of

NEW JERSEY CAPITAL BUDGETING

AND PLANNING COMMISSION

B. CAROL MOLNAR (Chairwoman): I’d like to call the meeting

to order. In accordance with the Open Public Meeting Law, the Commission

has provided adequate public notice of this meeting by giving written notice of

time, date, and location. The notice of the meeting has been filed at least 48

and filed with the office of the Secretary of State.

I’ll now do a roll call.

MR. VRANCIK (Acting Executive Director): Senator Littell. (no

response)

George LeBlanc for Senator Bryant.

MR. LeBLANC: Here.

MR. VRANCIK: Assemblyman Cryan.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Here.

MR. VRANCIK: Beth Schermerhorn for Assemblyman Biondi.

MS. SCHERMERHORN: Here.

MR. VRANCIK: Dave Rousseau, for the State Treasurer.

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: Here.

MR. VRANCIK: Kevin McCabe, Department of Labor. (no

response)

Gary Brune, OMB.

MR. BRUNE: Here.

MR. VRANCIK: Patrick Brannigan, Governor’s Office.

MR. BRANNIGAN: Here.

MR. VRANCIK: Mr. Roth.

MR. ROTH: Here.

2

MR. VRANCIK: Mr. Annese.

MR. ANNESE: Here.

MR. VRANCIK: Chairperson Molnar.

MS. MOLNAR: Here.

Thank you.

MR. VRANCIK: We have a quorum.

MS. MOLNAR: Thank you.

At the last meeting, we tabled the minutes. Do I hear a motion to

approve the minutes?

MR. ROTH: So moved.

MS. MOLNAR: Do I hear a second?

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Second.

MS. MOLNAR: Any discussion? (no response)

If not, we’ll take a vote on the minutes.

MR. VRANCIK: George LeBlanc for Senator Bryant.

MR. LeBLANC: Yes.

MR. VRANCIK: Assemblyman Cryan.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Yes.

MR. VRANCIK: Beth Schermerhorn for Assemblyman Biondi.

MS. SCHERMERHORN: Yes.

MR. VRANCIK: Dave Rousseau for the Treasurer.

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: Yes.

MR. VRANCIK: Gary Brune.

MR. BRUNE: Yes.

MR. VRANCIK: Patrick Brannigan.

3

MR. BRANNIGAN: Yes.

MR. VRANCIK: Mr. Roth.

MR. ROTH: Yes.

MR. VRANCIK: Mr. Annese.

MR. ANNESE: Yes.

MR. VRANCIK: Ms. Molnar.

MS. MOLNAR: Yes.

Motion carries, right?

MR. VRANCIK: Easily.

MS. MOLNAR: Okay.

Is there an Executive Director’s report?

MR. VRANCIK: Not at this time.

MS. MOLNAR: Okay. We’ll take our departments now at this

time. We’ll do the Commission of Higher Ed.

I’d like to welcome James Sulton and Dr. Susan Cole.

Good morning.

J A M E S E. S U L T O N JR., Ph.D.: Good morning, Madam Chair and

members of the Commission. Thank you for inviting me to appear before you

today. I am Jim Sulton, Executive Director of the New Jersey Commission on

Higher Education. It is my pleasure to appear today along with Dr. Susan Cole,

President of Montclair State University. We are both here to offer brief

presentations and discuss capital needs of New Jersey’s senior public colleges

and universities with you. Following my remarks, Dr. Cole will offer comments,

and then we would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

4

During the regular monthly meetings of the Commission on Higher

Education and the New Jersey’s Presidents Council in September, CHE staff

presented a draft of Stage 1 of the long-range plan for higher education, a

Blueprint for Excellence. The Commission is statutorily responsible for

developing and regularly updating a long-range plan for higher education with

the advice and assistance of the Presidents Council.

In the spring of 2002, we kicked off a new planning process for

higher education in our state. Over 500 stakeholders have been involved in the

planning process, which included Governor McGreevey’s Education Summit and

several public fora held throughout the state -- a vision statement, articulating

the shared responsibility of the State and its colleges and universities to create

and sustain a higher education system that is among the best in the world, lies

at the core of our work. Seven principal State objectives push us toward the

achievement of that vision.

More detailed action plans and performance measures will be

evolving as the plan progresses. During the month of October, we will seek

broad, public input on the draft before adopting its final stage in November.

The capacity of New Jersey’s colleges and universities to fulfill the educational

needs of students in our state has been a central concern throughout the

planning process. The plan recommends an annual State appropriation for the

regular renewal of facilities at public research universities and State colleges and

universities, for the maintenance of the State’s Higher Education physical needs.

The Commission is currently analyzing institutional responses to

a capital needs questionnaire that complements our 2001 capital planning

5

report. This new information will inform efforts over the next year to develop

a State policy and predictable funding, to promote rational planning and assist

these institutions with the ongoing maintenance and renewal of campus physical

plants.

In the interim, however, it is important to recognize that the State

has only been able to provide periodic funding to maintain the capital assets of

its public research universities and State colleges and universities. Our recent

research indicates a need for more than $170 million to address preservation and

maintenance, regulatory compliance, and deferred maintenance needs that will

not be met in conjunction with major renovation and construction projects

anticipated over the next six years. The senior public colleges and universities

have not received a direct capital funding appropriation for this purpose since

Fiscal Year 1999. I respectfully urge you to consider funding in Fiscal Year 2005

to prevent a further backlog of projects.

Nationally recognized standards for annual maintenance of colleges

and universities specifically recommend that between 1.5 percent and 3 percent

of current replacement value be dedicated annually to maintenance and renewal.

For Fiscal Year 2005, the Commission recommends an appropriation of $36.3

million, which is 1 percent of current replacement value, estimated at $3.6

billion, along with a required institutional match of 0.5 percent by the

institutions, to avoid additional deferral of critical maintenance and compliance

projects.

Thank you.

Dr. Cole.

S U S A N A. C O L E, Ph.D.: Is that on (referring to PA microphone)?

6

DR. SULTON: Yes.

