▶ 0:14:20The subcommittee on economic development, public buildings, and emergency management will come to order. Chair ask unanimous consent that I be authorized to declare recess at any time during today's hearing without objection. So ordered. Chair also ask unanimous consent that members not on the subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at today's hearing and ask questions without objection. So ordered.
▶ 0:14:42As a reminder, if members wish to insert a document into the record, please also email it to documents timail.house.gov. The chair now recognizes himself for the purposes of an opening statement for five minutes. Let me just begin with an apology to those who have traveled far and waited long and dealt with Washington DC for our tardiness here. Sometimes that things are out of our control. It's really not an excuse, but I just want to acknowledge that your time is valuable and we appreciate it.
▶ 0:15:12I want to thank our witnesses for being here today to discuss the costs associated with designing, constructing, and operating federal courouses. In 2021, the United States courts updated their official design guide for designing and constructing new federal courouses. Following the publication of the new design guide, this subcommittee requested that the Government Accountability Office examine the changes that were made and the extent to which these changes would have an impact on the size and cost of courouses.
▶ 0:15:43We made this request because there has been a long history of taxpayer dollars wasted on overbuilt federal courouses and we just don't see that as needing to continue. In 2010, GAO reviewed 33 courouses built between 2000 and 2010 and found they were overbuilt by 3.56 million square ft, costing the taxpayers $835 million plus $51 million annually
▶ 0:16:13in additional operation and maintenance costs. That's real money. Following those findings, this committee agreed on a bipartisan basis to stop authorizing new courouses until the courts updated their process for setting their courthouse priorities. Only after the courts updated their asset management plan or the AM process and used it to adjust their property list for new courouses did this committee restart authorizing projects.
▶ 0:16:43In 2021, the courts issued a revised design guide for new courouses. Since no courouses have been constructed using the 202021 design guide to conduct the 2024 report, GAO looked at six recently constructed courouses that had been built using the previous 2007 design guide.
▶ 0:17:06GAO found that if the new design guide had been used for these six courouses, it would have increased the size by almost 6% and the construction cost by almost 12%. Just to reiterate, in 2010, GAO found that courouses were overbuilt by more than 3 million square feet.
▶ 0:17:27The new design guide now will now result the new design guide now will result in 6% more space. This is at least questionable if unacceptable. On top of this, despite the results of its own research arm, the Federal Judicial Center, indicating that courtrooms sit dark most days, district court judges have cont continued to argue that each of them is entitled to a dedicated courtroom.
▶ 0:17:56Even though state and local courts across the country, many of wh many of which handle far more cases, routinely share courtrooms without issue. To accommodate this perceived entitlement, the federal judiciary often includes vacant or unfilled judgeships when calculated the number of courtrooms required in a new courthouse. This results in overbuilt facilities with unused courtrooms and significantly increased construction and maintenance costs.
▶ 0:18:23The chair expects that we will either hear that a maj major driver of the design change is safety and security particularly the size of circulation spaces. And while the chair agrees that security is important and legitimate consideration, it is our duty to question these things so that we get the most value including with the effic efficacy that goes with that.
▶ 0:18:46Now, however, the court's own methodology for prioritizing courthouse projects assigned security, just 10% of the weighted score, while courtroom and chamber needs make up 50%. It seems lopsided, but here we're not here to judge, at least prematurely. We want to get the answers.
▶ 0:19:02What is even more concerning is that the expansion of the circulation pattern is based in part on an outdated 2012 review of then existing courouses, some of which were were the subject of GAO's 2010 review that they found were overbuilt. It seemed the changes in the design guide had little to do with addressing security issues.
▶ 0:19:24So, I'm surprised by how much of the design guide focuses on things like mill work and floor and wall finishes and includes notes like polished cement is unacceptable. Frankly, it's hard to believe that at a time when Congress and the president are focused on downsizing the federal government and balancing the budget, the judiciary remains so tonedeaf to the fiscal realities. I mean, I walk on polished, probably unpolished concrete around here every single day, and I'm perfectly happy with it.
▶ 0:19:51The United States court's uh courthouse project priority for fiscal year 2026 includes a request for 863 million for new courthouse construction. The United States courts are asking Congress and more importantly our bosses, the American taxpayer to spend hundreds of millions of dollars of new courthouse construction despite decades of oversight that has found the design guides have enabled the construction of courouses that are too large and too costly.
▶ 0:20:18Going forward, Congress must take a hard look at the construction priority priorities of the United States courts, especially the 2021 design guide to ensure the taxpayer dollars are not being wasted. We need to ensure that proposals for new courouses that this committee must authorize make sense, reduce cost to the taxpayer, and not overbuilt. With that, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses.
▶ 0:20:42And just uh prior to recognizing the ranking member, I want to enter into the record this letter from the Associated Builders and Contractors regarding project labor agreements and the uh increased cost associated with those. And without objection, so ordered. The chair now recognizes the ranking member Freriedman for five minutes for her opening statement. Thank you, Chairman Perry.
▶ 0:21:04I have to say it's refreshing to be in a committee when we have Congress working in a very bipartisan way and I think being in agreement on a lot of the issues in front of the committee today. Over the last 45 years, the Government Accountability Office, the GAO, has compiled a large body of work on federal courthouse construction, much of it at the request of this very committee.
▶ 0:21:24In study after study, GAO found that the judiciary has requested and received courouses that are larger than the size authorized by Congress and more expensive to build and operate than Congress was aware of. Wide latitude amongst judiciary and GSA decision makers and choices about location, design, construction, and finishes often resulted in expensive features in some courthouse projects um for reasons that are obscure. Long range space projections by the the judiciary were not sufficiently reliable.
▶ 0:21:55The judiciary's five-year plan did not always reflect its most urgently needed projects and the judiciary did not track courtroom usage. The judiciary pays rent to GSA for the use of these courouses and the proportion of the judiciary's budget that goes to rent has increased as its base requirements have grown.
▶ 0:22:13Difficulties in paying for its increasing rent costs were so great that the judiciary requested a $483 million permanent annual exemption from REB payments to GSA, which they did not receive. Representative Elaine Holmes Norton, then chair of the subcommittee, was so concerned about the bloated federal courthouse construction program that she asked then President Obama to place a moratorum on new courthouse construction requests.
