Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Okay. Good morning. Welcome back, folks. This is House Corrections and Institutions Committee. It's Wednesday, March 25. We are working on our capital bill. This is section 13 of our capital bill. This pertains to Forest and Parks entering into a lease with Vermont Huts Association for them to use the structure at Little River State Park. We have our Legis Council here and has been working with Forest and Parks on this language. So, Michael, I'm going to turn it over to you.

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: Good morning. This is Michael Grady with Legis Head of Council. As I discussed with the committee last week, these types of transfers authority to lease or sell land by the Department of Forest and Parks must be approved by the general assembly. Traditionally, you've done it by resolution, but you are not bound to do it by resolution. So this section would give Forest and Parks the authority to enter that long term lease with Vermont huts for the use of a structure at Little River State Park and the land on which the structure is located. As we discussed last week, there are conditions or criteria for that lease so that you are, specific about what you're authorizing, and you're also protecting the state. And any potential liability or or other type of provision like how to terminate or how to resolve conflict. So that's what this does. Page one, line eight, and nine, it gives a term of twenty years with an option to renew for an additional two ten year terms at the commissioner's discretion. Line 10, it requires the lease to have a fee or fee formula for compensation of the state. Line eleven and twelve, it requires conditions on the use of the structure, including the boundaries of the land and structure to be leased. Lines 13 through 16 and requires Vermont huts to secure insurance and be subject to an indemnification clause consistent with Attachment C of the standard state provisions for contracts and grants. That provision says that if there's any liability that's brought against the state that the contracted entity Vermont Huts is required to indemnify the state, pay the state for that liability. It's a pretty significant clause, but it is mandated in the standard state provisions for contracts and grants. Page one nine seventeen, there needs to be provisions for termination of the lease. Lines eighteen and nineteen, there need to be requirements for operation and maintenance of the lease structure and land, including responsibility for cost of mace maintenance. Line 20 is how any conflicts shall be resolved. And then page two, lines one through five, that the contract between the Department of Vermont and HUD is going to be executed in accordance with the standard state provisions for contracts and grants and be required for relocation reconstruction of the structure, the Goodell House located at Little River State Park. Now I would have one slight edit in talking with Catherine Gessing from the agency, page one, line three. I don't think you should not withstand 10 BSA section two six zero six. That's actually your authority to approve this lease, And I wouldn't want you to open up any interpretation that you didn't exercise that authority. So, and Catherine agrees. You don't need to not withstand 10 BSA two six zero six. Whereas 29 b s a one sixty six is BGS' authority and the governor's authority to approve, and you don't need that.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So So we would take out what you're recommending is taking out that first part, notwithstanding 10 VSA section blah blah and 29 VSA section

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: No. I I think you would take out 10 VSA section two six zero six and then the word and. So it would read notwithstanding 29 VSA one sixty six in fiscal year twenty twenty seven. And I can either Yeah. Redraft that or send it to John.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Send it to John to do that. So 29 VSA, so notwithstanding, 29 VSA is BGS. Yes. Right? So what are we notwithstanding within BGS?

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: You're notwithstanding the requirement that the Commissioner of Buildings and General Services approve this lease.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Okay. So the commissioner doesn't need to approve the lease?

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: No. This is part of some parks land. It's it's maintained under and authorized for conveyance under 10 b s a two six zero six.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Because we're entering into a lease, and normally whenever there's any state properties, on land, BGS is the one that really works through that lease negotiations?

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: Right. Except for Forest and Parks lands, the the Agency of Natural Resources lands. The agency effectively has its own standalone authority for that with your approval, of course.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So why, if that's the case that Morrison Parks has that authority, why would the BGS be involved in this?

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: They shouldn't be, but that's what that night notwithstanding clause is there.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Just some belts and suspenders?

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: To be clear about, yes.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Okay. Okay. It. Know if any questions are on the language

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: to change. Not language, but the process. So this is this lease after they agreed to it. Is gonna come back to us for approval.

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: No. No. This is this is effectively authorizing them to

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: to enter the lease. Okay.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: I was thinking your question was pertaining to the twenty year option to renew for an additional two ten year terms. That would not come back to us.

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: That that would not come back to you.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: That could be a potential forty year lease. Yeah.

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: Yes. And and you have done something similar to that when you authorize the department to issue licenses for maple sugar production. And those licenses are subject to a rule. And and underneath that authority, can renew for two five year terms without your approval. But it's the same concept. It's just how long would you want to allow those renewal terms.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Rebecca, can you give me an understanding of how, what's the longest lease you've got going right now?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Rebecca, could you identify yourself for the record, please?

