New way to build may save
While state leaders wait years to learn whether a revamped public-construction law saves millions of dollars on a trio of projects, scores of other building projects will continue under a 132-year-old law that university presidents say adds to their costs.
Ohio State University leaders hope to save $100 million or more on the $1billion medical center expansion. It will be one of three pilot construction projects to be completed under public-construction law changes approved as part of a state budget fix in December.
In the meantime, the university will spend about $200 million a year on other projects, including a $170 million renovation of five tower dorms and a $126 million chemistry and chemical engineering building.
Those and other undertakings across the state will continue to be built under Ohio’s current “multiple-prime contracting,” which hires separate contractors for general construction, plumbing and electrical work.
Ohio is the last state in the nation that solely uses that approach.
“The place we end up struggling is coordination among all those contractors,” said Lynn Readey, associate vice president of facilities, operations and development at Ohio State.
“All of the studies show that when you have a single point of contact it really makes a big difference, when a single construction management company can coordinate all of that work.”
The lack of coordination adds time to a construction project, she said. More time equals more money.
For that reason, some say state lawmakers should not wait long before expanding the construction-law overhaul to all public projects. Supporters have projected savings at 10 percent to 30percent.
Senate Republicans – who did not overhaul Ohio construction law while the GOP controlled all of state government for 14 years – in December pushed to get changes recommended by a governor-appointed council into the $851 million state budget fix. But House Democrats balked, and the two sides ended with a compromise allowing three pilot projects to proceed.
Sen. David Goodman, R-New Albany, said he would like another push for a full construction overhaul in the state capital budget, which likely will be considered later this year.
“I don’t know what kind of convincing (lawmakers) need,” he said. “If anybody is saying they are waiting for (pilot project data) to make a determination as to whether this is a good idea, I’m skeptical of that. We’re the last state not to do this. It’s a proven fact that this will save hundreds of millions of dollars.”
While a renewed push in the capital budget is not likely, Senate President Bill M. Harris, R-Ashland, said he wants to move a separate construction overhaul bill this year.
“I don’t think having hearings on a bill would impact at all on the pilot projects,” he said. “The pilot projects will indicate that construction reform needs to go forward.”
The Ohio Board of Regents plans to pick the three pilot construction projects March 23, with hopes that the state Controlling Board will approve the selections April 5. From there, the regents plan to issue reports on the projects every six months, possibly starting in January.
The speed of data flow will depend on the size of the project, said Ohio’s higher-education chancellor, Eric D. Fingerhut. The Ohio State Medical Center, including construction of a 17-story hospital tower by 2014, will be the largest of the projects.
Savings might not materialize at the initial bidding but could come when one looks at the entire project, including change orders, litigation and cost overruns, Fingerhut said.
“Now we’re going to have some real data on which the General Assembly can make a decision, rather than impressions and conflicting testimony,” he said.
“I’ve never talked to a university president in my entire career in state government that hasn’t wanted this law to be changed. They want to get projects done faster and cheaper.”
Sen. John A. Carey Jr., a Wellston Republican and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said it’s a shame that only three projects can be completed under the new law, but that shouldn’t discount what is being done.
“We do lots of things incrementally in state government, so doing it this way, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that,” Carey said. “I think it will lead to complete construction reform.”
But barring major political changes, that reform is likely a few years away. Some unions have pressured Democrats to block the initiative, and Carey said he also heard opposition from architects and other subcontractors.
“When you do things more efficiently in government and save taxpayers money, it means someone else isn’t going to get the money,” he said.
Speaker Pro Tempore Matthew Szollosi, an Oregon Democrat, union attorney and leading opponent of placing construction changes in budget bills last year, said the issue is too complex to make a quick decision.
“It’s difficult to gauge how much data will be enough to trigger a conclusion,” he said. “I think it’s a difficult sell to conclude you’re going to get those types of savings early in the construction process.”
Widener Energy Bill Heard (SB 232)
Architect’s Board testifies on Grandfather Bill (SB 183)
Senate Republicans Float Alternative To House Democrat’s Tax Break Proposal For Renewable Energy
As House Democrats put the finishing touches on a plan to ease the tax burden on renewable energy, the Republican Senate Energy & Public Utilities Committee chairman on Wednesday unveiled a proposal he says is much simpler and less contentious.