▶ 0:22:40Along the way, the judiciary did seem to try to meet the concern of Congress. The judicial conference revised its courtroom allocation planning assumptions. New courtroom construction projects are to be designed to facilitate courtroom sharing for senior district judges, magistrate judges, and bankruptcy judges. But there is still some cause for concern. In 2022, this committee asked GAA to look at differences between the court's 2007 design guide and their updated 2021 design guide.
▶ 0:23:09GAO found that the changes made to the 2021 design guide will increase the size of new courouses by 12%. As the judiciary increases the size of their spaces, the building envelope expands. More tile, more wiring, more ceiling tiles, more paint, longer hallways, increase circulation. You get the picture. The judiciary wanted three circulation zones. Public restricted space for judges and staff and the secure circulation, that's the marshall's service purview to move prisoners, which of course is appropriate.
▶ 0:23:40But when updating the design guide to reflect the changes in circulation, the judiciary did not fully collaborate with GSA or the Federal Protective Service to determine necessity or even feasibility. I appreciate the participation of the witnesses today. Director Moroni, you and your colleagues are the workh horses of this committee year after year, report after report. Your work is incalculable to the effective and efficient operations of the United States. And I want to thank you, Judge Sedy.
▶ 0:24:07I assume that you and your colleagues are probably annoyed by coming in front of Congress to ask uh as we ask these questions. So, I really do appreciate you being here and your patience with us. I hope we can work together collaboratively. So, thank you for being here. And Commissioner Peters, I'm particularly pleased to see you here today since um I'm told you declined to participate in our last hearing on federal real estate.
▶ 0:24:29I look forward to learning more about your plans to shed 63% of your workforce and 50% of your budget, all without impeding the progress of courouses under construction and courouses that need repairs and maintenance. Interested to see how that can happen. So, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. The chair thanks the gentle lady. The chair would now like to welcome our witnesses and thank them again for being here today and thank you for your patience with us. Briefly, I'd like to take a just a moment to explain our lighting system to our witnesses.
▶ 0:24:59There are three lights in front of you. Green means go. Yellow means you're running out of time and red means to conclude your remarks. The chair ask unanimous consent that witnesses full statements be included in the record without objection. So ordered. The chair also ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing remain open until such time as our witnesses have provided answers to any questions that may be submitted to them in writing without objection.
▶ 0:25:24So ordered the chair also ask unanimous consent that the record remain open for 15 days for any additional comments and information submitted by members or witnesses to be included in the record of today's hearing without objection so ordered. As your written testimony has been made part of the record, the subcommittee asks that you limit your oral remarks to five minutes. And with that, Mr. Moroni, you are now recognized for five minutes for your testimony. Sir, thank you, Chairman Perry, Ranking Member Freriedman, and members of the subcommittee.
▶ 0:25:54I'm pleased to be here today to discuss the judiciary's revised design standards for federal courouses and the likely impact on courthouse costs. The judiciary issued these revised standards as part of a 2021 update to the US court's design guide. That guide sets standards for designing and constructing federal courouses and is meant to help GSA and other stakeholders build functional and cost-effective step courouses.
▶ 0:26:18The judiciary updated the design guide for several reasons, including to improve security, provide flexibility for local courts involved in new courthouse projects, and to contain costs. Cost containment is certainly an important goal because federal courouses, like all federal real property, require a significant investment of taxpayer resources. It can cost over a hund00 million simply to build a new courthouse and even more to operate and maintain those buildings over time.
▶ 0:26:45As a result, changes to design standards are important, particularly now as Congress and executive branch agencies are taking steps to reduce the federal real property footprint. Given that last year we reviewed the changes the judiciary made in the 2121 design guide and analyzed their potential impact on the size and cost of future courthouse projects.
▶ 0:27:06We identified 16 substantive changes and estimated that together they would increase the size of future courouses by 6% and their cost by 12% on average. This could equate to tens of millions of dollars in additional construction spending. For example, when we modeled what would happen if seven courthouse projects were designed according to the updated design standards, we found it would increase the construction costs for those seven projects by an estimated million.
▶ 0:27:33These higher estimated costs are due in part to changes in the 2021 design guide that increase the amount of space allotted to design pathways like hallways and stairways between courtrooms and other judiciary spaces. For example, we estimated that the updated standards would provide about 350 additional square feet of circulation space for each district courtroom in a courthouse.
▶ 0:27:56Building in this additional space not only increases the size of judiciary space, it also increases the size of the overall courthouse, making it more expensive to build, operate, and maintain. The judiciary cited the need for improved security as the basis for the higher amounts of circulation space. and the security of federal courouses is certainly a key consideration for their design and construction. However, we found that judiciary did not fully collaborate with GSA when deciding to make this and other updates to the design guide.
▶ 0:28:26Specifically, while the judiciary solicited input from GSA on its plan changes to the design guide and met with GSA to discuss concerns with the final draft, it did not consistently engage in two-way communication. For example, the judiciary did not fully address GSA's concerns that the revised circulation standards were based on a 2012 contract study of older courouses, some of which GO GAO had previously found to be oversized.
▶ 0:28:53GSA officials told us it was unclear how the judiciary determined the final 2021 circulation standards in relation to that study. GSA also raised concerns that the proposed changes would significantly increase the overall size and cost of courthouse projects, which is consistent with our own analysis. While the judiciary adjusted some of its proposed circulation changes based on GSA's feedback, it did not fully address concerns.
▶ 0:29:17Given the significant cost implications, we recommended that the judiciary in collaboration with GSA reassess the need for the revised circulation standards in the 2021 design guide. The judiciary is now working with GSA to identify an approach for reassessing these standards, and that's a positive step. If the judiciary determines that the increase in circulation space isn't needed, then the federal government could avoid tens of millions of dollars in costs.
▶ 0:29:42And if the judiciary decides it is important to keep those increases in the guide, then it will have a stronger basis to justify the higher costs. That's important as the federal government moves to rightsize its federal property footprint. Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening statement. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Chair, thanks a gentleman for your testimony. The chair now recognizes just you are recognized for your testimony for five minutes, sir.