DR. COLE: Okay.

Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the Commission. I’m

Susan Cole, President of Montclair State University, and I’m here today

representing New Jersey’s 12 senior public colleges and universities: The College

of New Jersey; Kean University; Montclair State University; New Jersey City

University; New Jersey Institute of Technology; Ramapo College of New Jersey;

the Richard Stockton College of New Jersey; Rowan University; Rutgers, the

State University of New Jersey; Thomas Edison State College; the University of

Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey; and William Paterson University of New

Jersey. I appreciate the opportunity to address you today. I will keep my

comments brief, and I’ll be glad to answer any questions you might have.

New Jersey, unlike the majority of other states, does not adequately

or regularly invest in the capital facilities of its public colleges and universities,

and the consequent urgent capital facilities and major equipment needs of the

State’s campuses have been documented for years. A recent survey conducted

by the Commission on Higher Education identified unmet capital needs of more

than 3.7 billion just for New Jersey’s 12 senior public colleges and universities.

For decades, the State’s institutions have been left essentially on

their own by the State to make the choice between inadequate facilities, on the

one hand, and on the other hand, independently selling bonds and laying off the

obligations of debt service on operating budgets that increasingly must rely on

tuition revenues to sustain the quality of the campus environment. The State’s

public colleges and universities are, as a consequence, among the most leveraged

7

public institutions in the nation and are already carrying more than 1.2 billion

in debt, and that debt is going to increase significantly again this year.

Just to give you a few limited examples of what I’m talking about:

The College of New Jersey, for example, recently completed two

science buildings, two parking structures, and has a new library, another parking

structure and a residential complex under construction.

Richard Stockton College has planned 29 million in repair and

renovation projects for the academic year.

Montclair State University, where our enrollment is growing

extremely rapidly, has recently completed a parking garage, four new residence

halls, and has under construction the largest academic building ever built on the

campus, a theater, and a massive upgrade of the entire campus utilities

infrastructure.

Rutgers, in continuing collaboration with the redevelopment efforts

in New Brunswick, is currently constructing a public safety building and student

housing downtown.

UMDNJ has underway approximately 500 million in a building

program across its campuses.

A number of New Jersey’s institutions are approaching the limits of

what the bond-rating agencies assess as responsible debt, and debt service

obligations are an increasing portion of underfunded operating budgets. A

number of our institutions are carrying particularly high levels of debt per

student, and for the nine State colleges and universities that have been

particularly disadvantaged in receipt of capital funding from the State, debt is

already equal to over 30 percent of the replacement value of our campuses.

8

Lack of support for the upgrading and expansion of capital facilities of its

colleges and universities has a long-term and a negative impact for the State.

One of the more dangerous results, the inadequacy of the science and high

technology and specialized facilities on New Jersey’s campuses, clearly will

affect the State’s ability to remain competitive in the high-knowledge economy.

One of the more visible results is the deficit in the types of amenities found on

the campuses of the nation’s great public universities, such as adequate

residence halls, and athletic and recreational facilities. And one of the more

compelling results is the dramatic lack of capacity we have to meet the current

demand for higher education by the people of this state.

The critical point here is that the under-building of New Jersey’s

public colleges and universities is not marginal, it is very dramatic. New Jersey’s

ranking has just dropped again, and the State now ranks 45th out of 50 states

in its public four-year enrollment per capita. Just to reach the national mean,

New Jersey would need to serve 68,000 more students -- just to reach the

national mean. This dramatic shortfall in capacity coincides with current

projections of the fifth highest growth rate in the nation in the number of high

school graduates in the decade between 2001 and 2011. We could have as

many as 36,000 more students seeking enrollment in the State’s institutions

each year. The results of the under-building of New Jersey public higher

education become apparent as soon as one looks at states of comparable size.

Each year, New Jersey educates 20,000 students fewer than North Carolina;

25,000 fewer than Georgia; 35,000 fewer than Virginia; 47,000 fewer than

Indiana; and a whopping 130,000 fewer than Michigan -- all states of

comparable size.

9

New Jersey came later than other states to a fully developed sense

of the importance of public higher education, both in supporting the economic

development of the State and in assuring that economic and other societal

obstacles do not limit educational opportunity for all who have the ability to

benefit from it. But the time has come to catch up with history and for the State

to begin to think strategically about the investment it must make to secure the

future.

Over the past year, the idea of taking a proposal for a major, general

obligation bond to the voters to support capital construction on the State’s

campuses has received increasing attention. Hopefully, there will be serious

consideration given to such an initiative, which would enable the State to

address its serious capacity problem, enable the State’s institutions to stand at

the forefront of research and the high knowledge disciplines that will be critical

to the State’s future competitiveness, and address the educational needs of its

growing population.

A major bond, if properly structured, could have a very significant

impact on meeting the urgent backlog of higher education facilities’ needs, and

could have a profound and long-term positive impact on both the economy and

the quality of life in New Jersey. Such a bond would require the active support

of all sectors of government, as well as the business and higher education

communities. And speaking for the entire higher education community in the

state, I can assure you that we would mobilize all our resources to work with

government, the business community, and the communities throughout the state

to assure the success on the ballot of such an initiative.

10

Beyond a potential GO bond, it is time for New Jersey, from a

long-term policy perspective, to come to terms with the fact, as have most other

states in the nation, that its public colleges and universities need a regularly

recurring source of funds to maintain, upgrade, and expand their facilities. As

important as a bond would be, and it would be very important indeed, such a

one-time event needs to be buttressed with ongoing attention to the continuing

needs of these heavily used and critically important institutions. An annual

appropriation for maintenance and renewal, as recommended by the

Commission on Higher Education, would be a modest but a very useful start to

a renewed commitment by the State to sustain its public campuses for the

education of New Jersey’s current and future students.

Thank you.

MS. MOLNAR: Thank you.

I had a few questions for my fellow members up here. Is there

strong support from the Governor’s Office and Treasury regarding a major bond

for higher ed, or any supporters?

MR. VRANCIK: David.