Rep. Roland Winburn (D-Dayton) announced plans to introduce legislation to eliminate the Tangible Personal Property tax on wind and solar facilities’ generation equipment to spur renewable energy development in the state.
The measure, which is similar to his previous measure designed to reduce the TPP for green energy production (HB 218
), is a response to Gov. Ted Strickland’s call to phase out the tax on wind and solar facilities to help Ohio compete for renewable energy job creation.
“Our neighboring states are competing aggressively for renewable energy jobs,” Rep. Winburn said in a news release. “We must position Ohio to compete just as effectively. This legislation will help see construction on wind and solar production facilities in Ohio by the end of this year, and for Ohio to become a leader in tomorrow’s green economy.”
House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Rep. Tom Letson (D-Warren), who will likely oversee the proposal in his committee, said, “I would like to thank Gov. Strickland for his leadership on this issue, and hope we can work with the Senate to find a solution to bring new, green jobs to Ohio as quickly as possible.”
Widener Approach:
Meanwhile, the Senate will soon take up a separate proposal from Sen. Chris Widener (R-Springfield). Rather than phasing out the tax, it would allow renewable energy companies to apply to the Ohio Air Quality Development Authority for an exemption from the TPP and instead pay an annual fee of $6,000 per megawatt of installed capacity for the life of the facility.
The measure would reduce a wind facility’s total average state tax liability from more than $40,000 per megawatt to $6,000, which is comparable to rates charged in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Indiana and West Virginia, he said during a news conference.
Eliminating the TPP on renewable energy generation is difficult because it involves defining new technology that isn’t already defined in law, he said. Further, the tax burden varies in each locality and depreciates over time.
Moreover, local governments and school districts that receive TPP revenue will likely oppose efforts to eliminate the tax, Sen. Widener said. However his legislation would ensure a continued revenue stream.
“When you do something related to the TPP and personal property tax for local governments, they’re going to get upset,” he said. “What we offer in Senate Bill 232 is much more simple, easy to understand, easy for them… to predict what the revenue stream’s going to be.”
Chairman Widener said he believed the two parties and chambers could work together to quickly pass the measure. “I hope they quickly can see that we need to be more simple than complex when it comes to dealing with something of this nature.”
Rep. Cliff Hite (R-Findlay), who previously planned to be a primary co-sponsor of Rep. Winburn’s bill, said he hoped to persuade fellow House members that Sen. Widener’s proposal was a better approach that adequately quells the concerns of the many interested parties.
“If it gets political and I feel I have to do a stand-alone bill, I will do that. But I don’t think that would be the best avenue. I would like for them to come in with us at least close to this – if not a companion bill, something relatively close so we can work it out quickly and get it done,” he said.
Republicans and Democrats agree that passing a measure quickly is critical to beat deadlines to qualify for a windfall in federal stimulus funding for renewable energy development. Both measures call for the facilities to be operational by 2012 and both would require companies to commit to create jobs in Ohio.
Sen. Widener said changes to the tax code are necessary to ensure that the six proposed wind projects pending before the Power Siting Board would create an estimated 700 jobs.
Capital Bill Talk Starts: Expect Smaller/Fewer Projects
Action on more state debt to fund bricks-and-mortar projects around Ohio is on the horizon for the General Assembly, although some differences of opinion have already surfaced regarding the timing for the next capital appropriations budget.
Guidelines for project requests distributed recently by majority House Democrats have started the biennial surge of phone calls and emails to members of both chambers from the wide array of interests that stand to benefit from the fiscal year 2011-2012 construction bonds, ball-parked by the Office of Budget and Management at about $1.8 billion when planning the Third Frontier issue.
That $700 million bond issue, which goes before voters on the May 4 ballot as Issue 1, is the subject of some leeriness as it relates to the timing of the capital bill. Officials want to avoid voter confusion over the high-tech research and development package versus the regular biennial capital budget even though both authorize the issuance of state debt over a number of years.
