gotta be the community and the legislature for this particular type of facility and BGS. So I that was long winded. But

[Rep. William "Will" Greer (Member)]: Now I have a follow-up question about the criteria as well. I'm sure this was not designated, but maybe it was, and I'm just not not familiar with it. When you mentioned the Windsor facility being repurposed and the South Burlington facility, assuming going down there, in the criteria, did retention of correctional staff make its way into that? Because one Yeah. Okay.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: And so I'm not an expert in the contract. But I believe, I don't believe, I do know. I believe it's 30 miles. So we are very sensitive to that because if your workstation, so your designated workstation is South Burlington and you go outside of a 30 mile radius, I think it's a radius, I'm looking at you.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: It's a geographical rip essentially, yeah.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Then you have the right as an employee to say, I'm not going to go any further, and you get this geographical rip and I'm not the expert on that. So that's really important because this facility, I think, I can't speak for corrections, but I think they have a pretty good staff at the women's correctional facility, very well trained. They have really good, what I understand, partnerships with the local businesses, which really supports your concept and your idea around reentry. So Windsor, that's another added lift because all of those employees would have the right to choose to move or to go after Yeah. Yeah.

[Rep. William "Will" Greer (Member)]: Take care. That's just funny. Sure.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Shawn? Hello. Are you Huawei?

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: What if we covered Chittenden and Copper?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: In twenty more years, I think.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: It'd be quicker and less expensive.

[Unidentified committee member]: So I I visited the women's facility with Troy. And and and you Will was there. Yeah.

[Rep. William "Will" Greer (Member)]: I was there. Yeah. I remember I was the one who drove up during the snowstorm.

[Unidentified committee member]: You know, Brian was there. We so I'm just curious. Do you have any data about why that wouldn't work there?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: I believe that you should talk to the commissioner of corrections. Is about

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Tell me your right.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Yes. So you can bill you could You could go up. You could go up. There are there are many, many program reasons why it is not the right solution for the future correctional facility.

[Unidentified committee member]: Yeah. Because everything else is there. It's there. You're not gonna meet you know, people are gonna give

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: a big

[Unidentified committee member]: talk about being there. It's there.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Yeah. I think it would be difficult to I I think there's also some concern about the reentry, the focus on the programming of reentry trying to use that site for you know, both programs and but I would prefer that you, you know, I would prefer that you have that conversation

[Unidentified committee member]: with

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: commissioner.

[Unidentified committee member]: Do they own the the parking lot that the secondary parking lot that we park in?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: We own that too. We we b park. Yes. We, BGS, do.

[Unidentified committee member]: And if you're like, there's a bunch of swamp land in there and stuff. Right?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Own that parking lot.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: That's

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: it. Several. So several. Let's not all of us talk at the same time. Thank you. Several. Just I know. But several several years ago, we had to do something with the wetlands and with act two fifty, and we had to transfer, I believe, some of that land to the city of South Burlington. Is that correct? And that's why Tabrina is emphasizing just the parking lot.