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: I believe that the Vagelos

Commission -- that’s one of the things that they’re -- or which -- one of the

commissions that is looking at it, at the total restructuring and everything, is

looking at that topic. I think we’ll just wait to see what they have to

recommend.

MS. MOLNAR: Are they also looking at the possibility of an

annual appropriation?

11

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: I don’t think they’re looking

at that. I think they’re looking at the overall capital needs. On that issue of an

annual appropriation, what I’d like to ask President Cole and Director Sulton

is -- you say that most states have this. Can you give us some information on

these states that have it? And just as a point of reference, if in an ideal world,

yes, we would all like to put 1 percent of our capital plan aside every year. It’s

a shame that during the 1990s, when we had lots of money, we weren’t doing

that. Now, when we have hard times, we don’t have-- Just for reference, if we

were to do that for State buildings, which we probably should do just as well as

the colleges, we would have to put -- what was it, Gary? It’s 12 billion, so we’d

have to put $120 million aside that wouldn’t be available for other things in the

budget, and that’s what it comes down to. A budget always comes down to a

choice between, do you fix a building or do you provide current services to the

public? And normally fixing a building, just like in your own household budget

sometimes, fixing something gets put aside because of current expenses. But I

would just ask for information. You referenced other states, and I’d like to see

that information and whether or not, for the last three or four years, they have

still kept up with their commitment as well.

DR. COLE: Mr. Rousseau, I’d be glad, and I know the

Commission would be glad as well, to provide you with detailed information

about how other states provide capital support to their public institutions.

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: And also on ideas about

how they fund them, as well, if it’s a regular fund appropriation, if it’s some

other means.

DR. COLE: Yes.

12

DR. SULTON: Dr. Cole is right, Mr. Rousseau. And I would add

that in several states you find they have a capital budget for higher education,

and that is a distinct difference when it comes to New Jersey -- that we don’t

have pay-as-you-go capital on a regular basis. And therefore, when hard times

kick in, as you aptly described looking at the ’90s as compared with the current

decade, they have already a base, that we don’t have, on which to build.

MS. MOLNAR: Mr. Brannigan.

MR. BRANNIGAN: I’d like to address the issue. The Governor’s

Office is very involved and is working with and communicating with all of the

sectors of higher education, both the research universities, the four-year

institutions, the community colleges, and the independents. There are a number

of major issues occurring right now, and they are all interrelated. You have the

education. You had the study that was conducted of the Commission on

Science and Technology, all of which look at the economic growth of our state,

and providing for the quality of life of New Jersey. New Jersey is a state that

will depend on having a robust higher education community.

But the Governor’s Office is consistent in its message that these are

all interrelated, and that the restructuring of the research universities is very

important, as is capacity building, but that we don’t think that we will be able

to move ahead unless you move ahead on addressing all of the issues, rather

than a single issue. But we are deeply committed to building our higher

education system to be the system that Dr. Cole described, and Dr. Sulton, as

13

a world-class system, because we realize that our future in the State depends

upon it.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Can I ask a follow-up on that?

MS. MOLNAR: Sure.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: If we had a funding mechanism in

place, would tuitions drop?

DR. COLE: Would tuitions drop? It would depend on what

happens with operating support and capital support.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: If there was what you described, which

we just discussed, some sort of current and on-going revenue stream for capital,

would tuitions drop? And I’m going to ask the same question later in terms of

capacity. But if that was available today, would tuitions drop?

DR. COLE: It depends on how much capital support and how

much operating support the institutions receive. The public institutions in the

State raise tuitions only to the extent that they need to do to meet their needs,

and if the operating support is there and the capital support is there, then you

don’t put the burden on student tuition.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: I know how it works. I just wanted

to understand. I guess the answer is, is realistically, probably not.

DR. SULTON: I might qualify it a little bit more. I think that you

have a reasonable expectation there, but it would differ from one institution to

another, as to whether or not, because the tuition-setting is an individual

institutional decision. It’s hard to say, flat out, if it’s dropped.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Well, 9 percent seemed to be a pretty

common institution number this year.

14

DR. SULTON: Well, New Jersey has held under double digits for

a couple of years now, which is admirable, and in comparative context, no

question about it. Other states have gone way up into the double digits now,

even into scary territory -- 40 percent.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: I was following up on that topic. I

have some other questions when you’re ready. Can I do that now?

MS. MOLNAR: Yes, sure.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: President Cole, with the -- just so that

I understand, in terms of the numbers on Page 2 of your wonderful statement

here, are they apples to apples? Is New Jersey’s 20,000 students fewer than

North Carolina when the numbers go up? Is that full-time to full-time, or does

that include our -- what about our county colleges? I recognize you’re here in

terms of higher ed, but is it apples to apples, just so that I understand it?

DR. COLE: That is an apples-to-apples comparison, but it is only

of the four-year public institutions. It does not address the community college

comparisons. I can tell you, from the research that I have done, that you would

find that New Jersey educates approximately the same number of students in its

community colleges as states of comparable size. The major deficit is in fouryear

institution.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: And in the four years of full-time

students only?

DR. COLE: This is not full-time only. It’s full-time and part-time.

But the predominant majority of the students are full-time in both baskets of

apples.

15

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: My other question was, for the

priorities that you listed -- I guess this goes to you, Director -- there is-- I have

what makes up the 36 million, that’s part of your testimony, and I read through

each listing of that. But what I don’t get is a sense of priorities. Like I see,

Rowan wants a million-six, New Jersey wants a million-four. Is there a set of

priorities within that, or is it just by institution, or is there something that

crosses institutional lines that would be able to guide us, because I didn’t see

that?

DR. SULTON: Well, in answer to all those questions is, yes, sir.

The institutions have facilities and master plans which include a prioritization

of their projects.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Yes, I got that.

DR. SULTON: And so, we have to go institution by institution to

give you that breakdown.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Right. So I don’t have any -- I have

that. I read through that stuff for each thing--

DR. SULTON: Okay.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: --but there’s nothing that says, in terms

of your world, "Hey, this priority at William Paterson counts more than this at

Rowan or vice versa."

