Mr. Janofsky agreed, but reiterated the fact that a floor is often used as a target. Mr. Teel perceived that the Members agree that the building renewal formula is barely adequate because anything funded or appropriated below the formula ends up in deferred maintenance, and since the formula has not been fully funded, deferred maintenance increases every year. From DOA's perspective, a floor means full funding of the formula. Mr. Goodman agreed that if an amount lower than 100 percent is allowed, that is what will be obtained. He suggested merging the last two recommendations so 100 percent would be required with a triggering mechanism that under certain conditions the formula could be funded below 100 percent, but not less than a certain percentage.
Money goes into the fund, but it is currently raided for other needs.
He submitted that the DOA system would be 100 percent funded if COSF were a dedicated fund for facilities purposes only, rent could be collected for buildings not currently contributing to maintenance, and the rental rate increases requested for the next biennium are approved. Mr. Martinez related that the buildings currently paying rent are categorized as office buildings. Under the recommendation, State Parks, for example, would be charged a fee for building renewal for facilities and latrines. Another major component would be State prisons. Mr. Brand clarified that the DOA recommendation is to charge rent for office buildings, but an assessment for improvements not classified as actual office buildings.