“We worked hard to be fiscally responsible as it relates to the Third Frontier initiative that’s on the ballot, so I would like for us to concentrate on the Third Frontier and getting that passed before we get into the issue of going forward with the capital budget,” Senate President Bill Harris (R-Ashland) said.
“We ought to not mix apples and oranges for sure. The capital budget is a totally different thing than doing the Third Frontier initiative,” he added, while saying he sees no reason the capital bill couldn’t be processed after summer recess.
House Speaker Armond Budish (D-Beachwood), on the other hand, said in a recent interview regarding the capital bill, “We hope to be working on that very soon. We’d like members to be getting us their projects now.”
In fact, House members were recently sent a capital project request form and a list of project types that don’t qualify for the bond money, such as those entailing operating expenses. This cycle is expected to be no different in that the $100 million or so that’s usually set aside for local “community projects” will get the most attention from legislators even though it accounts for only a fraction of the capital bill.
The speaker echoed the Senate leader in stating that voters should understand the key differences between the legislature-approved capital plan and the pending Third Frontier ballot issue.
“They are completely different,” Speaker Budish said. “One is investment in technology, aerospace, biomedical and other jobs of the future. Capital projects help our communities with capital needs, so they’re very different.
The bond packages are also different in that the Third Frontier unlike the capital bill will not count against the state’s 5% debt ceiling based on general revenues and lottery profits in a given year.
Still, the state’s debt load, along with other fiscal and economic concerns in general are expected to keep the capital bond total somewhat in check this cycle.
“I expect it to be smaller and I expect the projects to be smaller and fewer,” Speaker Budish said.
In preparing policymakers for debate over the Third Frontier plan a few months ago, OBM suggested the FY 2011-2012 capital bill would be about $1.8 billion, which is roughly in line with recent capital spending.
“That’s certainly the sizing we’ve been looking at,” OBM Director Pari Sabety said in an interview. That amount of debt can be authorized under the 5% cap.
The last capital measure (HB562, 127th General Assembly) only appropriated about $1.3 billion, but that was smaller mostly because the state avoided issuing hundreds of millions in bonds for Ohio School Facilities Commission projects by instead financing school construction projects with proceeds from the securitization of $5 billion-plus in tobacco settlement payments.
Timing and financial issues aside, if the debate over the last budget-related bill (HB 318
) is any indication, capital bill deliberations could provide fertile ground for the next partisan tug-of-war over state finances and public policies in general.
The last two-year capital budget also doubled as a budget correction measure of sorts, with dozens of provisions hitching a ride and 13 attracting ink from Gov. Ted Strickland’s veto pen.
Director Sabety said there have been preliminary discussions with agencies on corrective language but to what extent the bill would serve as a vehicle for statutory changes hasn’t been hashed out yet with legislative leaders.
Sen. Harris said he wanted to sit down with Gov. Ted Strickland and Speaker Budish to discuss the capital bill plans. The Senate leader has recently tied the lack of any prior GOP input to difficulties in getting bills such as the budget fix through his chamber.
“We have not yet had any types of communications with the governor relative to what his intentions, what he’d like to do with the capital budget,” Sen. Harris said, adding that the House’s preparations have already triggered numerous inquiries. “It’s got lots of people coming to our members and coming to me wanting to talk about the capital budget, and what about community projects and so forth and getting people interested in it, but we don’t have anything at this point that we can work toward.
“It’s uncomfortable to go to a meeting and (hear), ‘This is what I’ve decided what we’re going to do,’… when all the decision-makers haven’t decided it,” Sen. Harris said. “So I just hope that before this goes forward we’ll have an opportunity” to talk.
Ms. Sabety said the administration plans as much and deferred most questions over details of the bill pending those high-level discussions.
“This bill is normally done as a consensus bill between the House, the Senate and the executive branch,” she said. “We’re looking forward to beginning deeper conversations about that but those conversations have not yet begun.”