DR. SULTON: Nothing so centralized as that.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Okay. And so, you would follow the

1 percent guideline or the half of percent guideline in order to try and determine

some priorities, or you’d leave that up to us if we were trying to figure out an

amount. If we were going less than 36 million-- Suppose we were going less

16

than your request, what sort of guidance would you give us if we were looking

at priorities? Why don’t I put it to you that way. Do you follow me?

DR. SULTON: Yes.

DR. COLE: Oh, yes.

DR. SULTON: We would give you whatever guidance you need

to break it out.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Okay. All right. Thank you.

DR. COLE: I think, basically, what you’re asking us is, we could

do it by lowering the percentage across the board or by prioritizing the needs of

the institutions.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: That’s correct. Thank you.

MS. MOLNAR: Any other questions or comments?

Mr. Brune.

MR. BRUNE: I have a question for Dr. Sulton, for a second. I

understand and I heard fully well the point about being leveraged to the hilt.

But sprinkled throughout the project was -- appear to be some projects that

might have their own revenue stream, things like parking facilities, new residence

halls. I want to make sure I understand the rationalization for where the State

comes in. If you have an example where you’re building a new parking facility,

wouldn’t that be a perfect opportunity to leverage something?

DR. SULTON: Dr. Cole might like to speak to that as well. From

my planning purposes at the Commission, we have separated out all revenuegenerating

projects from others. But as someone who runs an institution, she’d

probably be in a better position to speak to that.

17

DR. COLE: Normally, when an institution will put in its capital

priorities, it will put in both the revenue and non-revenue generating projects,

so you have an overall sense of everything that is needing to be built. We would

look to the State, primarily, for funding for non-revenue projects. The reason

knowing about the revenue projects is important is, because even though they’re

revenue projects, when the rating agencies come in, they count them against our

balance sheet because we are responsible for them. And so they do have an

impact on how the institution is rated and our overall leveraging in terms of

borrowing the funds.

MR. BRUNE: Thank you.

MS. MOLNAR: Any other questions or comments? (no response)

News -- that New Jersey residents get one of the best values for their dollars at

our higher ed. So I want to thank you for looking out for our students, and I

want to thank you for your presentation,

DR. COLE: Thank you.

DR. SULTON: Thank you.

MS. MOLNAR: Our next department is the Department of Law

Typo. Dan Foster.

D A N I E L W. F O S T E R: Before I begin, I would like to introduce

Bureau Chief in our Budget Office.

18

of the Attorney General, Harvey, thank you for this opportunity to outline the

Department of Law and Public Safety’s capital budget request for Fiscal Year

2005. I would also like to thank the Commission for the support it has

provided to the Department over the past several years.

The State Police Troop C Headquarters in Hamilton was recently

occupied and the adjacent Technology Complex will soon be completed.

Funding provided by the Capital Commission has given the Troop C

Headquarters building, the forensic laboratory, and the high-tech criminal

science facility new state-of-the-art equipment. Through this facility, the State

Police will now have the tools to better and more efficiently perform its mission

-- from DNA and ballistics testing, to compiling and reporting crime statistics,

to investigating high-technology computer crime, to providing sophisticated

computerized dispatching.

Concerning the Department of Law and Public Safety’s capital

request for Fiscal Year 2005, our first capital priority is the 9/11

Communications Center in Totowa. As the responsibilities placed on the State

Police increase, the ability to effectively communicate is of the utmost

importance. This request would fund the construction of a much-needed

communication center at Totowa in northern New Jersey, and the purchase of

the new radio equipment for the Totowa, West Trenton, and Buena Operational

Dispatch Units.

Totowa is operating in space that was originally designed as a report

room for the Totowa Patrol Station. The Totowa Communications Center

remains overcrowded, in need of repairs and numerous upgrades. It is time to

construct a new facility for this important function.

19

The radio equipment for existing communications centers will

provide those centers with state-of-the-art radio equipment, which is on par with

the equipment recently installed at the new Hamilton Complex. As part of the

aftermath of September 11, we have realized that all of our communications

centers must be equipped to handle large-scale crises, as well as the increased

volume of calls handled on a typical day.

Our second priority is a request for capital preservation funds to

address fire safety at the Division of Consumer Affair’s Weights and Measures

facility in Woodbridge. This is a facility where millions of dollars worth of

sophisticated equipment remains at risk due to the need for a sprinkler system.

The equipment at risk includes precision testing scales and balances, calibrated

measuring devices, and other precision instruments used to verify the accuracy

of commercial equipment, pharmaceutical scales, and supermarket weighing

equipment.

We are also requesting funds for the critical repairs to the Regional

Medical Examiner and State Toxicology Laboratory at the Albano Institute of

Forensic Science in Newark. This institute is a 22-year-old, State-owned facility

used by the New Jersey Medical Examiner as a base of operations for mass

disaster planning, training, and other medical examiner functions. It is the

largest morgue in the state, and serves as the staging area for catastrophes.

Several modifications are needed to ensure the continued health and safety of

those that work in this facility, as well as a consistent quality of scientific

performance.

20

We are requesting that the HVAC system be replaced, as well as

various floors and refrigeration units at the Medical Examiner’s office. In

addition, we are requesting that the parking lot be resurfaced.

Another serious concern is the condition of our aging helicopter

fleet. This year’s request includes funding for the purchase of three light, twinturbine

engine helicopters and two intermediate twin-turbine engine helicopters.

Recent events have demonstrated the need for a rapid response in

crisis situations. We have examined our airborne law enforcement mission with

emphasis on domestic preparedness, as well as our air ambulance

responsibilities. Three of the four aircraft used for the Air Ambulance Program

are more than 14 years old. As these aircraft continue to age, maintenance and

repairs occur more frequently and become more costly. The replacement of

these ships is essential.

Numerous State Police facilities require continuing fire safety

retrofits, roof repairs, HVAC replacements, and critical repairs. These requests

remain high on our list of priorities. Over the years, the Commission has

provided funding to minimize emergency repairs. This request is made in the

hope that, once again, you will provide funding to help keep our State facilities

well-maintained.