[Unidentified committee member]: Got it. Yeah. Because it it yeah.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So that's not to say that at some point, depending how the RFP plays out. Just don't know. But I feel that we're back at square one per se. That's not to say that the current facility could not be rehabbed into a reentry facility. And then you have the immediate secure incarcerated facility built somewhere else. Those are options. The other option is you do both on a particular piece of parcel. Or another option is they're on separate parcels and you sell the South Burlington property because that's prime location.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: So I and and I will share with this committee. We've had some excellent working working meetings with DOC talking about those. And so, yes, those are all options. The preference is one facility because you will have maximized staffing instead when once you go to facilities, this is important. Right? You have two different operating costs. You have a different staffing level transportation need. You have duplication of space. So that is really DOC has put a lot of thought into that, and that's where I think, you know, understanding their their programming. If we go when when we get our request for when we get a response to the request, we might not get Might not get any? We might not get any options. So guess what we do? We sit back down with DOC and we say, well, you know what? We may only have one option. Mhmm. And and again and you have to look at the whole scope of the project and the whole time frame of the project. And, you know, South Burlington brings its own challenges. And one of them is if you were to demolish and rebuild, what is your cost? What is the time? How do you address the current individuals?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And that right there is where this committee plays in because we have to weigh all those factors because we don't know what will be in the governor's recommended budget, but there could be a line item in there in FY twenty seven for women's correction, more money to go towards replacing the Chittenden facility. I'm not saying that there will be, but there might be. So if there is, then we have to weigh as a committee what direction are we going. We're the ones that will then be in the driver's seat, more or less, based on testimony from BGS, based on testimony from DOC, and based on what we know in our capacity sitting in this room to make these decisions. And you have to weigh the programming and the structure of the building versus the cost. Because at some point, you may really want to go down a certain path, but the cost may be prohibited. Then you've got to make the decision as a committee, where do we go from there? So that's what's going to be before us. And we don't know where we're going to be in a month or two months from now. But I just wanna lay this out that there's a lot of thinking that we're gonna have to to do as a whole committee here on how we move forward. If we move forward, we may decide not to move forward.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: I think the last thing we want to do is have another facility. Frankly, if we already have more facilities than we can, it looks like, conceivably properly maintained or upgraded now. So, if anything, would want to have fewer individual facilities, not additional facilities.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Well, we know from an operating standpoint, from a staffing standpoint, one facility right, was obviously is more cost effective and. And we have to remember, if we don't have a plan for vacant facilities, then you have to still continue to pay the heat, pay the electricity, maintain and and keep it basically in cold storage. So

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Conor? Oh, sure. As as the timeline moves out, you know, and as the chair says, we're feeling like square one. Are there any discussions of an interim plan? That's what I know what that looks like. But I'm just cognizant that every day in their facility is like an eternity for the people working and living in it. And the cost of duct taping this thing together for a few more years.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: There's a deferred maintenance on this.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: I don't. We can get back to you. I don't want to make a guess on that. Maybe Joe can find it. But here's So there's not. I don't feel like we're going back to the beginning. And and I go to your appropriations. We have spent an we have invested money, time, detail, specific details into the design and model. With the RFP, we'll be presenting the outlay of that. So you're not gonna be starting right from the beginning on your design. And and what it is, you're gonna have to modify depending on what the site is. And we don't know what the permitting is. You know, this it's it depends on the piece of property and what permits we would have to go through. And this type of construction is a unique even though we've talked about it's a softer construction because of the model, it's still a correctional facility. It's going to be a building that you're investing in for many, many, many, many, many years. So I don't feel that you are going back to a. I think

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: No. B plus.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: I'm gonna let's say, a. We got five years, so I think we're at we've got a C plus. You know what? We are going to have a really good idea by the time we wrap up the RFP. And what's we wrap up the RFP, and we're saying we have them evaluated by April. That mean we'll we'll get them a little bit sooner. But I will say to you, madam chair, if you truly think that you're gonna change all of this criteria, I I'm concerned. And what I'm concerned about is it costs Vermont businesses. It doesn't matter if you own land, if you're a developer, if you're a construction company, if you're an oil company bidding on the state. The cost to put a bid together for the state is very high for a business. And so it is really important for me to say we have to we're moving forward with it because to ask a business to make and respond to our proposals and then all a sudden said, we're not going to do it, is not a good reflection of the state doing business with the industry. So I'm just really sensitive to that, and I'm hoping there is support to let us move forward in the way that we are, and let's see what we get for a bit.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: When do you anticipate the RFP going out? You're finalizing?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Well, Sabrina is actually finalizing it. We haven't done an internal review with DOC. We've had discussions, but to make sure everything is there. And I think what is important is we are providing more information in our RFPs than we have in the past. So because we don't want someone just to give us a list of land and then, you know, Sabrina has to go out and figure what is the sewer, what is the water, do they have capacity, etcetera. We're trying to get that information up front so we can make a stronger, better decision. Of course, you may.