Historic Preservation Needs Your Help
|
Historic Preservation Needs Your Help ACT NOW to Restore Funding for Historic Preservation Programs
Last week, President Obama released his FY 2011 budget request that would eliminate funding for Save America’s Treasures (SAT) and Preserve America (PA), and cut funding for National Heritage Areas by 50 percent. These critical historic preservation programs matter now more than ever — not only because they protect our national heritage but because they serve as economic development engines and job creators in the thousands of communities they serve. For example, Save America’s Treasures alone has been responsible for more than 16,000 jobs since it was created just ten years ago. We’re asking you to act now and use our easy online form to send a message to your members of Congress asking them to support restoration of funding for Save America’s Treasures and other preservation programs as the House and Senate work on their respective budget bills. Simply enter your zip code. It’s easy and takes a few minutes. We have provided a sample letter but we encourage you to personalize it. WHAT YOU CAN DO:
For additional information, visit:
|
|||||
|
National Trust for Historic Preservation |
Chris Widener, FAIA Named Vice Chairman of Senate Finance Committee
AIA-Ohio Past President, Senator Chris Widener, FAIA, has been named Vice Chairman of the powerful Senate Finance and Financial Institutions. Chris also serves as Chairman of the Senate Energy and Public Utilities Committee and sits on the Senate’s Insurance, Commerce and Labor and Ways and Means and Economic Development Committees.
Because of Chris, the voice of architecture is present on most important statewide issues!
State Senator Chris Widener represents the 10th Senate District, which includes Madison, Clark and Greene counties. Before coming to the Senate, he served three terms as the State Representative for the 84th House District. An architect by trade, Chris brings strong interpersonal skills, a dedicated work ethic and a keen attention to detail to his job as a legislator. He engages with witnesses in committee and his fellow senators about key issues. He spends hours researching important bills. And, he has a genuine passion for public service and a dedication to doing what is best for the people of the 10th District and the future success of the region.
Senate Committee Hears Sustainability Bill (HB7
The Senate Finance and Financial Institutions Committee took sponsor testimony Tuesday on HB7 which would require a building or structure erected or constructed using state capital moneys to adhere to certain sustainability standards.
Rep. Harris said her bill would require buildings constructed with state capital budget money to meet certain energy efficiency and building standards, and would encourage the use of Ohio-made products. Specifically, building standards would be either Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) silver level or higher; certification at the two green globes level or higher from the Green Building Initiative; or a nationally recognized design standard chosen by the Department of Administrative Services.
Energy efficiency standards would require projects to exceed by at least 30 percent the most current standards of
the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers; or a national energy performance
rating of not less than 77 under the Energy Star system.
Harris said the energy savings resulting from such standards will generally allow building owners to recoup their
higher upfront costs within a number of years.
Sen. Kearney said he and his wife had been involved in a project to build the first LEED silver building in
Cincinnati, and they found it difficult and expensive. “As we began … to look at the bill for stuff, our environmentalism slowly deteriorated,” Kearney said.
Harris responded that LEED is being revamped to be more user friendly, and includes several options for meeting
standards.
In response to a question from Sen. Carey, Harris said the bill does not cover publicly funded renovations or
historic building restorations, saying it’s generally more cost-effective to start from the ground up when seeking
these standards.
Sen. Widener suggested including a cost-benefit analysis for determining if the standards should be required,
noting that upfront costs might be too high for certain project types. Harris said she’d contemplated allowing
waivers if builders can show they couldn’t recoup the upfront costs within 20 years.
Architect’s Licensing Bill (SB 183) Heard
Architect’s Licensing Bill (SB 183) Heard
The House Civil and Commercial Law Committee held a hearing February 2 on SB 183 which would eliminate a grandfather exemption from the requirements of the Architects Law granted to certain corporations.
In sponsor testimony, Sen. Schaffer said that the Ohio Architects Board brought a matter to his attention that needed to be addressed. There exists a grandfathering provision in the law concerning requirements for ownership of architecture firms. The provision allows firms operating for many years to be passed to relatives of original founders without having to meet the strict ownership requirements. The Board of Architecture reported to Shaffer a specific issue concerning an individual who had bought out an existing firm. The person who acquired the firm was not a licensed architect but was able to get around regulatory law by exploiting the loophole.
SB183 would move the grandfathering provision to the section dealing specifically with ownership requirements. “This will narrow the grandfathering provision to make sure that a company can keep passing down a firm from parents to children. However, the new location of the grandfathering provision will still ensure that a company uses licensed architects to provide architecture services,” said Schaffer.