[Rebecca Washburn (Director of Lands Administration & Recreation, VT Dept. of Forests, Parks & Recreation)]: Certainly, Chair Emmons. For the record, my name is Rebecca Washburn. I'm the Director of Lands Administration and Recreation for the Vermont Department of Forest Parks and Recreation, and also the Chair of the Vermont Outdoor Recreation Economic Collaborative. And to answer your question, we have seven ski leases. We talked about those a little bit last week when I was in providing testimony on the VT HUDs proposal. In the ways that they have been amended over the years, some of them have extended for nearly one hundred years. So we have very long term leases with our ski leases, the most recent of which coming up for full scale renewal will be Bromley in 2032. So that will be the first time we'll be considering any significant amendments to ski leases.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Great. Thank you.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Questions on the language? Katherine, you worked with Michael quite a bit on Monday. Do you want to weigh in?

[Katherine Gessing (General Counsel, Agency of Natural Resources)]: Thank you. My name is Katherine Gessing and I'm general counsel for the Agency of Natural Resources. I I I don't necessarily have anything to add unless you have specific questions for me. I think we're satisfied with the language. I will note that the initial twenty years is based on the partly on the grant that is being provided to Vermont Huts for the relocation and renovation of the facility. And that's a twenty year grant. The investment in that facility in that house as a structure that can be available for lodging for recreation. That is tied, know, is is going to the the grant contemplates that that's going to continue for at least twenty years and hopefully for longer. So that was sort of the thinking behind the initial twenty years and then an option to renew for two additional, you know, terms.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So for that grant, where is it coming from, number one? And number two, is it money coming in from that grant every year for twenty years, or is it one month sum that is to cover twenty years? And where's the

[Rebecca Washburn (Director of Lands Administration & Recreation, VT Dept. of Forests, Parks & Recreation)]: VT Hutz applied for and received a congressionally directed spending grant. The funding was routed through Housing and Urban Development, so this is essentially a federal HUD grant, one time going to VT Hudson Trails to allow them to do a number of things, a portion of which was the renovation of the Goodell House. So this is one time funding to support the renovation of that structure, including other activities, essentially modernizing or constructing other structures around the state.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: You have a number in terms of how much that grant is?

[Rebecca Washburn (Director of Lands Administration & Recreation, VT Dept. of Forests, Parks & Recreation)]: I can find that. I don't have it off the top of my head.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: I think we would need to know that. And that was a congressional call it earmark. I know we don't call it earmark anymore, but that was a congressional earmark. Is there a time limit when that money needs to be expended? Approved and expended?

[Rebecca Washburn (Director of Lands Administration & Recreation, VT Dept. of Forests, Parks & Recreation)]: I believe it's going to be based on the grant requirements for Housing and Urban Development. I would expect it's probably a five year grant with extend. That's another thing that I can confirm. We have a copy of the grant agreement in our files. I just haven't looked at it in quite a while.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So, I would like to know how much the grant is. One question I've had with this. Did we put in a time, a length of time that this lease has to be put in place, by May.

[Rebecca Washburn (Director of Lands Administration & Recreation, VT Dept. of Forests, Parks & Recreation)]: Within fiscal year '27.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Within FY '27. But it has to be done.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Yep. Yes.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Correct. So, the first sentence on my on the first line, notwithstanding, didn't say $1.60 six in FY twenty seven is authorized.

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: Yes.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: But we're not saying it needs to be completed. The lease needs to be completed by the end of f y twenty seven.

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: If they're authorized to enter into the lease in f y twenty twenty seven. If it rolls over into 2028, they're not authorized to enter that lease.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Okay. Okay. Got it. Because I just didn't want this to go on and on and they didn't have a lease.

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: Understood. And they basically have one fiscal year to do it. Yeah.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Where are we on the language? We all right with the language? Other folks?

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: I have no issues here.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Okay, sounds good. Sounds good. So it's included in our draft for the capital bill this year. We're going to get the capital bill out this week and then it will go over to the Senate. So you'll want to pay attention. And Kate's here. She can be a dog on a bone and carry this through to the Senate Institutions Committee for that. So thank you, Michael, for all the work you did on this.

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: Thank you.

[Michael Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: Helpful. Thanks for accommodating.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Yep. No problem. Thank you, Catherine, and thank you, Becca. Thank you. Thank you so much. Just let us know, Becca, how much the grant money is. I will. Thanks a lot. Email Tate Mullen.

[Rebecca Washburn (Director of Lands Administration & Recreation, VT Dept. of Forests, Parks & Recreation)]: Okay. Great. Thank you. You.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Thank you. Bye bye.