▶ 0:30:09Chairman represents Freriedman and members of the subcommittee. I'm Glenn Suy. I'm a US District Court judge in the Northern District of New York and I'm the chair of the judicial uh conference committee on space and facilities. Thank you for the opportunity to be here today. As this subcommittee considers the topic of federal courthouse design and construction, examining the cost to the taxpayer, I want to assure you that the judiciary is also thinking about being good stewards of taxpayer dollars.
▶ 0:30:40Federal courouses play an instrumental role in allowing the third branch to carry out its constitutional mission. Every day in these buildings across the country, judges preside over hearings, trials, litigants appear in courtrooms to present their cases to juries, and the public is able to observe the administration of justice. Courouses are unique buildings. They serve a vital and distinct purpose to the communities in which they are located.
▶ 0:31:05Accordingly, the judiciary plays particular importance and is uh on its courthouse construction and facilities programs. In recent years, the judiciary has used a number of tools to manage its courthouse construction program in a costefficient and effective manner, including a 3% space reduction program, circuitwide policies to asssure no net new space growth, and the capital security program, as well as courtroom sharing policies.
▶ 0:31:32At the outset, it is important to note the judiciary space is not like much of the executive branch. The Constitution and statutes passed by Congress require us to have a presence and hold court in hundreds of community communities across this country to ensure there is equal access to justice for all. The vast majority of the courouses are buildings that have been in place for decades, many of which have deferred maintenance liabilities.
▶ 0:31:58At the same time, the judiciary acknowledges we are obligated to the efficient use of the space we have. To that end, in 2013, the judiciary began its space reduction program by setting out on a five-year goal to reduce its nationwide footprint by 3%.
▶ 0:32:16By 2018, the judiciary surpassed that goal, reducing over 1.1 million rentable square feet, which equated to an annual cost avoidance of 36 million and a cumulative cost avoidance over 100 million during that time period.
▶ 0:32:32Since the conclusion of that space reduction effort, the judiciary has maintained a no net new policy whereby any space increase within a circuit must be met with corresponding and equal space reduction to in order to ensure the federal judiciary footprint does not grow. Courts today are still finding innovative ways to do more with less.
▶ 0:32:55closing underused non-resident courouses and leveraging open office workspace strategies to gain greater efficiencies. The judicial conference has also developed its capital security program which provides funding to address security deficiencies and existing courouses where physical renovations are viable. The construction of new courouses is not needed or expected in the foreseeable future.
▶ 0:33:22The program's goals include utilizing buildings and government resources in a coste effective manner to address security deficiencies that put the public and government sta staff at risk. Also providing lower cost alternatives to higher cost capital investments. This costeffective program has reduced the need for new courouses in many locations across the country. Since 2011, the judiciary has implemented three separate courthouse sharing policies.
▶ 0:33:50Courtroom sharing is required in all new construction projects for senior, magistrate, and bankruptcy court judges. The judiciary also requires sharing policies to be followed when the court needs to build out additional space in any existing facility as a result of newly authorized judgeships. An important tool in implementing our courthouse construction program is the US court's design guide.
▶ 0:34:13The design guide set forth the judiciary's unique essential requirements for design construction and renovation of facilities. In March 2017, the judicial conference approved undertaking a comprehensive review and revision of the existing design guide which was previously updated in 2007. As a result, a number of new courthouse construction projects uh being completed.
▶ 0:34:39It was determined that the previous design gide was outdated in terms of industry standards and practices and did not reference critical judicial conference policies including courtroom sharing. The updated um design guide was incorporated by the judicial conference and these policies and standards were incorporated.
▶ 0:35:02The judiciary is evaluating and addressing each of the recommendations made by the 2024 GAO report, including reassessing the need for increased circulation requirements and collaborating with GSA on mutually acceptable methodologies.
▶ 0:35:18As always, the judiciary looks forward to working together with the subcommittee and the this executive branch um subcommittee to design and construct court courouses that meet the branch's unique needs and enable us to carry out our constitutional mission. Thank you for the opportunity to be here today and I'm happy to answer any questions. Chair, thanks Judge. Uh sir, Mr. Peters, you are now recognized for your testimony for five minutes.
▶ 0:35:46Good morning, Chairman Perry, Ranking Member Freriedman, and distinguished members of the subcommittee. My name is Michael Peters, and I serve as commissioner of the public building service at the US General Services Administration. I accepted this position for two reasons. First, it enabled me to fulfill a calling to public service I had not previously answered. And second, it provides me with an opportunity to contribute to addressing the unsustainable imbalance between our federal revenues and expenditures.
▶ 0:36:13I'm honored to be serving in this role and grateful for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the federal courthouse program. Since stepping into this role in January, I've been focused on realigning PBS with its core mission, delivering efficient, cost-effective real estate solutions that support federal agencies and serve the American taxpayer. Acting administrator Steven Hickeyian and I share a fundamental belief with this committee. Taxpayers shouldn't pay to keep the lights on when nobody's home.
▶ 0:36:42That's why we're committed to identifying and shedding costly underused space while investing in the assets that matter most. To date, we've sold 19 federal properties, avoiding $49 million in deferred maintenance, and initiated the termination of nearly 600 vacant or underused leases, saving 298 million in future obligations. My strategy centers on focusing limited capital on core missionritical facilities like courouses while leveraging the private sector where appropriate.
▶ 0:37:12PBS partners closely with the federal judiciary to deliver courthouse projects that meet evolving security and operational needs. Since 2016, we've completed 10 major courthouse projects with more underway, totaling over two billion in investment. We've also made significant progress under the courthouse security program. However, these gains haven't come without challenges. GSA currently faces over $ 24 billion in deferred maintenance needs, 8.3 billion of which is tied to courouses alone.
▶ 0:37:42Prioritization is essential and we must continue to ensure that every courthouse project approved by Congress delivers on time, on budget, and aligned with judicial needs. In closing, GSA is dedicated to rightsizing the federal real estate portfolio, reducing liabilities, and investing where it matters most. I'm proud of the progress we're making and I look forward to working with you to deliver on this mission. Thank you and I welcome your Chair, thanks gentlemen and all our witnesses. Uh thank you for your testimony.