New way to build may save
While state leaders wait years to learn whether a revamped public-construction law saves millions of dollars on a trio of projects, scores of other building projects will continue under a 132-year-old law that university presidents say adds to their costs.
Ohio State University leaders hope to save $100 million or more on the $1billion medical center expansion. It will be one of three pilot construction projects to be completed under public-construction law changes approved as part of a state budget fix in December.
In the meantime, the university will spend about $200 million a year on other projects, including a $170 million renovation of five tower dorms and a $126 million chemistry and chemical engineering building.
Those and other undertakings across the state will continue to be built under Ohio’s current “multiple-prime contracting,” which hires separate contractors for general construction, plumbing and electrical work.
Ohio is the last state in the nation that solely uses that approach.
“The place we end up struggling is coordination among all those contractors,” said Lynn Readey, associate vice president of facilities, operations and development at Ohio State.
“All of the studies show that when you have a single point of contact it really makes a big difference, when a single construction management company can coordinate all of that work.”
The lack of coordination adds time to a construction project, she said. More time equals more money.
For that reason, some say state lawmakers should not wait long before expanding the construction-law overhaul to all public projects. Supporters have projected savings at 10 percent to 30percent.
Senate Republicans – who did not overhaul Ohio construction law while the GOP controlled all of state government for 14 years – in December pushed to get changes recommended by a governor-appointed council into the $851 million state budget fix. But House Democrats balked, and the two sides ended with a compromise allowing three pilot projects to proceed.
Sen. David Goodman, R-New Albany, said he would like another push for a full construction overhaul in the state capital budget, which likely will be considered later this year.
“I don’t know what kind of convincing (lawmakers) need,” he said. “If anybody is saying they are waiting for (pilot project data) to make a determination as to whether this is a good idea, I’m skeptical of that. We’re the last state not to do this. It’s a proven fact that this will save hundreds of millions of dollars.”
While a renewed push in the capital budget is not likely, Senate President Bill M. Harris, R-Ashland, said he wants to move a separate construction overhaul bill this year.
“I don’t think having hearings on a bill would impact at all on the pilot projects,” he said. “The pilot projects will indicate that construction reform needs to go forward.”
The Ohio Board of Regents plans to pick the three pilot construction projects March 23, with hopes that the state Controlling Board will approve the selections April 5. From there, the regents plan to issue reports on the projects every six months, possibly starting in January.
The speed of data flow will depend on the size of the project, said Ohio’s higher-education chancellor, Eric D. Fingerhut. The Ohio State Medical Center, including construction of a 17-story hospital tower by 2014, will be the largest of the projects.
Savings might not materialize at the initial bidding but could come when one looks at the entire project, including change orders, litigation and cost overruns, Fingerhut said.
“Now we’re going to have some real data on which the General Assembly can make a decision, rather than impressions and conflicting testimony,” he said.
“I’ve never talked to a university president in my entire career in state government that hasn’t wanted this law to be changed. They want to get projects done faster and cheaper.”
Sen. John A. Carey Jr., a Wellston Republican and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said it’s a shame that only three projects can be completed under the new law, but that shouldn’t discount what is being done.
“We do lots of things incrementally in state government, so doing it this way, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that,” Carey said. “I think it will lead to complete construction reform.”
But barring major political changes, that reform is likely a few years away. Some unions have pressured Democrats to block the initiative, and Carey said he also heard opposition from architects and other subcontractors.
“When you do things more efficiently in government and save taxpayers money, it means someone else isn’t going to get the money,” he said.
Speaker Pro Tempore Matthew Szollosi, an Oregon Democrat, union attorney and leading opponent of placing construction changes in budget bills last year, said the issue is too complex to make a quick decision.
“It’s difficult to gauge how much data will be enough to trigger a conclusion,” he said. “I think it’s a difficult sell to conclude you’re going to get those types of savings early in the construction process.”
Widener Energy Bill Heard (SB 232)
Architect’s Board testifies on Grandfather Bill (SB 183)
Senate Republicans Float Alternative To House Democrat’s Tax Break Proposal For Renewable Energy
As House Democrats put the finishing touches on a plan to ease the tax burden on renewable energy, the Republican Senate Energy & Public Utilities Committee chairman on Wednesday unveiled a proposal he says is much simpler and less contentious.