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: Thanks.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Bye bye. So, what have we got booked? So, the next thing we have is the entry project. So, I know we got BGS here. We don't have we don't have an Agafil. So, if somebody could not Agafil now. Yeah. Go ahead. I get that. Oh, good. So, just to give the committee a little heads up, there's conversations about school construction going on. And they're looking at bonded dollars.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Who are they?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: They're biggie from the there was a leans, and I kept adamant. No money

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: to do for I

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: mean, you got maybe a million or 2,000,000 or 300,000,000 at the most, but you got $100,000,000 each. Do we

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: need a are we looking at equipment shed somewhere? That's a start.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: And we don't have what would be else to

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: go

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: the hospital. I'm afraid. Which means people like the building that do construction.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: One? They get the commissioner in here. Yeah. One in here. Given the fact there's no money, it's almost at moot point.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: The fact that you're

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: not even

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: sure. Find some money, but you can only find a couple of them.

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

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: In reality, and you don't know what those bonded dollars would go to because there's no standards in place now that would tell you what is eligible for state aid.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: There are a couple other questions regarding the whole education delivery thing too.

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: Enough. So this

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So this where I need to

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Yeah. Does that like, you know, just I'm not as familiar with the education's, you know, funding and all that. I know that we just passed a capital bond in children to do work on the schools. Isn't that, like is is that some responsibility on the actual town to take money out to build, or is that is that part of it?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Comes out of the end.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: But doesn't don't towns themselves, like, go to a like, go get a bond and and then finance?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: What used to happen with the old school construction, we would pick up 30% of hang on, 30% of the eligible costs within that project. If you had a $30,000,000 project for school construction, it does not mean you're gonna get $10,000,000 from the state because there are items that is not eligible for state aid. That's what we have to figure out going forward. What is going to be eligible and what is not? If you're using bonded dollars, it's gotta be for actual construction. And you've got to figure out what is eligible, it has to work for those local state boards. Figure out if you've got a $30,000,000 construction project, maybe only 3,000,000 of that is eligible for state aid because you've gone beyond what the standards require. So an example of a standard, this is just an example, could be what's required by the state as a standard is 10 square feet per pupil. And that would be eligible. Those 10 square feet for construction would be eligible for 30% state aid. If the district wants to build 15 feet per square foot per pupil, they're not gonna get state aid on that five extra square feet.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: It would still

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: be based on that then. Yes. And that's where you need somebody on the state level to work with the school board to understand how that plays into the big project. Because what's being said out there is, oh, we can pick up, say, 10% or 30% of your budget. So if you have a 100,000,000 school construction project going on, you're not getting 30,000,000 from the state.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: So how did we do that with Burlington? What happened with Burlington?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: I don't wanna go to Burlington. Well I don't wanna do that.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Of course, the grievance and equities. It's what the other words. It's what? Oh, I see. That sums it up well. Something, because that's 180 or 200,000,000 Yeah, dollars

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: so 15 or 16.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: After carrying out a building that probably didn't need to get torn down by No.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: That's that's even to us. Yeah.

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

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: What what we really need to be clear is what is going to be out. I don't think we have figured that out yet.

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: Gotcha. Okay.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So then to look at funding, you don't know what it's gonna go to. It's doing a disservice to our communities.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: It is.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: And it's putting the state in a real financial pocket.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Think it's safe to say that that's nothing that has to be figured out this year.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: That's why

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: people don't wanna try.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: They're doing it.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Well, there is so many. There's so many prerequisites.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: To do with Agatha now.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: And BGS used to build stuff. Right? No. They didn't?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: No. The only thing that BGS ever did was when we got into and we're live folks. When we got into redoing our career education at tech centers, We paid 100% of those construction costs. And the construction costs were reaching 20,000,000 to $24,000,000 And we were paying 100%, so we only had about $8,000,000 in our capital bill to go towards school construction.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: So

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: what was happening, because those construction projects were getting so big and it was beyond the school board level, we had BGS help those school districts for the projects. That's what were paying on.