▶ 0:38:12We'll now turn to question. The chair now recognizes the ranking member Freriedman for her questions. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um Mr. Peters, thank you again for being here today. Uh the Inflation Reduction Act, the IRA, provided GSA with $3.4 4 billion for building renovations and improvements. 975 million to support the emerging and sustainable technologies.
▶ 0:38:35Uh 2.15 billion for low embodied carbon materials and construction and renovation projects and 250 million to turn GSA facilities into high performance green buildings. GSA identified 164 projects to be supported with the IRA funding. 42 federal courouses, 69 federal buildings, and 53 land points of entry.
▶ 0:38:56These projects include modernizing buildings, replacing windows, repairing building facades, making deep energy retrofits in installing storm water management technology, stabilizing garages and foundations, resurfacing parking lots, and replacing windows and lighting. And to be clear, a lot of these kinds of upgrades also make buildings run more efficiently and make them more less expensive to operate in the long run. So, there's a lot of good reasons to to do these to do this work.
▶ 0:39:23What is the status of the courthouse modernization projects that GSA identified as good candidates for IRA funding? And I'll also ask a second question. You can answer them both at once. Will GSA move forward with the projects for which funding has not yet been obligated? Thank you for the question. So, we've done an assessment uh in conjunction with the work here and we are continuing to utilize IRA funds both for LPOE projects and for courthouse projects.
▶ 0:39:52Um the requirement we have is that we must comply with with the legislation and the law but we need to find cost-effective alternatives. So if there were a situation you mentioned low- embodied carbon where low- embodied carbon solution uh was prohibitively expensive uh relative to a more standard solution we wouldn't proceed with the IRA funding in that case but to date we've been able to utilize IRA funding and have actually over a billion of funding that we look forward to utilizing moving forward uh for LPOE and for
▶ 0:40:22courouses. Thank you very much. Uh so GSA's approach to reducing waste and construction costs has included a focus on energy efficiency in both existing federal buildings and new construction. This has been the case for the past 30 years through both Democratic and Republican uh presidents and leadership. These projects are like I mentioned are often undertaken as energy savings performance contracts where the federal funds are leveraged to attract private investment.
▶ 0:40:49Does GSA currently have any energy savings performance contracts in federal courouses and how is GSA's contracting freeze impacting these projects? So, we do continue to utilize ESPC's. We've uh scrutinized and evaluated them on a case-byase basis. Uh I think your assessment is accurate that in many cases in the past we've been able to employ technology, you can call it green technology, you can call it energy saving technology, whatever it is, we want to deliver the most value to taxpayers that we can.
▶ 0:41:19So we're not opposed to saving money. Now we are opposed if there is a lowcost alternative perhaps natural gas that is a lowcost solution. We don't want to feel like we're obligated to put a solar panel on a roof if we have a lowerc cost solution for securing energy. Uh, but we're not prohibiting any type of energy sources in our projects going forward. I can't speak. I would be happy to get back to you on ESPC's and courouses in particular. We're certainly using ESPCs across the portfolio though. Thank you.
▶ 0:41:49Um, I'll move now to Judge Sutter. Uh, thanks again for being here. Uh, the judiciary has cited the need for heightened security at courouses as a reason for revisiting the 2007 design guide. Obviously, we want everyone to be safe and secure in courouses. Uh given ongoing security concerns, why did the judiciary not include the Federal Protective Service in the process of revising the design guideline? Thank you for the question.
▶ 0:42:15We uh participated with our stakeholders GSA uh the Marshall Service and FPS. FPS was consulted. FPS took the position that uh they weren't really involved in the design guide. They're responsible for the exterior of the courouses, the courthouse proper, the properties, and and certainly going forward with any courthouse construction, we're going to be consulting with FPS to say, "Where do you want to put cameras?
▶ 0:42:42How do you envision uh courthouse hardening projects to make sure that that building is secure?" Thank you. Um Mr. Moroni. Uh, in 2013, GAO cited gross overestimates by the judiciary of projected additional judgeships, a refusal to share courtrooms and courouses constructed by the GSA that far exceed the congressionally approved square footage as reasons for the overruns.
▶ 0:43:07So, my question is, how has the implementation of courtroom sharing requirements for bankruptcy, magistrate, and senior district judges impacted the judiciary's courthouse construction So it certainly when you use courtroom sharing it reduces the number of courtrooms you need to build in courouses. So that is going to have uh a positive effect on reducing the cost of construction. U courtroom sharing is a great way to maximize the utilization of your space. Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 0:43:34Chair thanks representative general lady and chair now recog recognizes himself for five minutes of questioning. I guess I'm going to start with Mr. here. Um, your most recent report said that the changes to the uh 2021 design guide result in significant uh size and cost of future courouses.
▶ 0:43:57A and it seems to me like I I I think if nothing else we ought to just maybe question this process as as the beginning here. Um you you're working with the conference uh committee on space and facilities with which Judge Suddy uh I guess chairs and do you see this as the appropriate methodology for determining what courouses should be? I understand I'm not a judge so I'm not in the chambers.
▶ 0:44:28I don't know what the needs are. I suspect you're not either. So we would design a building differently. So, we want that input, but is are we asking the people to the to to provide the input? Are those the very people that are going to say, "Well, you need this and you don't need that." Um, with all due respect, I mean, I would assume that they would advocate for the best for themselves. We all would, but is that the best for the taxpayer?
▶ 0:44:54And is that the most efficient and best way to do this in in in your estimation based on what you've seen? So I think it's important that judiciary establishes the requirements as you were saying they they know best their needs but I think as part of that it's important that they collaborate with GSA with their partners to get a sense of the the real world implications of this.
▶ 0:45:17I also think getting Congress o congressional oversight and other independent means to look at these design guide changes like we've done this 2024 report is important because yes as anyone when you're looking at your needs you're going to know what you need but you're also you maybe go for a little more than perhaps you an independent observer would think you would need. So having an independent source to look at it is important. So just to follow that line of reasoning that line of line of thought who's who's the arbitrator?