Another critical need for the Division of State Police is the

modernization and replacement of the telephone system. Currently, patrol

stations are using an antiquated, 23-year-old telephone system. This system

disrupts phone service for lengthy periods of time, and citizens are unable to

contact our patrol stations. The inability to contact our road stations by

21

conventional telephone service, even for a short period of time, potentially

compromises the safety of both our citizens and our State Troopers.

Our radio equipment request asks for $10 million to continue

funding for overhauling our analog radio system. We are fortunate to have

received a $30 million Federal grant that can help fund this project, but

additional State funding is necessary to complete it. I cannot emphasize enough

the need for the reliable communication equipment and the need to modernize

the radio system in New Jersey. Simply put, radio communications are a

Trooper’s lifeline.

Over the past few years, funding was made available through the

State to develop many of the critical internal systems needed by the Division of

State Police to manage their resources in a cost [effective] and efficient manner.

Despite many significant improvements, there is still a long list of critical

internal information systems that need to be built. There is still no automated

inventory system to keep track of the thousands of materials used by the

Division. We have yet to develop a comprehensive personnel system, which is

the integral part of meeting the requirements of the consent decree.

The Division of State Police cannot lose the momentum it has

gained since the advent of the Federal consent decree. Our Fiscal Year 2005

capital budget IT request is aimed at keeping the critical infrastructure in place,

upgrading obsolete equipment, and developing those systems necessary to

support law enforcement in the 21st Century.

As you know, plans for the new State Police Emergency Operations

Center at West Trenton will continue to move forward with construction

proposals that are expected in mid-October, and an anticipated award date in

22

December of this year. Our Fiscal Year 2005 capital request seeks your support

to buy furniture and specialized emergency operations equipment that are not

included in the funding.

The need for homeland security forces the issue of our ability to

provide security for a number of vulnerable ports, sensitive military facilities,

nuclear power plants, refineries, and other strategic locations. The purchase of

five, fully equipped, 44-foot Sea Ark marine vessels is requested to strengthen

Marine Police operations. The Marine Police presence at Lake Hopatcong

remains critical because, year round, it is the most heavily boat-populated lake

in the state. The State Police facility at Lake Hopatcong is presently a

renovated bait shop, built in 1948, and is inadequate. We are requesting funds

to purchase a property adjacent to the existing space.

We also look forward to the development of a new State Police

Professional Learning Center and Headquarters in West Trenton. Construction

of this facility would address the State Police’s training needs, as defined by the

consent decree.

Over the years, funding has been requested for the purchase of two

vehicles to replace two severely outdated Weights and Measures trucks. These

trucks test the weighing scales, used by the State Police, for enforcement of truck

weight and size regulations, and they also are used to test the accuracy of

shipping scales and container sizes.

We have also included other requests, like the purchase of lease

facilities, mobile crime-scene laboratories, regional training center, and

renovations which are all critical to the mission of the State Police.

23

Your continued support and funding will help to maintain our

infrastructure. Again, I want to thank you for the support you have given us in

the past, and I will be happy to address any questions you may have.

MS. MOLNAR: Thank you.

Any questions or comments?

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: I have a couple.

MS. MOLNAR: Okay.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Is that all right?

MS. MOLNAR: Assemblyman Cryan.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Thanks.

The first one -- and good morning and thanks for your time and

your testimony -- is on the 9/11 Center. Any Federal money out there? And if

so, what’s the budget for the Federal money?

MR. FOSTER: We’ve actually looked at all the resources that are

available, and we have not been able to find anything else to be able to address

this situation.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Even if we got the cash from

Washington that we should get for the Homeland Security and the response to

9/11, there’s nothing there that would help us in terms of building this facility?

MR. FOSTER: Actually, most -- we have a statewide list of first

responder grant money that’s--

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: That’s out there.

MR. FOSTER: There have been many projects identified. Again,

they are done in priority order. There’s nothing for the 911 Totowa Center at

24

this point. I mean, they are operational. It is an overcrowded situation, and it

really needs to be addressed.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: I don’t have any issue with the

addressing it. I just find it -- I’ll be honest with you -- surprising that there’s not

any money available for a center that would be -- what -- 20 miles from New

York City, or so? That just doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. There’s been

applications that have been denied -- is that what we’re saying -- or we never

tried?

MR. FOSTER: I don’t know that. I will go back and check on that

before -- and just to ensure that it’s not on the list or hasn’t been requested.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: I’d like to know that, and I know that

in particular -- like, I represent a city with a port and the first responder money

that they’re asking for there seems to be high dollar. And I guess I just want to

understand what part of the Federal Government works with that. And if there

isn’t any, I’d like to know that through the Chair.

MR. FOSTER: And through the Chair, we will provide you the

answer.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: I’m in no particular order, but on Page

14, I want to understand the outdated Weights and Measures trucks. And the

reason for that is the highway safety initiative, that’s a concern of mine. Route

78 runs through -- I’ll be selfish and say -- my district, but we’ve all seen the

highway safety initiatives put out there by the government. Does this have any

impact? I mean, what’s the cost of the measurements, the truck safety?

Because I couldn’t pick that up looking through the priorities. Maybe I just

missed it.

25

MR. FOSTER: We have a $300,000 request for the Weights and

Measures trucks.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: What’s the issue now? Are you saying

that they don’t work or they are outdated or-- We’ve seen the administration

take a very pro-active approach with the trucks that are too heavy, and a

concern about public safety in that regard. My interest is, is what does this do

to help combat that?

MR. FOSTER: Well, I can offer that the vehicles are 1984 vehicles.

And then, due to the age and the wear and the condition, they have deteriorated

to the point where they need to be replaced.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: You know I’m going to ask you the life

span, the other questions. I’ll come back. How long should they last? Have

they been calibrated? Are they properly maintained? Through the Chair, I

would appreciate it if you could just follow up with some more information on

that for me.