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: I think it

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: was only for those. It was like three of them. And that's what broke that's what broke the budget in the capital bill because we had that obligation and we couldn't carry through because we didn't have the capacity to get. So we just headed right back down to that same returns.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Well, used to, but in relative terms, the capital bill doesn't have the resources it wants to.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Well, how's about the equivalent? So you got the cash? Because we only had $30,000,000 to bond back. Back and forth. You lived with us with school construction. You were in that committee. Remember that struggle that we came through. Anyway, so let's shift gears. The reentry.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Where the entry?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: The reentry here. Have put in at this stage, 1,300,000.0. I know there's concern on some parts of the committee here on what that gives us and what it needs to give us before we need to take more steps. So, I wanted to have some opportunity for BGS and sergeant Arms to come before us to talk about this. So I don't know who should go first, the the two d d years. If you go back to this document here, folks, State and Wild Century Overview. March 10. We've got it on your website. On the website, it's March 10. There is the schedule of an estimated time frame. And we have right now penciled in 1,300,000, but if I remember the testimony, by the time we get back next session, at 1.3, the full amount may not be needed to get us to design projects. Emily, welcome. You can identify yourself for the record.

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: Good morning. Emily Kusicki, Deputy Commissioner of Buildings and General Services. And I am pleased to be joined by your Sergeant at Arms and Shawn Brennan from Freeman to French Freeman. We have been working together, as you've heard in previous testimony, to support this project. And the $1,300,000 that is based on a need for additional funding to continue design work on this project. We are currently in design development, I think heading towards the later stages of that work. However, the funding that we currently have available would be exhausted. And so additional funding would be needed to move into construction documents to continue, again, that process for this project.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So for the current dollars that you've Yeah. We might as much as it was when would it be exhaustive?

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: Funding to date has included ARPA funding, which expires at the end of this year, Capital bill funding in the amount of $150,000 from the acts of 2020, and then some capital bill funding in the amount of 48,780 from planning reuse contingency in the acts of 'twenty. That doesn't

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: really track with this chart here. So I'm trying to I

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: think I'm looking at a different

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Yeah, this is what was given to us on the March 10. That includes ARPA funding.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Yeah, so the ARPA funding, which we have to get out by the end of the year, is about back then, two weeks ago, it's 243,447. So that's what's left. And then we have put in different appropriations. I've been doing that in public. So you got about 23 class in FY 2021, and then there was 150,000 cash in '24, and you got about 180,000 of state dollars. And of that, you got about a 103,000 left.

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: So for a total of $346,000 so are those still your numbers? Those are still the numbers. The ARPA funding was originally higher and then was reduced because funds weren't obligated. So again, ARPA funds have to be expended by end of year. Then to, again, continue work based on what we have available, we would need the additional funding. And your numbers are accurate to

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: my knowledge. So when I look at this chart here, it looks like what you have in the balance left, that 346,000, would get you through design development documents and beginning of the construction documents with what you have in hand now. Is that accurate? I think

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: the very beginning, the $1,300,000 number was based on a desired timeline. So there were different options that were available for construction schedules based on different scenarios of trying to minimize the impact during the legislative session. And this particular scenario that underlies the $1,300,000 would be to try to move it along faster in the process for a pre production season schedule.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So, for the committee, the schematic design, a very 30,000 foot year. It's really your beginning for the crew scope. But then your design development refines that into the more particulars of the construction project. So, right now, we're at the beginning piece of the design development piece.

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: Further along in the design development piece, we're closer to the end actually, of moving a bit ahead of schedule.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: We're approaching 73. Kids are still down the price.

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: Sorry. Shawn Brennan, answer that question, we're approaching 75%.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: 75 Representative

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: Emmons, I guess, sir, I'm sorry, This red arrow which says TR here is just in the wrong spot. It should be down the road. We're hoping to finish by August 2026. We started in November and we're hoping to finish in August 2026 with design development.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So the arrow reflects where you were in November. So what are some issues you're starting to see as you're refining these disarmed documents? What are some of the issues that are percolating up to the top? Are there any? And I'm going to open it up for the three of you. I'll

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: let Shawn speak in more detail. Just some of the things that I've been thinking about as we discuss options is how this particular project impacts other areas and flow of traffic through the State House. So that's something we've been discussing with the Sergeant at Arms. We've talked about potential water mitigation issues, and we've done some initial testing on that front for what's currently in the coat room. And then, of course, there's a lot of So it's

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: water issues within the building for underlying underlying front and lash.

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: And then, of course, just some initial conversations about the design and stakeholder interest in that. And that's really very in the early conversation stages and process that'll be led by the Sergeant at Arms in partnership with us. But those are just some of the issues that I've been thinking about, but I'd invite our partners to chime in too.

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: Sure. The three primary technical issues that we've been resolving through the design development process involve co conformance. So there are a number of things that are non conforming in the existing buildings. So it is a conversation with the authority set of jurisdiction as to how to add on to the building in a way that does not increase the non conformity. So, we've been addressing that. We have resolution to that with the court officials. So, by doing renovations, you

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: have to bring that up to code and that may trigger a review of the code within the whole business. We know we don't comply because there's some structural impediments to that. And we've negotiated over the years, we've negotiated with the Department of Labor, is it? Safety.