▶ 0:45:46Who's the who's the arbiter? Who's the honest broker? Not to say that anybody's dishonest, but but is it is it Congress? Is it this committee that provides all the oversight to what the who who else would it be? Who who is it? Is it you? It's not us. Uh the primary primary oversight would be Congress through the authorization process as well as through the appropriations process. Judiciary as a as a branch of government is setting its own requirements there. So we certainly can help by providing reports, but we are not the primary.
▶ 0:46:13So that having been said, in my opening statement, I mentioned the fact that the courthouse's project assigned security 10% of the weighted score, while the courtroom and chamber needs make up 50%. Who determines that makeup? Is is it is it Judge Sabby's group or who who is it Congress? Who determines that? Because the claim is is that this is all for security and safety. And I think we're all for that whether you're Democrat or Republican.
▶ 0:46:41But it clearly indicates that there are other forces that seem to take precedent over safety and security. The question is is who determines what that what that breakout supposed to be. So I believe judiciary sets their requirements for uh the security and the other requirements for the courthouse. Does that not seem at least a little bit like the fox guard and the hen house? Well, I think it's a starting point to design your you need the customer to decide what the requirements are, but you do need some oversight of what's coming out of that. So, let me ask you this.
▶ 0:47:11We've got the 2021 design guide, but we've also got the 2007 design guide. The committee has been informed that the courthouse in San Juan, Puerto Rico, would be designed to the 2007 standards, but may include elements from the 2021 standards. Those are the very elements that your organization, the GAO, claimed would increase cost and size. Why do we have two standards? And which one are we following? And why are we following what's happening here?
▶ 0:47:40So my understanding there and Judge Sedby can correct me but my understanding is they're using the 2007 design guide and then incorporating design costneutral elements from the 2021 guide. So not circulation we're describing they're including the costneutral elements but judge sudden okay judge what what do you say to that? Yes. Uh thank you. Um first of all uh Mr. Mr. Chairman, I want to assure you that the judiciary is not tonedeaf with regard to your concerns.
▶ 0:48:09Based on criticism from GAO and this committee, we had a 5-year plan which was halted and we went to the asset management program um to rightsize courouses and we continue to do that. Um and we look for every opportunity uh to downsize courts. We are not looking to build bigger, more elaborate courouses.
▶ 0:48:30We are trying to build secure courouses that will last uh the uh cycle that uh GSA sets with a 100redyear uh building cycle. So these things that uh when the design guide the 2007 design guide was in effect when Puerto Rico was authorized to go forward uh with their new construction based on their seismic uh retrofit concerns and the building being unsafe.
▶ 0:48:57Therefore, the 2007 guide would be used and then the there have been no courouses constructed or even designed under the 2021 design guide. So, costneutral things that can occur to improve the design and circulation patterns of that courthouse in Puerto Rico. That'll be done as long as it's costneutral. Okay. Thank you. My time has expired. The chair now recognizes the representative from Washington DC, the Honorable Miss Norton.
▶ 0:49:29Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I support policies like the courthouse affordability and space efficiency act that ensure cost effectiveness and space efficiency and require courtroom chairing. The sub this subcommittee, including when I was chair, has worked over the past two decades to prevent federal courthouse overbuilding and to save taxpayer dollars.
▶ 0:50:00The judiciary has a history of providing flawed projections for future courouses, which has led to underutilized courtrooms across the nation. This is why the public buildings service must collaborate with the judicial conference on space efficiencies.
▶ 0:50:22Commissioner Peters, how does this administration plan uh to collaborate with the judiciary to effectively manage the design and construction of courthouse projects and implement courtroom sharing policies? Thank you for the question, Representative Norton. Thank you for the question, Representative Norton. That's a great question.
▶ 0:50:47Um, you know, one of the things that I was really surprised by when I first assumed this role was the lack of data we had, not just about courtroom utilization, but really about utilization of federal properties across our entire portfolio. Um, one of the benefits that I had going for me was that through the word of legislation which was passed, we were instructed to work with OM to begin developing uh, occupancy data across the portfolio.
▶ 0:51:13Actually, yesterday, last night, late last night, that data just started coming in and that'll really inform our decision- making on a go forward basis um, across the federal portfolio of which assets to dispose of and where to consolidate. uh with respect to the courts, we're really lacking in in that type of data and uh don't have a good understanding of occupancy uh going forward.
▶ 0:51:36the the bills you referenced do call for to begin developing utilization data in the courouses and I think that would be uh important data for all of us both the courts uh Congress and and us at GSA to identify you know where there are opportunities to increase utilization where we have shortfalls and might need to consider adding additional space or adding additional courts um in terms of the court's actual utilization of their facilities that's really outside of GSA's control But that's a matter
▶ 0:52:06for the courts to to assess. I would say it is our collective duty and and Congress's for sure to determine how to allocate, you know, the very scarce capital we have and in an environment where we have almost 37 trillion dollars in debt. We we don't have a lot of excess funds. We don't even have enough funds to address the eight.5 billion of deferred maintenance within the portfolio.
▶ 0:52:30So, we need to be very judicious in in building new courouses and making certain that when we do so, it's because there's a true need there uh and putting a close eye to that. Uh thank you. Um Mr. um what steps can Congress take to work with the public building service and the judiciary to ensure smart asset management for courouses? I think Congress needs to do things like this.
▶ 0:52:58These kind of hearings ask tough questions during both the prospectus process and during appropriations to understand uh the basis for requests for funding for uh courthouse projects and have that independent look. Uh, Justice Celebrate, uh, how can members of Congress be assured that the planning of new courouses is consistent with the actual needs of the judiciary, the new courthouse
▶ 0:53:29uh, AMP program where we evaluate every year the needs for every court across this country. It's called a a urgency evaluation to make uh to consider that court's needs with regard to space, number of judges, number of courtrooms, number of chambers as well as security concerns. All that is weighed and they're ranked and we uh act on the ones that are most urgent at that time.