[Emily Kosinski, Deputy Commissioner, BGS]: One other thing is that we're being upfront about the planned use of the parcel. This is for correctional facility use. So instead of just in the past, we did some land searches through a broker without disclosing what the use is. And that doesn't get us viable properties necessarily, because there are some that are just clearly not going to be suitable or might have zoning improvements that are just not going to work for us. So we're just putting that out there. We're seeking land for this specific purpose, and we're hoping that with that clarity, we'll get better direction on whether we're going to get something or not.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: And, Emily, thank you for bringing that. That is so important because now they're gonna look at it and they're gonna also tell us these are all the you know, there will be some specific detail. So I think that's important too.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So I'm trying to get the time frame here in connection with our legislative session. So you're anticipating going out in the next two weeks, three weeks with the

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: I think three weeks is fair by the

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: time she July, January. And

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: so a month, month and

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: a half of February or so, you'd get the responses. You have an idea.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: And then there's and so we are sensitive about evaluations because that has to be that's a documented, fair, open process. And so that's why we're saying the beginning of we're giving ourselves really a month.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So in March is usually the time. February and March, February, we do markup. Yep. And then we get the bill done March, middle of twentieth of March. So at that point, we'd have more direction in terms of where we're headed or not headed for that. The long term process, folks, and then you may end up with no responses to the RFP. We may. And then what do you do? That's all known that by the February.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Yes. And that's where we sit down again with our partners and and we say, okay, you know, this is you know, what that would say is based on all of that criteria

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Criteria is an issue.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: On a stand stand alone. If there's nothing that's not available, then then Then what? Then we gotta have that that that hard discussion. That's, you know, what what I, you know, what I think it is. Or we choose to go back to one of the previous sites. I mean but I do think, you know, everybody liked the idea of the community that we were working with and that we were looking at. But I think all of you know that, you know, there was a lot more you know, we didn't even have we were gonna have to put on-site septic, which we didn't realize on the state property in the beginning. There's, you know, issues with the capacity and what they what they have for the community of Essex and their water and sewer plant, their proposal and, I mean, I'm just summarizing because I did listen to them, their housing, and what they wanna do. I think you all know they didn't even support the Amazon Right. Relocation.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: So Kevin? Did I miss did you ever describe the reasons Essex said no?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: No. I I I didn't. I mean, they they said well, they I mean, they said no. I think where it really came from is I kind of it it was really it's about this negotiation and what are we going to get and what does it mean and how does it impact our community and looking at their housing. It was all of those decisions. It wasn't a letter saying we denied you because of acts. It was just in general, they voted no not to support. I

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: don't think a planning commission doesn't. They're not adjudicating. They don't have to.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: No. I I understand they don't have to. But if we knew what their objections were, then we could that's that's important lessons learned. That could be

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: they wanted to get know what the state was gonna give them. That's what I said. Think We had access to the land.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: And and I was open. I said, you know, when they say we sort of didn't we weren't listening. I think that some of what they wanted or wanted a commitment from, we could not provide through this MOU. I call it an MOU, but it's, you know, through this agreement that we have with other communities. And that's where we, the state, have to say going forward, we have to change our process and how we engage on aligning those things and when it comes in. Because BGS can sit down and have the discussions and capture everything they want. It still takes the agency of administration, the governor, and the legislature to agree to and to fund what they want. So in the process

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: But if they don't tell us what they want, we can't even

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: They think of did. They did. But we didn't have access to the land. That's the issue. We didn't have access, so you could give them this this, and then they could still say Yeah.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: I mean, they were looking at

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: might be

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: know, they were looking at transportation. They were looking at sidewalks. They wanted to know about additional support for the Essex local for the emergency services, for the policing. How would their I just said their rate of pay in my head. How would the building impact their Grand list? The what their the the money we give them. Pilot. The pilot. You know, we were trying to do the best estimates on that. There there were multiple, multiple, multiple.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And we didn't have the assurance we'd be able to get the zoning.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: And I didn't have the authority to To