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: Fire safety.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Department of Fire safety, we've negotiated mitigating aspects because you can't reach code due to limitations in the building.

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: Exactly, because the building wasn't built at the time our current codes are reinforced, so there's in many cases there's no way to retroactively initiate those code conforming measures. So what we've done is we've addressed it in a different manner protecting what we're building and addressing things like area limitations, how much you can build based on the type of construction, separations, things like that. So we've resolved those issues. The other two issues that we're resolving are how do you build a construction between two buildings and still deal with snow and rain. So roof construction has been a technical challenge that we're still working through. We have an approach but we're working out the details and then something you probably are all familiar with dealing with HVAC. So heating, ventilating, air conditioning. How do we address that with the new construction such that it meets current codes and addresses the other areas we're renovating as far as meeting those codes as well. So logistically there's, you all know, a lack space available in current buildings. And so how do we come up with space to address renovated areas? So we're working through that as well, we have solutions.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So, is that going to increase the overall cost of the project?

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: That's included, correct, in the cost of the project as far as it's been estimated to do.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: And that estimate is about $18000000.18.6 Questions?

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Scope of this include what's going be done about ingress, egress for truck deliveries and parking. Sorry, I just didn't see any of that in the presentation.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: It's part of it's the piece we have to commission the design development. We haven't developed the RGA plan and the outside schematics yet. So that's to be determined. We know we'll lose the C LOT, which is the one right outside. It has six parking spots in it. So we know that much. But to optimize, we've looked at some sketches, but to optimize how the 18 millers can come in and come out and behind the painting lady, that's all still that last piece of design development that we need to do.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Yeah, so now obviously we've become more ADA compliant, but then there's no ADA parking in close proximity to the building that would be somewhat self defeating.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: Yes.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Are there any step all ideas? So

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: we know that on the East side of the building, that's where our best parking spots are for people who need access to the building. It's flat. It's close to the linking door. So that would be the best spot, but not necessarily for the public because the entrance will be on the opposite side of the building. So we still have the two spots by the pink lady that we're going to re shift and optimize. And then we'll have to use spots behind the pink lady for the public. But you're hitting on a very critical piece of state house and access to this project, but even in our current state is we basically have no parking for members of the public that need an ADA space. The spots are the closest spot is down by 2 Aiken, then you have to walk up the hill to get to the building.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: So Yeah. And even if if all the members drove here individually, there isn't adequate parking for them.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: There is that we have I don't

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: want to be mathematical of parking,

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: but we have enough parking slots for legislators. Every legislator has we have 180 parking slots from 180 legislators. We have it as probably more of an enforcement issue, it is people parking, it's very hard to address this because legislators do not have assigned parking. Again, I don't want to go down the rabbit hole because I have some ideas for the future, but when you come to the State House and you're a legislator and you're looking for a place to park and you're a general parker, not a reserved, you know, reserved spot, you're just going look for the next open spot. So there's no way for us or for BGS to really know if there are non legislators parking in legislative spots. There's no efficient way of doing that. So we have 180 parking spots for 180 legislators. You could each drive your own car. You could drive to work every day, Representative Casey. You should have a spot, so we have enforceable issue. We can do

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: better with that. And if I

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: may, there are more spots during session that are designated for legislative use during session than there are legislators. Those are available as well to legislative staff in a number of areas, including on Aiken, by 2 Aiken, as well as across the street. And also, staff and legislators are able to park in general state parking lots as well. And they do. I observe that frequently, like in the lot times 133. So there should be sufficient space, but it may not be directly adjacent to the State House that can fill up quickly.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Could be parking thing in those legislative spots? I mean, is more controlled here to come in, but you could come in the back way in here and still get in without a card. Yes. Parking over here, you can't get in Right. Without a card. Aiken, you don't need a card. In the pit, you don't need a card. Who what who is parking in that? Is it folks who are working, like, in 120 State Street or 133 State Street, is it legislative staff? Do we have any clue?