▶ 0:53:57We have a courthouse priorities list that all of this came out of the stop work order by Congress with regard to courouses on the five-year plan and reassessing how we uh looked at planning and constructing new courouses with regard to you know the overbuilding uh again the judiciary heard this this committee and GAO's concerns and projected uh judgeships are no longer part of the calcul population that
▶ 0:54:28is done with regard to determining whether courouses uh the size of courouses and how they're built. There's a 10-year window that we look at. If there are senior uh judges or judges who are active judges and are looking at uh taking senior within that 10-year period, the courthouse is appropriately built for that future expansion, but nothing else.
▶ 0:54:50So there are a number of things that the court does to continuing to look at our portfolio and make sure only the most urgent uh uh courts across the country are going to percolate up to the top of that list to get consideration and we do that in conjunction with GSA um to make sure that uh we're doing things appropriately and of course they come to Congress with a perspectus and all of this is uh put through the space and facilities committee
▶ 0:55:20and the judicial conference for approval before it comes here to you for for your appropriation approvals. Thank you. I yield back. Chair, thanks, gentle lady. The chair now turns to Representative Barrett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and uh apologies for not being here for your uh opening remarks. I was um uh on my way uh across um but I did have a few questions for you, so if you've already answered them, uh please bear with me.
▶ 0:55:49Um, I know we've talked a lot about courtroom sharing and what effect that has on overbuilding or building to right size or the appropriate um size of a courtroom. Um, can you give us um any uh either of you that have had insight into this?
▶ 0:56:06Has there been any look at what percent of the time a courtroom is in use versus time that it is essentially dormant and not in use and could help facilitate that courtroom sharing? I'm happy to to take the question. Courtroom sharing uh has been in place now since 2009 for both magistrate judges and senior judges and then bankruptcy court judges uh since 2011.
▶ 0:56:37Any construction that goes forward includes those requirements, right? And any buildout in existing courthouse includes those elements. Now the courtroom legacy courtrooms that aren't under that that condition, right? because they haven't been built or updated since then.
▶ 0:56:56And if we look and and not to interrupt you or cut you off, but if we look retrospectively, do we do any analysis of what percent of the time I and and this is just an over oversimplification of my own um kind of understanding of this is that most cases end up, you know, not going to a full trial with the jury and everything else.
▶ 0:57:18I'm sure the courtrooms are used for other proceedings along the way, but the, you know, like the stuff you see on Law and Order is less likely to happen in real life with dramatic jury trials and everything else, thereby probably offloading some of the need for courtrooms that are fairly dormant most of the time. Is that accurate? I would say it's not accurate. Okay.
▶ 0:57:40There there's a reason for judges having access to courtrooms and that's an important tool to get their docket or their cases moved. They they have to handle emergency motions. They have to do uh trials that require speedy trial act concerns and uh active district court judges in this country are among the most busy judges uh in this nation and they have to have a courtroom accessible to them.
▶ 0:58:06Now, is that courtroom used every day uh 8 to 5 in the afternoon? No, not always. Depends on what's going on. But certainly that access and the ability to be in there is what gives them the ability to do their jobs.
▶ 0:58:22and uh the courtroom sharing policies that the judicial conference continues to look at and refine consider these things and we work on them consistently to make sure that we're sharing where appropriate but making sure that judges have courtrooms to do their work. Mhm. And I think if you look at, you know, some of how we do our work here, I mean, this committee hearing room is used for the full committee. It's used for each of the subcommittees. We we share this space.
▶ 0:58:51And, you know, if you were to look at our committee today, there are fewer members than the full committee. And you would say maybe we're overbuilt in this room. But when the full committee is assembled and we're doing a markup, obviously we're right sized for that situation. I just want to make sure that what we're doing is the appropriate use of resources that we have. And the escalation dramatically of building costs over time has made it such that we have to be far more mindful about the capital expense of things.
▶ 0:59:18Everything from building materials to labor to sighting approval to engineering design, all of that has become far more expensive over time and it ends up coming out of certainly, you know, the appropriations that that come from the Congress. Um, another question I had for you, do we own every federal courthouse? Does federal government own or do we rent any space? Currently, there are some leased courouses. Okay.
▶ 0:59:43Um, and that's a decision that's made in conjunction with GSA that it is more costefficient and effective and timely to build or have a lease built done in a particular area. A lot of times often rural or remote regions of the country where constructing a federal building just does not make good economic sense. So there are few lease buildings and of course we have other leases for different court units.
▶ 1:00:12Uh probation and uh pre-trial services often are in lease spaces. Uh federal defenders offices are typically in lease spaces. Okay. Thank you. And uh thank you Mr. Chairman. I yield back. Chair. Thanks the gentleman. The chair now recognizes rep representative Thank you Mr. chair and thank you to all the witnesses for being here uh today and thank you to your respective teams uh for getting you guys prepared here.
▶ 1:00:40I don't know if a law clerk uh you know when I was a law clerk congressional testimony preparation wasn't exactly within the job description. So um want to give a special thanks to you guys. Uh Judge Sud, I want to start with you. Can you just talk about and highlight the importance? I've been a federal law clerk myself. I've worked at Department of Justice.
▶ 1:01:00Uh can you talk about the importance in all of this to making sure that prioritizing judicial uh security um remains the sort of northstar in all of these design changes and all the construction assessments that we're doing that we don't lose sight of the ball of making sure that we are asking our judges and our court personnel and officers and witnesses and um and all of those who are participating in in courthouse proceedings um that they are in as safe as possible position that they can possibly be. Yes. Thank you.
▶ 1:01:30Um the design guide revision was a lot of the impetus for that was on that particular concern security and it it's a major um concern in all construction the three pathways of circulation secure for uh in custody persons al you know and law enforcement.
▶ 1:01:50the Marshall Service transporting people into our courts, restricted areas for judges and staff and uh obviously the open public corridors in many of our uh older courouses. Those pathways do not exist. These are from lessons learned. Things like building sally ports for the appropriate transportation uh and security of in custody persons uh secure parking.
▶ 1:02:17uh all of these things are incorporated in the design guide and again we work with cooperatively with GSA to make sure those issues are addressed. Uh one of the things that drove uh the size concerns of GAO and we thank them for their analysis is that making sure that those corridors existed and didn't impinge on other areas of the courthouse uh design.