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: go Right. Because you gotta find the money through the appropriations process in the building. Right. And you gotta sign off the three the executive branch, the 5th Floor has to sign off and the legislature has to sign off. And then you can't you can't really do that because you still don't know if the zoning is gonna be changed. So it's a chicken and egg situation at that point.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Would you like to move on to Virgin's? Yes, please. Okay. So thank you. We'll be available. I just wanna say I'm really I think we are in a good place. I do want to close with this. I think our team and DOC are working really well together, and we're exploring this. So, I want to say that. So, the Youth Stabilization Treatment Center. Some call it the Green Mountain what do they call it? Green Mountain Campus? I won't call it that because I don't want to get into naming of state facilities. So I refer to it as the Youth Stabilization Treatment Center. And I just gave a trauma template again. I think all of you know this, so I'm gonna I'm gonna summarize. A decision, you know, quite a few years ago was to do a a a build to suit a developer agreement for the youth center because you have two very expensive buildings. You have a replacement of the the youth facility and you have the women's correctional reentry program, and those who are very large and demanding on on the capital bill. So a business decision to go out with a developer was made a few years ago. And so BGS came to a place that for gens, they there was a whole process done. There were RFPs with developers. And Virgins, as in one of the options, the state owned land in Virgins was was an option you could bid on and put on a proposal. So the Virgin site was chosen. We worked with a really good developer that's been very good with us. We had to go through the work with Virgins to expand the PUB, which is the It's the public district. We're public. For about a 10 parcel piece of land that that we own in Virgins. Again, I will I will share with this committee. They wanted to get into the negotiation. They wanted these agreements. They were told we would sort of do this. And then I came in and I will you know, I probably tossed that ball a little bit saying, well, first of all, let's get the designation, then let's go do the negotiation. And, you know, they had several list of of demands and wants that that they wanted, and they wanted us to commit to that before. And I wasn't we weren't in a position to. I can't commit to that and then signed a contract. Just it doesn't align. At the end of the day, we decided to step away from the property. And that was a decision that that we made. And we reset and working with DOC, we looked at the Oh, CF. DCF. Sorry. I'm back. Thank you, ma'am. We looked at, you know, the original bids. Could we go to the next bidder? We looked at multiple different options and for a number of reasons. My recommendation, and this is the way we want, is that we go back out to bid. And we and in this bid for a developer to do the build to suite, and then we lease it back with the option to buy. We were much more specific on permitting. We put that responsibility on the developer. Location, was really important to DCF and what the programming is, and we had designed so a lot more information was provided for a response to us. And I think that's really important. And I'm going to focus right now on the permitting because one of the things I couldn't figure out is why is Sabrina doing this piece of the permitting and then the developer does the other piece. The the the developer is saying, we have this land. It needs x, y, and z. It meets this criteria. Let's let the developer lead, and we're gonna partner. So that's a big shift with this one. We put out a proposal in October. We received the proposals in November. And on December 8, we selected a proposal. I am here to tell you that I cannot discuss in detail because we are moving we just I just signed a letter of intent notifying them, and now we have to move into negotiations. And this is a little bit different than a construction contract because we're negotiating a development agreement that turns into a long term lease. So we have not sat down with the recipients that received the letter of intent and started to negotiate. But what I can tell you is we got a solid response for this facility. And and to me, that is really, really, really important.

[Unidentified committee member]: You sound that good.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: I am optimistic. I really am. I mean, can't even say we're going to have it built. So, what I can tell you is that the way we wrote the RFP, we would potentially if all permits, all stars aligned, that we potentially could go to construction, Joe, in September 26?

[Joe Aja, Director of Design & Construction, BGS]: Yes. That's correct.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: When will we know? When will you know where it is and who it is?