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: I think it's everyone. And I'll just give you a quick anecdote. I was walking about Beacon one morning, I parked across the street because I often give up my spot for people who need ADA access. It's the one reason I keep a spot. I So parked across the street and I was walking up and I noticed someone parking on Aiken. It was probably 07:45 in the morning. I said, excuse me, I'm so sorry, but I know you're not a legislator, you're not supposed to park here. And he was more like eight and he said, I'm sorry, I'm late, I have to testify. And he was frantic. I said, Please move your car, and he didn't. So he took the spot of a legislator. So it's all kinds of people, and BGS and the Sergeant Arm's Office have to work together to improve our enforcement. Without legislators having assigned parking for every single legislator's given car to track. That's

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: How could you even do that? I mean, put a sign up, but it doesn't prevent folks from parking there. I mean, I see that over here. We have their numbered. And I know there are legislators who are parking in a reserved spot that's not his. Yes. So how do you even if it's reserved, how how do you administer that? Because people aren't using legislative plates anymore, and they're supposed to hang something from the window. Yes. And a lot of times that doesn't happen.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: No. They're good about, I got one on.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: They do, but it doesn't

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: mean No. No. No. I didn't have it, and they gave me a warning.

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: So I will share that. We, BGS Safety and Security, in coordination with the sergeant at arms. Have increased our monitoring and light touch enforcement. This session, we hired some temporary parking attendants. I think we shared that in previous testimony, especially in combination with the hybrid work standard. There are more folks coming to Montpelier, especially during session. And we do know that parking is a challenge. And so we have been more actively monitoring it. Again, it is not our goal or desire to go out and tell people where we don't have to write. So we've taken more of an educational approach, putting reminders on vehicles. If it's a problem or if they're clearly parking in an area where they can't be like a fire, a striped fire area, we will tell. But that's very rare. So again, we have been monitoring. I wouldn't say that we've observed that it is a overwhelming issue. It's more of a and occasionally we'll notice someone parking in a spot and reserved spot where they really shouldn't. But I wouldn't say it's very common.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: And it's most likely an underreported issue because the legislator will pull in, be frustrated if there's no parking, park later today and never report it. So it's likely underreported, something that BGS and the Sergeant Mark's office can work together on is there's levels, there's the warning sign that can turn the warning note back in your row all the way up to towing, but in between there can be ticketing, which we haven't done in the past, but we can move that an option to us. So the parking issue is, typically there's lots of levels and there's lots of ways we can address it.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Do you have a list of legislators and their license plate number? Not their legislative plate number, but their regular plate. Because I I know in the old days, if you came in here with a different car, you had to go to the sergeant at arms, and you had to tell them what that plate number was so that they knew that you were a legislator in that spot. We had to do that in the old days.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: We're not doing that.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: We're not doing that. Another thing that happened in the old days, there was a real uproar. I think, Mary, you were here, this was probably back 2012, 2014. People were coming in, they had access to our lots that were gated because folks were handing out cards to swipe. So even our gated lots, we couldn't find parking. And that was happening. I don't think that's happening now, but that was happened. And it was worse back then.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: Yes. It was really bad. We are working with BGS to actually audit who has access through the gates. We've done a lot of work together in the last few months on access, parking lots, access to the building. It's all part of our security program and our screening program. But yes, we are trying to rein it in quite a bit.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So is there a way, at least for Ave, because Aiken Ave is asked, anybody can come in, park on Aiken Ave, and then they get down Baldwins. They don't have to come in. I had to pick a lady here. They could go to the next drive by and pop up, or they could go all the way up Bailey and down that way. Is there a way to place a person at the foot of Aiken to check the cars coming in to make sure that they-

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: I mean, so again, we do have roving monitors. And just, I haven't observed or heard of an issue that would rise to the level of deploying staff to monitor traffic coming in on Aiken. It is also, you know, people can drive through it, so not everyone is entering to park. I would encourage if members are really having a challenge finding a place to park to report it to the sergeant at arms and we can work together to find strategies to address it. Again, I just haven't had anything funnel up to BGS to alert us to a problem that would rise to that level of deploying resources in that way. We can certainly work to improve communication and reminders. Again, BGS does in the advance of the legislative session, we send out maps to all state employees. And I would say, I think that oftentimes where you might see someone parking where they're not supposed to, it's oftentimes a member of the public. They're coming to an event. They're coming to testify. They're not familiar with all the rules and the signs. I think state employees who work in Montcalier are generally familiar with the rules and tend to respect it well. So oftentimes it's sort of folks that we have less communication touch points with, and maybe we could look at better signage or other ways to communicate.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Well, this is No, you can go first. Think science that it costs money that makes it not cheap and the only way for people who don't know state employees and us to make sure that they don't park somewhere than mom's supposed to. You pull into a parking spot, it doesn't have a sign, you don't stop right. And even if it says number 56, should I park 56 or 57, doesn't mean anything to anybody. So it has to say legislative parking lot or something. But to get that many signs, it's not like millions, but it's still

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: That's what we're hearing.