▶ 1:02:43So certainly again it was it's not our intention to build build bigular bigger or more opulent courouses secure efficient courouses that will uh stand for decades and allow for uh reasonable growth without overbuilding is what we're attempting to do. Right. And I want to shift focus a little bit to our more rural areas. Satellite offices um as they're commonly referred to. The I come from Alabama.
▶ 1:03:12U Mobile and Montgomery are both respective um sort of judicial district seats. Montgomery being the middle district, Mobile being the southern district. They both have satellite offices. And those satellite offices historically, as I'm sure you can relate to, Judge, um they have historically been the the the the red-headed stepchild uh when it comes to investments in terms of um construction, redesign, upgrades, renovations, uh that sort of thing. So, as we go through this process, can you talk to me uh Mr. Peters? I'll direct this one to you.
▶ 1:03:42Um and anyone who wants to take a stab at it of, you know, what we can do to prioritize making sure that those satellite offices don't fall behind the curve in this and don't get unnecessarily cut. appreciate the question. I I actually was born in Alabama, so many many moons ago. Well, here's the question. Roll Tire or War Eagle? There's only one right answer. There's no good answer there.
▶ 1:04:09So, but u you know, that's a great question. I mean, we have a great partnership with the courts and um work with them. Uh, I've met with Judge Suttery on more than one occasion before this and and they really set the priority in terms of which projects get get prioritization both for new construction as well as um, you know, dealing with deferred maintenance and in our facilities.
▶ 1:04:31And you're right, there are a lot of courouses um, particularly some of these stepchilds, but even here within the district that are neglected, right? of our $ 24 billion in deferred maintenance across GSA, over eight billion of that is just within the courts. And um those are they're not nice to haves. They're they're critical needs that need need to be addressed and and we're working with you to to to deal with that. So, and I don't want to cut you off, but I got one more question I want to squeeze in.
▶ 1:04:59Um throughout the Doge process, there were uh numerous federal facilities that were listed for sale, federal property that was listed for sale, and in some cases, this was shared space between, you know, federal courouses and maybe a non uh judicial uh space. Were any of you guys consulted um in your roles with any of the proposed cuts?
▶ 1:05:17The reason I asked this is because there was a courthouse space in in one of my uh areas that was very valuable and vital parking um that without it, they don't build parking decks underground in Mobile, Alabama for hurricanes and sea level issues. Without it, uh employees will be in a tough spot. Um so, a I want to work with you guys to hopefully try to resolve those issues, but b just want to know if any of you guys were consulted in the sort of listing of federal property as it related to shared space with federal courts um throughout the Doge process.
▶ 1:05:46If you don't mind, I'll answer that first and and then I'll let the judge comment. Um, you know, the list that that we published initially was there were two purposes. Primarily, it was to identify core assets which we view as basically untouchable assets. They should be owned by the federal government in in perpetuity. There were other assets that didn't fall into that category that got listed as noncore, probably not the best name. That was not meant to imply that those assets are for sale or that we're trying to market them.
▶ 1:06:13It was meant to imply that we want to evaluate them and assess their uh importance to the federal government based on how utilized they are, what level of deferred maintenance is in them currently, could the existing tenants be moved into another facility. So probably poor communication on our part.
▶ 1:06:30I will say that u the policy we have in place now whether it relates to a potential lease termination or disposing of a building is to first identify it then contact the agency uh for which it might be which it would be relevant to get their input on that decision if the agency is in agreement in this case the courts that hey this is an asset uh we could dispose of then to reach out um to Congress and the relevant members of the house and the senate to make certain that they're aware before we take any action.
▶ 1:07:01Um, but we probably did move a little too quickly in our first month here and we've changed our procedures at this point. Thank you. I'm well over my time. I appreciate it. Chair. Thanks a gentleman. The chair now recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Ander. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you uh to the witnesses for being here today. Um, Mr. Mr. Peters.
▶ 1:07:27Um, and again, I apologize, excuse me, if if any of my questions have been asked previously, but what what tools does the GSA have to push back when the judiciary uh a building project, a courthouse that appears to be oversized or misaligned uh with the actual usage? Um, what tools are at your disposal and and u what's usually the outcome? Yeah.
▶ 1:07:56So, I guess as I mentioned earlier, you know, I think we really have been developing a collaborative relationship with the judiciary. Um, but it's in the context of of what we spoke of earlier. Um, massive federal debt type budget. We just have limited funds. We many of these projects are clearly useful not just within the judiciary elsewhere. But, you know, just because it's useful doesn't mean we can afford it. And so what we're working to do is is to develop a better process of assessing need.
▶ 1:08:25I think we would like to work collaboratively with the judiciary and Congress on one of the things that was mentioned earlier is utilization because right now we're gathering that data outside the judiciary, but we don't have it collectively. If if if they have it, I'm unaware of it to think about like how how often are these courtrooms occupied?
▶ 1:08:44I don't know what the ultimate standard should be, but let's work together to assess that so that we can make informed decisions about where do we spend our limited capital dollars either, you know, improving and upgrading an existing facility or investing in in a new courthouse. Um, but our tools are really, you know, we we're kind of instructed what to build and Congress appropriates the funds and says, "Go build this courthouse." And then we try to do that as cost-effectively as we can.
▶ 1:09:12uh but we don't ultimately determine the design standards. Right. So yeah, you touched on something I did want to ask. Does the GSA GSA verify whether the new courouses are actually being fully utilized once they're built? So I have to admit we do not we I I I um that you know at least historically that has not been our role. You know, like I say, I would welcome the opportunity to work together to determine how utilized they are.
▶ 1:09:42Sure. To determine how necessary they are. Judge, do you care to care to comment? Yeah, thank you. Well, any um part of the design guide that would uh would deviate, any construction deviation would have to be approved by the judicial conference and then it would have to go through uh the uh the process as an exception with GSA.
▶ 1:10:12They would uh then have to include it in the prospectus that would be sent over here for congressional approval. So to say that we're you know looking at you know overbuilding or doing extravagant things that is not what this is about and that's not what we are doing as far as courtroom usage.