Rep. Roland Winburn (D-Dayton) announced plans to introduce legislation to eliminate the Tangible Personal Property tax on wind and solar facilities’ generation equipment to spur renewable energy development in the state.
The measure, which is similar to his previous measure designed to reduce the TPP for green energy production (HB 218), is a response to Gov. Ted Strickland’s call to phase out the tax on wind and solar facilities to help Ohio compete for renewable energy job creation.
“Our neighboring states are competing aggressively for renewable energy jobs,” Rep. Winburn said in a news release. “We must position Ohio to compete just as effectively. This legislation will help see construction on wind and solar production facilities in Ohio by the end of this year, and for Ohio to become a leader in tomorrow’s green economy.”
House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Rep. Tom Letson (D-Warren), who will likely oversee the proposal in his committee, said, “I would like to thank Gov. Strickland for his leadership on this issue, and hope we can work with the Senate to find a solution to bring new, green jobs to Ohio as quickly as possible.”
Widener Approach:
Meanwhile, the Senate will soon take up a separate proposal from Sen. Chris Widener (R-Springfield). Rather than phasing out the tax, it would allow renewable energy companies to apply to the Ohio Air Quality Development Authority for an exemption from the TPP and instead pay an annual fee of $6,000 per megawatt of installed capacity for the life of the facility.
The measure would reduce a wind facility’s total average state tax liability from more than $40,000 per megawatt to $6,000, which is comparable to rates charged in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Indiana and West Virginia, he said during a news conference.
Eliminating the TPP on renewable energy generation is difficult because it involves defining new technology that isn’t already defined in law, he said. Further, the tax burden varies in each locality and depreciates over time.
Moreover, local governments and school districts that receive TPP revenue will likely oppose efforts to eliminate the tax, Sen. Widener said. However his legislation would ensure a continued revenue stream.
“When you do something related to the TPP and personal property tax for local governments, they’re going to get upset,” he said. “What we offer in Senate Bill 232 is much more simple, easy to understand, easy for them… to predict what the revenue stream’s going to be.”
Chairman Widener said he believed the two parties and chambers could work together to quickly pass the measure. “I hope they quickly can see that we need to be more simple than complex when it comes to dealing with something of this nature.”
Rep. Cliff Hite (R-Findlay), who previously planned to be a primary co-sponsor of Rep. Winburn’s bill, said he hoped to persuade fellow House members that Sen. Widener’s proposal was a better approach that adequately quells the concerns of the many interested parties.
“If it gets political and I feel I have to do a stand-alone bill, I will do that. But I don’t think that would be the best avenue. I would like for them to come in with us at least close to this – if not a companion bill, something relatively close so we can work it out quickly and get it done,” he said.
Republicans and Democrats agree that passing a measure quickly is critical to beat deadlines to qualify for a windfall in federal stimulus funding for renewable energy development. Both measures call for the facilities to be operational by 2012 and both would require companies to commit to create jobs in Ohio.
Sen. Widener said changes to the tax code are necessary to ensure that the six proposed wind projects pending before the Power Siting Board would create an estimated 700 jobs.
Capital Bill Talk Starts: Expect Smaller/Fewer Projects
Action on more state debt to fund bricks-and-mortar projects around Ohio is on the horizon for the General Assembly, although some differences of opinion have already surfaced regarding the timing for the next capital appropriations budget.
Guidelines for project requests distributed recently by majority House Democrats have started the biennial surge of phone calls and emails to members of both chambers from the wide array of interests that stand to benefit from the fiscal year 2011-2012 construction bonds, ball-parked by the Office of Budget and Management at about $1.8 billion when planning the Third Frontier issue.
That $700 million bond issue, which goes before voters on the May 4 ballot as Issue 1, is the subject of some leeriness as it relates to the timing of the capital bill. Officials want to avoid voter confusion over the high-tech research and development package versus the regular biennial capital budget even though both authorize the issuance of state debt over a number of years.