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: Right now, legislative reserve signs, all legislative reserve spots do have individual signs, like even across the street and they are signed for reserve. And in our state lots, I would say there are signs sort of at the entry, like even just across the street or the 133 parking lot, it does say reserve for state employee use during the day, but perhaps because they're available for public use after hours or on weekends, which is a good thing, right? State property. Sometimes folks aren't always as mindful of restrictions during workday. I would say also lots tended to be emptier during the pandemic years, etcetera. So maybe habits changed a bit.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: And the last thing I'll add is when we get the security officers on board, which should be in a couple of weeks, to operate security screening at the door, it will free up the Capitol Police. And I've already asked the chief because the parking lots are an issue, not just for parking but for safety. So, I've already spoken to the chief and when we get those security officers here there will be a parking lot patrol in the morning and in the afternoon, duty. And part of that is the enforcement. But I really do see parking. It's not a space issue. We have all the space. We have 180 slots for legislators and another, think, we have two fifty slots total. We have more than enough slots. We have an enforcement issue. So that's on the list for Capitol Police.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: But I would think that folks, once you get comfortable, for legislators, once you get comfortable parking in a certain spot, you're gonna want to go back to that spot.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: And so one of the ideas I don't want to get ahead of myself is to actually have parking space for every legislator. You'd be number 75, number 76, and right where you are because you're the dean of the house so it just makes it easier because then when you park, pull up, and you're like I'm number 75 and someone's in my spot, you notice for it. Right now legislators don't know how to report it because they just go to the next open spot, so we'll have a much better idea of how to solve the issue if there's assigned parking, but that would be a huge, huge project.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: I want to go down by that.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: And I would protest because Shawn would have

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: a lower number.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: He basically has his signed spot.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: That's such a big deal. Yeah. So how many requests we got? I guess, up a little bit, because I know parking is an issue, ADA is an issue, so how many

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: requests do you get in a week for the public ADA parking? Dozens. Dozens. It's so hands on. It is practically, it's almost a miracle to go up to the State House and park independently without having to ask for help if you need ABA. And that's why I give up my spot most of the time for members of the public who need a place to park.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So you only have two spots now, I haven't had.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: Pretty much, and my one secret, not secret spot, but I always try to keep one of the C lot open, and that was just assigned to a legislator who has a mobility,

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: temporary mobility issues. How does

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: the process work? Like, does somebody pull up into a drizzle spot, like, following the sergeant arms or?

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: Usually Capitol Police, that's the

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: phone number that's posted at

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: the gate. Okay. And then the Capitol Police will help them find a spot, sometimes we even leave one of

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: the police officers' cars or staff members to make a spot for the public. So, I'm wondering, is there a way, because you're gonna fill in courtyard Mhmm. To the doors that go to the Lincoln Hallway. Is there a way to extend that? And have that open specifically an entryway there to the quarter for ADA access only. Is there a way that we design to go beyond the arch? You got the doors, the back way up to the mezzanine and the speaker's office, and then you've got the door into the Lincoln Hall. If you went beyond that and had an entrance there, specifically legislators to use it, but also that's where ADA folks would enter the building and not have to go around here. Is there a way to redesign filling in the quarter and going further?

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: At the east end of the courtyard underneath the archway, on the east side of the Windsor Lincoln Courtyard exits, we have an entrance there for the legislature. So, can, at anyone's discretion, voting authority, that can be used by anybody. But

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: could that be the designated ADA address? And I know that would put pressure in terms of screening. But if you know that there's ADA folks coming in, they would need card access. Yes. It wouldn't be open like it would be here. They would need card access. But if you knew, usually you'd know folks coming in who need ADA access.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: You could arrange that in advance. You could, and they could come in, but you likely need additional architecture to support that. You would need to have a screening operation though, on that side of the building. And that can be achieved. So we talk about, I've actually started to change some of the language. I'm not referring it to single point of I'll refer to it as security screening because the goal is not to have a single point of entry. The goal is to have screening in every entry. So you could theoretically have two screening operations on the east and west, it's just twice the staff, twice the equipment, but not twice the amount of architecture, structure, design. The east

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: side entry will already be there. It's for folks like us instead. But I'm wondering if that is the entrance that we use for ADA. And then because you've got the parking there. Yeah. What do you do during the summer? The doors, front doors are open. You're just not doing that anymore? Talk about those front doors.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: I'm gonna stick to opening the front doors for as long as I'm alive.

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: Because that's really important. So no, in

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: the tourist season, the doors will be open. They have. And my goal is still to open those front doors at least one major in session for legislators to enjoy.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Yeah, that's how we get out of here. We're gonna be on there. We're all those front doors.