MR. FOSTER: Certainly.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: With the facility that’s opened now,

as you mentioned in the opening part of your statements today, with the new

headquarters and the DNA facility, I was wondering -- because we sat here last

year and talked about the backlog of DNA testing -- if there’s been any

reduction in that yet, or do we foresee some and when? I’m not asking you to

have that today. I’m asking, through the Chair, if you could provide that.

MR. FOSTER: Okay.

26

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: And my last question is, is we were

chatting a little bit. Was there just some Federal money sent out for helicopters

anywhere?

MR. FOSTER: No.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: No, nothing. And what’s the life span

of a helicopter and a medi-vac helicopter?

L I E U T E N A N T R O B E R T P L A Z A: Sir, for a corporate

helicopter, the life span is approximately -- they say about 15 to 17 years. For

a helicopter that’s used for medi-vac, they estimate -- the industry standard is

probably about 12 to 14 years. The ships that are currently in use are probably

approaching 16 years old. Let me just clarify that, I think they’re around 16.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: And these are all -- three helicopters--

I don’t know the difference between the light, twin-turbine, and an intermediate.

I’ll be perfectly honest with you. Are these all medi-vac helicopters?

LIEUTENANT PLAZA: No, sir. The three light, twin-turbine

engine helicopters would be utilized to replace our general police mission, for the

most part. The general police mission, right now, is serviced by three, singleengine

Bell aircraft. A consultant survey that was done approximately seven to

eight years ago -- I’m sorry, maybe even longer that that now -- suggested that

single-engine aircraft should not be used in a state as congested as New Jersey,

flying over congested areas, as well as flying over water and operations of that

nature. We’ve been utilizing these aircraft. They have been performing

admirably, but we’re at the point now where if we had transferred to a twinengine

light-- The light and the intermediate are just basically -- the capacity of

the aircraft to, maybe, carry loads or to perform mission specifications. But

27

ideally, it would be nice if we could have five ships of the same nature. But

fiscally, it would be more responsible to request the lighter weight ship for the

general police mission, which is probably about a third of the costs.

The medi-vac ships, the twin-engine intermediates that you see --

the cost of the ship is, roughly, around $10 million. That ship would be needed

for the medi-vac service, because obviously you have a flight crew of

approximately four people, and then if you were transporting two additional --

it just needs a stronger capacity. The performance that it’s asked -- the mission

that it’s asked to perform is a much more critical mission. They’re asked to fly

in all kinds of weather conditions, land sometimes in parking lots to pick up

accident victims.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: So, if a fellow was looking at these

five, and they’re grouped really two and three--

LIEUTENANT PLAZA: Correct.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: --what priority of the two and the three

is -- which one is first and which one is second?

LIEUTENANT PLAZA: I would have to say the medi-vac ships,

sir.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: So the two are, versus the three?

LIEUTENANT PLAZA: Yes, sir.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: I have a couple more, Madam Chair,

if that’s all right?

I was surprised that the second priority was for sprinklers at

110,000 in Woodbridge. Is that right?

MR. FOSTER: Yes.

28

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: I know where it is. It’s near the prison

down there, right? Off Route 1, I think. Is that right? Is that where the facility

is? Wood building, brick? What kind of building is it? Is it a fire hazard, I

guess? It might be the way to ask.

MR. FOSTER: At this time, I don’t know what the building is

made of.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Okay. I guess that’s it.

Thank you.

MS. MOLNAR: Thank you.

MR. ROTH: Madam Chair?

MS. MOLNAR: Yes.

MR. ROTH: Perhaps I’m having a senior moment, but I seem to

recall over the last couple of years that we’ve approved -- this Commission has

approved the purchase of helicopters for the State Police. Am I correct? Were

they purchased? What’s their condition? Can anybody answer that question,

those questions?

MR. FOSTER: We did have an approp a couple of years ago. I

think there was fiscal constraints. We couldn’t go forward with it at the time.

And then there was language that provided us with the ability to go forward with

helicopters. But at the same time, we’re faced with some real tight fiscal

restraints.

MR. ROTH: So, we’re really talking today about the same

helicopters we approved two or three years ago?

MR. FOSTER: For the most part, yes.

MR. ROTH: Thank you.

29

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: I had one other one. I’m sorry. I

remembered what it was.

MS. MOLNAR: Okay, Assemblyman. That’s okay.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: The Medical Examiner -- and do we

share in Priority 3, in the largest morgue in Newark, the stuff that’s done there.

And I don’t understand the function that well. Is it something that services

counties, as well. Is this something where maybe--

MR. FOSTER: Yes.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: --other-- Should counties or other

municipalities, or whatever else is serviced, chip in, for lack of a better way to

put it, or is this something that we provide as a service? Maybe you could just

explain it for me a little bit?

MR. FOSTER: If I have it correct, I believe what happened was,

there was a charge several years back, but then it became an issue that the State

would provide the service statewide. Let me confirm that.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Okay. So this is a service we provide

to every county?

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER FROM AUDIENCE: Four.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Four counties. They are?

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER FROM AUDIENCE: Essex, Hudson, Passaic, and

Somerset.

MS. MOLNAR: Could you identify the speaker for our court

reporter?

MR. FOSTER: Yes. That’s John Hartman, the Chief

Administrative Officer from the Division of Criminal Justice.

30

MS. MOLNAR: Thank you.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: So what -- we actually provide

autopsy, morgue-type services for these four counties?

J O H N N. H A R T M A N: (speaking from audience) Under contract,

correct.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Okay. So they pay.

MR. HARTMAN: They pay for the services, for all the operating

costs.

MS. MOLNAR: Could you come up to the mike? Thank you.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: So these counties pay for this service?

MR. HARTMAN: They pay for the operating costs of the

autopsies. That’s correct. But not for the physical plant. This was built about

20 years ago, when the State operated the facility.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Okay. So what we’re looking for here

is-- Does the place operate at a profit, a loss?

MR. HARTMAN: No. Just at a-- No. It operates to break even.

We only charge the counties for what it costs us to perform the service.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Gotta ask, sitting here, on this. Why

wouldn’t we just go to the counties and ask each to throw in a hundred each?