[Unidentified committee member]: Yeah. If everything yeah. That that everything is

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: the

[Unidentified committee member]: next step is you know?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Well, right now, it's well well, let's negotiations are gonna go great. So That's positive. With negotiations being wonderful, I'm looking at Emily and Joe. It might be It could be two

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: months. What's that?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: March? Two months. Yeah. Yeah. Again, March. I'm sorry. Yeah. But I see the confidence, madam chair. We have a site. Yep. DCF is excited about the location. The location meets all of the criteria. There are elements of the site we don't know about, but what the developer but this is the this is the the developer has to make all of this happen. There are contents of their RFP, some cost, time frame, certain things, you know, standard language. We have not sat down with them and said, this is what it is and some negotiations.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So what's different about this particular project is what's called the design build. So it's the developer that fronts the money. They build the building. They work with the design with DCF and BGS, but they build it. So there isn't the capital budget implications to it. But what it does do, it shifts it to appropriations because there will now be lease payments because we won't own the building.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: We have an option to buy, and we and this time around, we ask for a and my team's gonna correct me. I think we did a five, ten, 15, but we've done an analysis even if you bought it in three years, if I'm or did we do three, five, ten, and fifteen?

[Unidentified committee member]: I think that come

[Unidentified committee member]: back to us. Right?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Right. But we've actually looked Towards a

[Unidentified committee member]: to purchase. If we opt to purchase, that would come back to us.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Yes. Yes. Yes. And I will tell you, you want to per- That's a slide of- Right. But if you were to purchase and take response- so what the agreement is, is the average maintenance, the upkeep, the site, all of that is managed by the developer. So we we would be responsible for long term maintenance damage. Or if one of the individuals that were housed there did some significant damage, then we have to do it. So this is an all inclusive lease, which includes heating, electricity, operations, snowballing, long term care, the the maintenance on the roof, the all of those pieces upstairs. But our response of yes, in the lease rate. But our responsibility in negotiating is to make sure that they do maintenance annual maintenance up upkeep. I'm just gonna use that as an example because I don't want them not to invest in the roof or do anything for ten years out.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Then we buy it, and then you have to do

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: the work. Correct. So there's that. But and then the operating side, which you'll have to talk to DCF, is their agreement with their company on how they staff and how they operate. So this the I will tell you they're excited about it. What we don't know is the permitting. But I think the difference is with confidence, you know, I think, you know, there's I I believe, you know, based on what I read is that, you know, they they have a really good working relationship with their community and and permitting should go easier. So and that's the other piece. I'm I'm just you know how I am with this committee. I'm pretty direct. And Emily and I have discussed this. We've never had this existing type of agreement with Woodside on what we contributed. Yep. And so I'm so baffled why we're why we would be doing that again with a youth facility. I think there's this impression that it may be considered in the same category as corrections. But I think that's something else we have to with this one, we have to figure this out because the standard of what we do with communities where we house correctional facilities was assumed that we would do the same with this youth facility. I think that's part of where there's a disconnect? Everything kinda fell apart.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Excuse me.

[Unidentified committee member]: So last session, you you showed us that facility. It was like Naylor and Brain had drawn it up or somebody like that had done it.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: We had an so we hired an architect.

[Unidentified committee member]: It was a nice facility.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: We still and so that was included in the RFP.

[Unidentified committee member]: It was because I was looking for the pictures of it because you had presented that.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: So what we presented in the RFP when we went out is we've already invested in this design. Okay.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Got

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: it. And the team ensured there was language. And what I've learned from Sabrina is that this is the design. It will be tweaked. It can be tweaked. And there's a certain agreement we have to do with the architect because of licensing, but that is the design.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Okay.

[Unidentified committee member]: So But

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: if I'm not mistaken, part of the issue in Virginia's before is they didn't want 19 year olds house there. Has that issue been has there been conversations that have been agreeable to both parties?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: I'm not sure if it was I'm not aware of the age specific. I think there was a policy issue in general on what is the population that is going to be housed there based on, I think, some stuff that was occurring here.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Raise the age.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Raise right. So I think it was that I will you know, I if I were to summarize the Virgins is they they definitely believe because of the age and the population that there was going to be much more demand on their emergency services and their policing. And they wanted to be have a compensation for that. And, you know, I know that and I don't think that DCF necessarily agreed with the impact. I think their data shows something different. So I don't wanna get it, like, into the d I don't wanna misspeak. Representative. I know raise the age was definitely a concern. And then who was going to be housed there and what was the impact on those emergency services and policing.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So you had 750,000, you got three seventy two left.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: And we're fine with where we are right now, madam chair.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: We'll know more as the session progresses.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Yeah, no, I guess we don't know yet, but what do you anticipate us needing to make decisions on with this discussion? Is

