Skip to main content Skip to office menu Skip to footer
Capital IconMinnesota Legislature

Legislative News and Views - Rep. Jeff Howe (R)

Back to profile

New Senate Office Building unnecessary

Thursday, January 23, 2014

Dear Neighbor,

 

I want to remind people I will host a town hall meeting 5 p.m. Tuesday Jan. 28 at Avon City Hall (140 Stratford St. E). Residents of District 13A are invited to attend and provide me with input on the issues in preparation for the 2014 legislative session, which starts Feb. 25. Feedback from local citizens is very important as I continue doing my best to represent the people of this area and I hope you can join us Tuesday.

 

As for news from the Capitol, there needs to be more discussion about the Senate Office Building project that has been moving forward in development. The Senate Office Building was not discussed in committee or on the House floor.

 

Without this discussion, a project that spends $90 million in taxpayer dollars did not get the public input, I believe, it deserves. Blueprints have included excessive frills such as a reflecting pool and workout gym.

 

If you are not familiar with the proposed Senate Office Building project, here are the details:

  • Location: North of the Capitol, across the street and light rail line.
  • Size: 44 Senate Offices and associated hearing and meeting spaces.
  • Parking: Will have an adjacent parking ramp constructed with it.
  • Cost: $63 million for the Senate Office Building and $27 million for the parking ramp for a total of $90 million.

 

The reason given for the need for a Senate Office Building is that, as the Capitol refurbishing goes forward, many believe there should be more space returned to the original public use. I have not been told what those public uses will be or which spaces are proposed to be repurposed, I look forward to seeing the plan.

 

If we are going to have a Senate Office Building why is there not enough space to house all of the Senators’ offices? There are 67 Senators, but only 44 offices. It makes no sense to build a new building for 44 Senators when we have room now for 40 Senators in the State Office Building. With the proposed Senate Office Building, 23 Senators will continue to office in the Capitol building. In essence, we are building a new structure for 4 Senators. This is a Senate Office Building, so why aren't there 67 offices?

 

When I asked a fellow Representative from the other side of the aisle why only 44 offices, he said he thought there were enough offices for all the Senators. This is another indication that this issue has not been thoroughly vetted. Of course, at a cost of $1.4 million per office, that could be a reason not to build 67 offices. If you add the cost of the parking ramp, it is over $2 million per office. Does this pass the common-sense test?

 

There is plenty of empty office space on the Capitol grounds and we don't need another building to maintain. With the relocation of some auxiliary service currently housed in the Capitol building there could be enough space to house all of the Senators in the Capitol. The Cedar Street National Guard Armory was just remodeled for around $9 million. That allowed many of the departments to relocate from the Veterans Services Building to the Cedar Street Armory; both buildings are located on the Capitol grounds. In fact, most of the five-story Veterans Services Building now sits empty with only one floor fully occupied. The Centennial Office Building, also located on the Capitol grounds, has more open office space. We also will have two floors of the State Office Building empty once the Senators move into the new Senate Office Building. That is more than six floors of empty office space! Are we really going to hire enough state employees to fill all those empty offices?

 

I believe there is plenty of existing office space on the Capitol grounds that should be repurposed and could provide the proposed needed space without building the new Senate Office Building. This would save millions of tax dollars, not only in current $90 million construction dollars but also in future building maintenance costs. The money saved could be put toward education, our transportation needs, or toward nursing homes and the long-term care industry.

 

Wherever we decide to put those dollars the question needs to be asked: “What is our priority?” I don’t believe it would be to build another office building to house part-time legislators. We should be putting tax dollars where they can make a true difference for our citizens.

 

Good luck and hope to see you in Avon this Tuesday,

Jeff