MR. HARTMAN: We have asked and--

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: And they said, "No, go back here."

MR. HARTMAN: --they’ve been unreceptive, particularly the larger

urban counties.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Which I can figure out which ones they

are, from here. (laughter)

31

Thanks.

And my last thing is the boats. Do we share services with the State

Troopers? I mean, Union County has a county police that provides port service

with marine-type stuff. You mentioned Lake Hopatcong, which I don’t know

much about, but do we really need boats at this point? To be honest--

LIEUTENANT PLAZA: Sir, the boats that are used-- I mean, we

patrol the Hudson Bay and also all the refineries, and all along the Delaware

River, as well as, we assist the Coast Guard with any events that are going on up

by Liberty State Park and in that areas. Most of our ships that are in the --

probably above the 32-foot range, the larger ships that we need, are probably

1987 vintage and older. The requests that we have -- I believe it’s for-- They’re

a 44-foot ship. Three of our larger ships have been placed out of service this

past year, with an additional five that have been identified for replacement, as

1987 vintage and older.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: How many identified for replacement?

You said three out of service, and one more?

LIEUTENANT PLAZA: Three are out of service, and there are an

additional five that we have that are beyond their life span, to put it easily.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: So that’s why we’re looking for five

boats, five vessels.

LIEUTENANT PLAZA: Yes, sir.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Okay. All right.

Thank you.

MS. MOLNAR: Any other questions or comments?

Mr. Brannigan.

32

MR. BRANNIGAN: Just a comment on the helicopter issue. The

Governor’s Office has been in communications with the U.S. Department of

equipment for our State Police helicopters, which would enable them to

identify potential terrorists hidden in different areas. The Department has been

optimistic on supplying us with at least two ships’ equipment, which is

approximately $2 to $3 million. So it’s critically important, particularly if you

remember the articles about the manpad, rocket-launched missiles, which were

attempted to be smuggled into the country.

So the issue of helicopters, because of homeland security, is a far

more significant issue today than it was two or three years ago. The driving

force, really, is our ability to reduce vulnerability in areas that we’re very

vulnerable.

MS. MOLNAR: Thank you, Mr. Brannigan.

MR. ROTH: Would those helicopters, coming from the Federal

Government--

MR. BRANNIGAN: No, it’s equipment for our current fleet.

MR. ROTH: Oh, it’s equipment for, not helicopters.

MR. BRANNIGAN: Yes. It’s infra-ray equipment for our fleet.

MR. ROTH: Okay, I’m sorry.

MR. VRANCIK: The request for the equipment at Totowa --

there’s a 911 Commission that meets regularly. I know they’re addressing a

statewide 911 communications network. Is this consistent with that, or a part

of that overall effort?

33

MR. FOSTER: It is consistent with the needs addressed by, and in

conjunction with, the 911 Commission.

MR. VRANCIK: I guess I didn’t ask the question right. Is it a

critical part of that network, or is it ancillary to, I guess, is a better way of--

MR. FOSTER: It’s a critical part of it.

MS. MOLNAR: Mr. Rousseau.

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: Just a follow-up on a couple

of Assemblyman Cryan’s questions. And I still believe that we are going to --

and when he’s done with his legislative career, we’re going to hire him in

Treasury, but-- (laughter)

The issue about the 911 center and his question to you about

Federal funds. There are Federal funds that you have available. You’ve just

decided to prioritize other things with those Federal funds instead. Correct?

MR. FOSTER: Yes.

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: I mean, this is a decision

you made to do other things. Could you give us a list of what things you believe

are a higher priority than this, that you’re using with those existing Federal

funds? So for us to look at -- maybe this Commission believes that you should

be using your Federal funds for this, instead of some of the other things that

you’re looking at. Because you didn’t say-- You were clear. You said you’ve

just decided to come for State funds for this. You have Federal funds available.

I think it’s something like $120 million, or something. I know some of it’s

dedicated to certain things, but if you could just outline why -- where you’re

spending your Federal money so we can take a look at it and decide, and the

Legislature later on. Maybe it’s better that, if this is really a high priority, maybe

34

we hold off on something you have on that list. We don’t know what’s on that

list. Maybe everything on that list is a higher priority. Maybe it isn’t. If we can

look at--

And the other thing. I’m going to go back to these Weights and

Measures trucks that he had. I’m just amazed that there’s no-- It appears from

reading this, are these basically trucks that you use, that you know they’re a

certain weight, you put them on the weights and measures, on this scale, just to

verify the scale is correct? Is that what I’m reading that these trucks are?

MR. FOSTER: That is correct.

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: There’s no other--

MR. FOSTER: They have 5,000-pound scales on them that--

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: There’s no other-- I mean,

technology has changed so much in the last 20 years -- there’s no other way to

check these scales other than putting something that supposedly weighs what it

is onto the scale? I was reading what they were used for, then I kept on going

back to it. I wasn’t clear. But then, the more I read it, it seemed like all you do

is put these trucks on the scale to make sure that the scale reads 5,000 pounds,

or whatever. Is there no other way to do that than to spend $300,000 on two

trucks?

MR. FOSTER: Well, they actually go as much as 25,000 pounds.

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: But there’s no other way,

with technology, to check a scale anymore, other than putting something on it

to check it?

MR. FOSTER: I don’t know of any other, unless-- I can check

with the Weights and Measures people.

35

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: I mean, are we finding out

that we’re having major problems with our scales?

MR. FOSTER: Yes. It’s just deteriorating. They have frequent

mechanical repairs, and it’s getting to the point where--

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: No. Which has the frequent

mechanical repairs, the truck that you’re checking the scales with or the scales?

Because I’m reading this as these are the trucks that you check the weight of --

you check the functioning of the scales with these trucks.

MR. FOSTER: It’s the actual trucks.

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: And there’s no other way to

check the functioning of the scales other than using these trucks?

MR. FOSTER: I don’t know of any other way.