▶ 1:10:32Um there's a separate judicial conference committee, the CATCOM committee, case administration and case management that has been looking and analyzing this issue for a number of years which led in conjunction with feedback from this subcommittee to courtroom sharing that we have now. Uh the determination about the way courtrooms are used by active district court judges as I indicated previously.
▶ 1:10:58uh we use our space differently and the fact that a courtroom may be empty for a period of time does not mean that that courtroom is not being uh put to use by a judge moving his docket, settling cases, being ready to you know handle emergency motions or anything else. So those those uh type of uh decisions the judicial conference makes by informed information coming back from the judges across the country. Okay. Very good.
▶ 1:11:28And Mr. Moroni, um, the GAO found that many courouses are underutilized, um, with more space than needed. Has there been any measurable improvements since your last audit? And are there any reforms you'd recommend to rein in courthouse proposals that you might deem oversized? So, our last look at this was in 2010, so quite some time ago. I don't have current data on the utilization.
▶ 1:11:54I do think the adoption of courtroom sharing is been an important step. I think that's worth looking further at and I do agree with Commissioner Peters. Uh the extent that there can be data, it sounds like judiciary may have some of that data to look at. How are these spaces being used? Could there be more courtroom sharing or other methods to increase utilization is worthwhile. Thank you. I yield back. Chair, thanks. The gentleman from Missouri. Um, are there any further questions looking around the room?
▶ 1:12:24I apologize. The change in schedule, unfortunately, oftentimes results in, you know, we have other things that are layered on top of these hearings and I I'd like to have the luxury of other members being here to ask more questions, but we simply don't have them because I'm sure they're busy doing other things that comport with their schedule before it was kind of upended this morning. I I do have one kind of final question as an overall theme here.
▶ 1:12:51Um, regarding utilization, occupancy if you will or utilization maybe is the better term. Who is collecting that information right now? Is there any ongoing uh collection? And I imagine differently from some other uh federal facility where we're looking for occupancy. It seems to me that the court has a very unique circumstance where they might have a competing interest in the same room or something like that.
▶ 1:13:22So, so we would have to identify that as specific category to to to to capture. But is anyone doing that who should be doing it? Who's best suited to do it? It is being done and it's done by the judicial conference committee that I just mentioned. We refer to it as CATCOM.
▶ 1:13:43Um, and the recommendations of this subcommittee to the judiciary led to courtroom sharing in the areas that we thought was were appropriate and those utilization factors are, you know, the ongoing study. But as I've indicated, the use is so unique and different to any other understand and we're not, you know, we're not here to challenge that, but we need to have the data.
▶ 1:14:06you know, in talking to both of you or all three of you regarding Congress's role in oversight, we we can't do a good job at that or an adequate job if we don't have the information. So, there's a study that's ongoing. Is it is it just a continual study or is there going to be some end to it that we receive a report? How will we know or can we just tap into that information at any time and get utilization rates for this courtroom or that courtroom in this courthouse? This is how many times somebody was in this one when somebody else needed to use it.
▶ 1:14:37H how is that all meed out at this point? The captainkin committee again is the one would be responsible for that and we can certainly ask them if they have those sort of statistics and numbers. You know, Mr. Chairman, for example, um I just turned senior this past year as a as a district court judge. In my entire career, I have never had a single courtroom that I was assigned to.
▶ 1:15:03I have shared courtrooms with other senior judges and other active judges because I'm in a federal office building with courtrooms that are available throughout the building. So, we make do with what we have and do it effectively and efficiently, I think. But certainly the way that the courtrooms are are used, I I I think there's a lack of an appreciation of how critical it is to have that availability.
▶ 1:15:27And certainly the judiciary is always looking for ways to maximize and uh the usage, minimize more space, and give back space when we can. And those um programs that I've mentioned, those tools that we've been doing are continuing all the time. So the answer you're looking for, we will approach the catum committee, see what information they have and see if we can provide uh that information back to this committee, what they have, sir.
▶ 1:15:57Well, the chair thanks the judge, thanks the gentleman for that and understand, you know, regardless of whether the questions come from myself or other members here, we're we're we're having this hearing so that we can formulate appropriate public policy. And so we're seeking information. It would be I think derelict if we were to make those decision without having the correct input and I don't think you'd like the outcome of that either.
▶ 1:16:23So it'd be better to have the input so that we can make decisions whether I think that you know uh the majority of the consideration should be on security as opposed to how the courtroom is is structured or whatever. You know, that's one person's opinion, but I think we all need the information so that we can do the job that we're tasked to do. That's the purpose for this hearing.
▶ 1:16:46And and and so I'm asking you that question so that we get the information because if if if we're not going to get the information or we're not knowing when we're going to get the information, then I suspect this body is going to move to say you're going to provide this information this way by this time so we can make a decision. All right. So that's that's the reason for the question. Understood, sir. I didn't take exception to that. We'll try and get you the information and get back.
▶ 1:17:11And if I can make just one last comment with regard to, you know, the cost for space, you know, in our own self-interest in these tough budget times, which the judiciary recognizes, rent is one of our biggest must pays. And when it comes to, you know, an extra conference room or some other type of space within a courthouse, certainly we want to be able to keep staff.
▶ 1:17:37And when it comes to a decision between uh space and personnel to do the work, we're always going to lead towards personnel. So, it's in our self-interest to examine our space and make sure that we are rightsized and efficient and optimize the use of our space so we can keep, you know, not only the lights on, but the people that we need to do the job in place. And we understand that you care for your people. We do as well.
▶ 1:18:03Whether we're on different sides of the aisle, I'm sure that Miss Norton and I both agree that a a functioning judiciary is critical to our society and and uh and the things that we have, the great things that we have in this country. We expect you to advocate for the things that are important to you. We have to be the kind of the referees in this thing to determine the right thing is being done. With that, unfortunately, because we have no other members to ask questions, this concludes our hearing for the day.
▶ 1:18:32I'd like to thank each of the witnesses for your testimony and for your time and your patience here today. This subcommittee now stands adjourned.