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: If it's during a legislative session, should have a multiple experience for the nation. It's very important from a symbolic point of view to have those front doors.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: The session's ending. It's time to finish up and get out of here. It's emotional. Same like we used to open up the windows in the well. So I hope the gentleman's coming. Gotta have those little signals. But

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: to the original point, when this sign comes back, we're gonna see some kind of ingress, egress for drugs and parking plans We've working on this.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: So, we're always a committee. What we've just got is just language in our capital bill on page two that says, state has entry upgrades. Do we put in design documents so at least we know what's happening with that money? Yes. We have nothing here, absolutely nothing.

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: Yes.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: It is acceptable to add some language to be inclusive of trucking ingress, egress, and parking reconfigurations?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: What would their language say?

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Oh, that's for John Gray, the parking plan, or whatever. That'd be an element that's part of this? I want someone to see city again.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: A parking plan for ADA? Well, I was gonna say, no, for legislative staff and the public in ADA And trucking? Deliveries?

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: Not necessarily. To

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: clarify for understanding, would it be parking plan to address the loss of spaces that you're seeing or, like, a broader parking plan? Because we've been discussing that. I just wanna

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: I think it'd be the loss of spaces. And then just to to make sure that we have proper ingress, egress for truck deliveries, which is strained now, and it's gonna be, you know, that much, more challenging.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: And the ADA

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: access? Mhmm. Sure. That's in here already.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Parking. Parking. ADA. Gotcha. It was the entryways for ADA, but it's the park. I'm looking at the parking. So a parking plan to address loss of spaces, trucking access, and ADA parking. Mhmm. Is that what folks want? Yep. Yes. Yes. And keep it at 1.3 and that we're in design documents. Should we say construction documents as well?

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: I think the flexibility of just leaving it to design work or something that's more generic might give us some flexibility.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Can I ask a question?

[Janet Miller (Sergeant at Arms)]: I know you should ask a question. If you don't include construction documents in the language, it doesn't preclude us from moving into that phase, correct? Because this 1,300,000 gives opportunity us to start looking construction management term. So I just want to make sure the language doesn't Next

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: year, we'd have to figure out where we're finding the money. Because once you get that far, then you're going out to bid. And we're not committed to money yet So I'll allow you to go out to bid.

[Emily Kusicki (Deputy Commissioner, Buildings & General Services)]: Yeah. That's why I was suggesting the more generic design work, but I wouldn't because he wouldn't be hiring.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Because the process will be come January. You're not going to be ready to go out to bid with those construction documents. You'll be in the beginning of construction documents. So it will be more refined. The governor's not gonna put any money in to go forward with construction. And that's gonna be the reality of the situation. So then in testimony before this committee, you need to know what is happening. You finish your design documents. You've begun your construction documents. So it refines more of what the issues are coming up to the top and what issues have been resolved. And then the legislature will work with BGS and Sergeant General Adams and Freeman French Freeman saying, this is not looking quite right. What about if you tweak this? The cost is gonna go up. Maybe we see a price tag of 22,000,000 and we say, oh, a minute, we're not going that high. What could we cut back on? Those are gonna be the conversations next year in this committee. And then you kind of finalize what money you're gonna put in for FY '28 and FY '29. So f y '28 will get you to go out to bid and maybe start some construction, maybe. That would be summer '28. But you're not gonna start construction in October 27 with the sessions starting in December or January. So your construction season's not gonna start till May '28. Really? Am I

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: off base on that one, Shawn? No. Not major construction. If if we did start, would probably be in the form of some enabling projects so that we would be ready to start the primary construction. Which you

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: could start at the '27, possibly, if the money's there. You But can't go out to bid and you're not gonna finalize those construction documents until you come back here. Because we can say, wait a minute, this looks right on target or wait a minute, this is overboard. That that will be the next step. So the 1.3 get you to the beginning of construction documents. And then next year, that 1.3 will get you to the end of the construction was spring twenty seven. '27.

[Shawn Brennan (Architect, Freeman French Freeman)]: Yeah. That sounds right.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: That makes sense to folks for the timeline? Yeah.

[Rep. Conor Casey (Member)]: That sounds good.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair, House Corrections and Institutions Committee)]: Okay. So we'll work on some language. We'll pass it by BGS. You, Shawn, you can Agatha can share it with Shawn too. Sense? Yeah. So thank you folks for coming in. So we're off of let's go off of YouTube. We will be back at some point, but just not sure how the day's gonna flow. If you're not comfortable, maybe we can come off the floor.