“We worked hard to be fiscally responsible as it relates to the Third Frontier initiative that’s on the ballot, so I would like for us to concentrate on the Third Frontier and getting that passed before we get into the issue of going forward with the capital budget,” Senate President Bill Harris (R-Ashland) said.
“We ought to not mix apples and oranges for sure. The capital budget is a totally different thing than doing the Third Frontier initiative,” he added, while saying he sees no reason the capital bill couldn’t be processed after summer recess.
House Speaker Armond Budish (D-Beachwood), on the other hand, said in a recent interview regarding the capital bill, “We hope to be working on that very soon. We’d like members to be getting us their projects now.”
In fact, House members were recently sent a capital project request form and a list of project types that don’t qualify for the bond money, such as those entailing operating expenses. This cycle is expected to be no different in that the $100 million or so that’s usually set aside for local “community projects” will get the most attention from legislators even though it accounts for only a fraction of the capital bill.
The speaker echoed the Senate leader in stating that voters should understand the key differences between the legislature-approved capital plan and the pending Third Frontier ballot issue.
“They are completely different,” Speaker Budish said. “One is investment in technology, aerospace, biomedical and other jobs of the future. Capital projects help our communities with capital needs, so they’re very different.
The bond packages are also different in that the Third Frontier unlike the capital bill will not count against the state’s 5% debt ceiling based on general revenues and lottery profits in a given year.
Still, the state’s debt load, along with other fiscal and economic concerns in general are expected to keep the capital bond total somewhat in check this cycle.
“I expect it to be smaller and I expect the projects to be smaller and fewer,” Speaker Budish said.
In preparing policymakers for debate over the Third Frontier plan a few months ago, OBM suggested the FY 2011-2012 capital bill would be about $1.8 billion, which is roughly in line with recent capital spending.
“That’s certainly the sizing we’ve been looking at,” OBM Director Pari Sabety said in an interview. That amount of debt can be authorized under the 5% cap.
The last capital measure (HB562, 127th General Assembly) only appropriated about $1.3 billion, but that was smaller mostly because the state avoided issuing hundreds of millions in bonds for Ohio School Facilities Commission projects by instead financing school construction projects with proceeds from the securitization of $5 billion-plus in tobacco settlement payments.
Timing and financial issues aside, if the debate over the last budget-related bill (HB 318) is any indication, capital bill deliberations could provide fertile ground for the next partisan tug-of-war over state finances and public policies in general.
The last two-year capital budget also doubled as a budget correction measure of sorts, with dozens of provisions hitching a ride and 13 attracting ink from Gov. Ted Strickland’s veto pen.
Director Sabety said there have been preliminary discussions with agencies on corrective language but to what extent the bill would serve as a vehicle for statutory changes hasn’t been hashed out yet with legislative leaders.
Sen. Harris said he wanted to sit down with Gov. Ted Strickland and Speaker Budish to discuss the capital bill plans. The Senate leader has recently tied the lack of any prior GOP input to difficulties in getting bills such as the budget fix through his chamber.
“We have not yet had any types of communications with the governor relative to what his intentions, what he’d like to do with the capital budget,” Sen. Harris said, adding that the House’s preparations have already triggered numerous inquiries. “It’s got lots of people coming to our members and coming to me wanting to talk about the capital budget, and what about community projects and so forth and getting people interested in it, but we don’t have anything at this point that we can work toward.
“It’s uncomfortable to go to a meeting and (hear), ‘This is what I’ve decided what we’re going to do,’… when all the decision-makers haven’t decided it,” Sen. Harris said. “So I just hope that before this goes forward we’ll have an opportunity” to talk.
Ms. Sabety said the administration plans as much and deferred most questions over details of the bill pending those high-level discussions.
“This bill is normally done as a consensus bill between the House, the Senate and the executive branch,” she said. “We’re looking forward to beginning deeper conversations about that but those conversations have not yet begun.”