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: it We just really something

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: don't have I mean, you decide that you

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: wanna just change the overall policy, then

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: you're putting us back.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: That's mostly just after my

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: career. It's we're

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: really you know, we're right now, where I feel we're in a really comfortable, solid place. You've given us the authority that we need. I'm gonna look to Emily because I Emily and I have so many discussions. She's my memory. I don't think, do we need Emily and I had discussed that we're gonna need specific development language or no. We've got it. We've already got the authority because of the lease.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: To go to three seventy two left. And the question will be how much of that do you need for remaining spending?

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: We need all of this to take this to The next level? Well, yes. Yeah. There's no money here to be reallocated, madam chair.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I'm always looking. I know you I'm just there's no money located here.

[Rep. William "Will" Greer (Member)]: Just a little while

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: on money there.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Absolutely not.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: We had, like, 3,000,000 when we pulled that. I so

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: yeah. I mean, what it does is it shifts the dollars to the development agreement that you know, and and to what the cost is and what that that lease payment is is going to It

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: comes out of DCF's budget. Right.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: It goes through appropriation and out of that. What we do know and I and is that we do know that the development types of agreements do cost us more money. But when you really start breaking it out and analyzing it and you think about some of the long term maintenance, it still costs more money, but maybe the gap isn't as big as we thought. Also, it's having a positive impact on your demands in the capital bill. It's the pressure.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: But we have to be very cognizant that we don't work in a silo here because we know we're shifting the cost to the big bill and to general fund and to DCF's budget. That we know because they're paying lease payments. Oh, I mean On the other hand, if we were building this on the capital bill, pressure on our capital bill, but then our debt service, which is a line item in the general fund, would also be impacted.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: Yeah. And you would in and you would increase BGS's budget and potentially DOCs depending on what they do because a building of this size and quality means we need staff to staff it, operate it, maintain it, the maintenance. So all that goes in. Without getting into one of the things that we've added and we've brought back is an internal financial analysis. Right? Looking at preliminary numbers. So we are cognizant of that. We are engaged with finance and management. We are engaged with DOC, the Secretary of Administration and BGS, because you are absolutely right. You have just because it's the right maybe the right way to build it, everyone has to understand what is the cost. Mhmm. Because no matter what, if we owned it or you do this, it's a bigger facility. It's a facility you don't have right now.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Mhmm.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: And so it's going to cost us. Mhmm. It's it's going to be part of doing business. So there is a cost impact.

[Unidentified committee member]: So So we

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: are at the end of time because we do have the commissioner of corrections. That's gonna be coming in.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: But We're going down. He's been in senate institutions. I wish we had been here together. So we're flipping.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah. Yeah. Any other questions? Either one

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: Oh, I think we'll see the commissioner again.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Oh, she's gonna be here. She's gonna be here. Anything else? Because I do wanna take a quick ten minute break for folks.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: And I do want at least three minutes with you if I if I can.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And then if folks call or whomever can coordinate with Tate to make sure when we do scheduling, what needs to be involved here.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: And if I could offer, maybe we go when we go back to the office, Joe, Emily, and I can kinda come up with a list of some items that we could have Cole send to Tate that you could pick where where we know that are some of those updates.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Because we do have time this Thursday and Friday morning. We're not working Friday afternoon, but we do have time on Thursday and Friday for for you

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: to So let us I know Joe's already thinking about it.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Because you know us, we'll ask a lot of questions. Yep. Anything else before we get off of Zoom for the time being, take a ten minute break? Thank you for that. Thank

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: you. That's a

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: good opportunity.

[Wanda Minoli, Commissioner of Buildings & General Services (BGS)]: For welcome welcoming us into your committees.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: That's a good