The University plans to submit its 2004 capital request to the State Legislature for a second time, University officials said Thursday.
Minimal changes will be made to the request for the 2005 legislative session, said Kathleen O’Brien, vice president of University Services.
The plan was announced at the Board of Regents’ Facilities C ommittee meeting Thursday.
The $187.8 million bonding bill was not passed when the Legislature disbanded last session. The state will give $155.2 million of the money, and the University will contribute the remaining $32.6 million for the projects.
O’Brien said that although the dollar amount will remain the same, two changes will be made to the request.
In one change, project costs not associated with the Higher Education Asset Preservation and Replacement fund will be adjusted for one year of inflation, totaling $3.8 million, O’Brien said. The asset preservation fund is money fully paid by the state and used to extend the life of the University’s existing buildings.
With projects other than the asset preservation fund, the University must foot one-third of the cost.
In the second change, funds for the Carlson School of Management building addition and a business school at the University’s Duluth campus have been dropped, O’Brien said. These projects were budgeted for $4.7 million.
However, the business school projects will still continue with donated funds. O’Brien said construction fees will be included in the University’s 2006 capital request.
Delaying the funding by one year has created $7.2 million in inflation, O’Brien said. $3.4 million’s worth of asset preservation fund projects were also lost because of inflation.
Several buildings have deteriorated more because of maintenance problems that could not be fixed, O’Brien said.
The University will still request $90 million in asset preservation fund money, even though the cost has inflated since 2004, O’Brien said.
Before the 2004 session ended, the State House of Representatives recommended the University receive $38 million for asset preservation fund money, while the State Senate recommended $50 million.
O’Brien said she thought it was smart to not increase asset preservation fund dollars from 2004.
“We’re losing money by keeping it flat,” O’Brien said. “But as we’ve been requesting larger amounts of (Higher Education Asset Preservation and Replacement) dollars, we’ve only been getting half of it.”
Regents were torn over whether the University should request more asset preservation fund money from the state.
Regent Clyde Allen said he was concerned with the University “not laying it back to the Legislature.”
“We need to go back and tell them what we need,” Allen said. “But maybe I’m a little more ornery and deterministic.”
Regent Frank Berman said he thought the University was requesting too much in asset preservation fund money.
Because the state already said they wouldn’t fund $90 million, Berman said, the University should not push the number again.
“Once you’re there once and they tell you $37 million, you’re stuck with that,” he said. “It’s better to not go back into the lion’s mouth and ask for another $90 million.”
O’Brien said the request of $90 million was a dramatic increase from previous years, but it needs to be funded nonetheless.
“It doesn’t hurt to ask,” she said.
University President Bob Bruininks said he is still optimistic the bonding bill could pass in a special session.
But if it is not, Bruininks said, he hopes the bill will pass very early in the 2005 legislative session.
The full board will vote on the resubmission today in the second day of its November board meeting.