Historic Preservation Needs Your Help
|
Historic Preservation Needs Your Help ACT NOW to Restore Funding for Historic Preservation Programs
Last week, President Obama released his FY 2011 budget request that would eliminate funding for Save America’s Treasures (SAT) and Preserve America (PA), and cut funding for National Heritage Areas by 50 percent. These critical historic preservation programs matter now more than ever — not only because they protect our national heritage but because they serve as economic development engines and job creators in the thousands of communities they serve. For example, Save America’s Treasures alone has been responsible for more than 16,000 jobs since it was created just ten years ago. We’re asking you to act now and use our easy online form to send a message to your members of Congress asking them to support restoration of funding for Save America’s Treasures and other preservation programs as the House and Senate work on their respective budget bills. Simply enter your zip code. It’s easy and takes a few minutes. We have provided a sample letter but we encourage you to personalize it. WHAT YOU CAN DO:
For additional information, visit:
|
|||||
|
National Trust for Historic Preservation |
Chris Widener, FAIA Named Vice Chairman of Senate Finance Committee
AIA-Ohio Past President, Senator Chris Widener, FAIA, has been named Vice Chairman of the powerful Senate Finance and Financial Institutions. Chris also serves as Chairman of the Senate Energy and Public Utilities Committee and sits on the Senate’s Insurance, Commerce and Labor and Ways and Means and Economic Development Committees.
Because of Chris, the voice of architecture is present on most important statewide issues!
State Senator Chris Widener represents the 10th Senate District, which includes Madison, Clark and Greene counties. Before coming to the Senate, he served three terms as the State Representative for the 84th House District. An architect by trade, Chris brings strong interpersonal skills, a dedicated work ethic and a keen attention to detail to his job as a legislator. He engages with witnesses in committee and his fellow senators about key issues. He spends hours researching important bills. And, he has a genuine passion for public service and a dedication to doing what is best for the people of the 10th District and the future success of the region.
Senate Committee Hears Sustainability Bill (HB7
The Senate Finance and Financial Institutions Committee took sponsor testimony Tuesday on HB7 which would require a building or structure erected or constructed using state capital moneys to adhere to certain sustainability standards.
Rep. Harris said her bill would require buildings constructed with state capital budget money to meet certain energy efficiency and building standards, and would encourage the use of Ohio-made products. Specifically, building standards would be either Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) silver level or higher; certification at the two green globes level or higher from the Green Building Initiative; or a nationally recognized design standard chosen by the Department of Administrative Services.
Energy efficiency standards would require projects to exceed by at least 30 percent the most current standards of
the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers; or a national energy performance
rating of not less than 77 under the Energy Star system.
Harris said the energy savings resulting from such standards will generally allow building owners to recoup their
higher upfront costs within a number of years.
Sen. Kearney said he and his wife had been involved in a project to build the first LEED silver building in
Cincinnati, and they found it difficult and expensive. “As we began … to look at the bill for stuff, our environmentalism slowly deteriorated,” Kearney said.
Harris responded that LEED is being revamped to be more user friendly, and includes several options for meeting
standards.
In response to a question from Sen. Carey, Harris said the bill does not cover publicly funded renovations or
historic building restorations, saying it’s generally more cost-effective to start from the ground up when seeking
these standards.
Sen. Widener suggested including a cost-benefit analysis for determining if the standards should be required,
noting that upfront costs might be too high for certain project types. Harris said she’d contemplated allowing
waivers if builders can show they couldn’t recoup the upfront costs within 20 years.
Architect’s Licensing Bill (SB 183) Heard
Architect’s Licensing Bill (SB 183) Heard
The House Civil and Commercial Law Committee held a hearing February 2 on SB 183 which would eliminate a grandfather exemption from the requirements of the Architects Law granted to certain corporations.
In sponsor testimony, Sen. Schaffer said that the Ohio Architects Board brought a matter to his attention that needed to be addressed. There exists a grandfathering provision in the law concerning requirements for ownership of architecture firms. The provision allows firms operating for many years to be passed to relatives of original founders without having to meet the strict ownership requirements. The Board of Architecture reported to Shaffer a specific issue concerning an individual who had bought out an existing firm. The person who acquired the firm was not a licensed architect but was able to get around regulatory law by exploiting the loophole.
SB183 would move the grandfathering provision to the section dealing specifically with ownership requirements. “This will narrow the grandfathering provision to make sure that a company can keep passing down a firm from parents to children. However, the new location of the grandfathering provision will still ensure that a company uses licensed architects to provide architecture services,” said Schaffer.