DEPUTY TREASURER ROUSSEAU: I mean, I’m sure that trucks

get weighed at other spots. That if it was weighed coming out of the shipyard

in Elizabeth, where it is weighed for a lot of reasons, and it’s on their manifest

that it’s 25,000 pounds, or whatever it is, and then it goes 15 miles down the

road and happens to get a weighing, they should be the same by that point in

time. Or if they’re not, then we know something’s wrong with one of the two

scales. It just seems strange that these are trucks that check-- These aren’t the

scales. These are trucks that check that the scales are accurate. That’s how I

read this, and I just thought there would be some way-- If this is how we were

doing it 20 years ago, that there’s got to be some different way. It just was odd.

MR. FOSTER: I don’t know of any new technologies.

MR. ROTH: Madam Chair, this really confuses me.

36

Are these trucks basically empty trucks that you’ve loaded weights

into to bring them up to a certain weight? They move around from weigh

station to weigh station to check the scales. Is that what we’re talking about?

MR. FOSTER: Yes. They go and they actually verify--

MR. ROTH: We have to buy new trucks to do this? I mean, the

Army -- the Department of Defense has auctions all the time where they getting

rid of their old trucks. Why couldn’t we buy enough of those, which are

relatively cheap. I think you can buy them for a few thousand dollars each.

Leave one at every weigh station and put some weights in it. You don’t have to

load it with gold bricks. You can load it with rocks.

MR. FOSTER: Well, it’s not just the weights.

MR. ROTH: It seems to me like $300,000 to check scales is

outrageous.

MR. FOSTER: Well, it’s the trucks with all the equipment in it

also.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: What equipment?

MR. ROTH: I’m sorry.

MR. FOSTER: I believe it’s the trucks with the equipment in it.

MR. ROTH: What equipment are we talking about? I thought we

were just talking about weights.

MR. FOSTER: It says here, "To provide the purchase of two

trucks, currently operated by officers. The trucks are used primarily in the field

of commercial operation to verify the accuracy of shipping scales and scales

designed to weigh transport vehicles."

37

MR. ROTH: Well, you just said the only way they can verify

whether those scales are operating is by putting something on them that weighs

that much that they know the weight of. An old duce-and-a-half truck filled

with rocks would weigh just as much as a new truck filled would.

MR. FOSTER: The trucks themselves, though, carry 5,000-pound

-- what I’m calling -- scaled test carts. And they actually have 21,000-pound

test weights on them.

MR. ROTH: All right. Thank you.

I’m still confused.

MS. MOLNAR: Do you want more information, perhaps?

MR. ROTH: Definitely.

MS. MOLNAR: Could you follow up with some additional

information on this?

MR. FOSTER: Sure.

MS. MOLNAR: Mr. Brune.

MR. BRUNE: Dan, just a couple of quick questions.

In Priority No. 12, one of my questions is the interoperability plan

for which we got $30 million from the Federal Government.

MR. FOSTER: Yes.

MR. BRUNE: I think that’s where you allude to, in your

testimony, that the cost of that is higher. Is part of that cost in this request

somewhere, or is that an out-year cost, the remaining value?

MR. FOSTER: It would be out-year cost.

MR. BRUNE: Okay.

38

As you unfold the plans for that, is the Department talking to NJ

Transit and people of that sort that have a similar need for, kind of, a global

interoperability plan?

MR. FOSTER: Yes.

MR. BRUNE: So when we see cost estimates that -- we can assume

that that reflects the combined effort.

MR. FOSTER: The other departments, yes.

MR. BRUNE: Okay.

Just one other question. In a world of 911, Dan, as I understand --

you can correct me if I’m wrong -- there’s over two hundred 911 stations locally

held around the state. And then, I wanted to ask you how many the State

Police is running at the moment. Is it three?

MR. FOSTER: Three.

LIEUTENANT PLAZA: Yes, sir.

MR. BRUNE: Three. And I guess the question is, obviously, in a

time of constraints around here, is there some need for a rationalization of the

shear number of 911 sites? The question that might come to mind is -- I’m sure

there’s a reason for this -- but is there a reason that the State Police cannot run,

say, one state-of-the-art facility in Hamilton, and parse the calls out from there?

Why is there a need for three at the State level and 200 at the local level -- all

of which need equipment upgrades?

LIEUTENANT PLAZA: Sir, the three centers that we have also do

the regional dispatch for the State Police, basically, for dispatching the troopers,

as well as doing the 911 calls. So there’s one North, Central, and South Jersey.

That’s how those three centers are broken up right now. The State Police,

39

because of the volume of 911 calls that they get, for instance, if there’s an

accident on Route 195, with the advent of cell phones, that one accident could

possibly generate 100 phone calls. And needless to say, that call, that 911 call,

has to be picked up by the operator. It becomes quite a burden, obviously, if

there’s several accidents in the area and then other incidents going on -- just the

volume of calls that are coming in. It actually takes the operators away from

dispatching the troopers.

So what the State Police is doing now, and you’re probably familiar

with it, is we’ve proposed a call-taker center. So the center -- what we’re going

to do is, hopefully, all the 911 calls will come into the call-taker center, and

then from there it will go out to the three regional dispatch centers. That will

then give -- the operators will be able to give those assignments, or if it’s an

accident they’ll be able to give that to the car in the area that they handle. So

those three centers not only do 911, but they also perform the dispatch

operations for the State Police.

MR. BRUNE: Okay. I understand. I guess I’m focused on 911 at

the moment. I guess what you’re saying, from the standpoint of 911, the flood

of calls that one gets, if they’re all to the Hamilton facility, do they literally spill

MR. FOSTER: Actually, what happens is they may receive multiple

calls, for example, on an accident. The calls will come in, and the one person

for the area that they know it’s from, they will forward it. For example, if it’s

North Jersey, or something, it gets shipped up to Totowa. The other people

there at Hamilton will continue to receive the calls, and answer whatever

40

questions, and take whatever information is necessary. But the one gets filtered

out to the other site right away.

MR. BRUNE: I guess we don’t have to resolve this today, Dan.

But in terms of volume, I guess the question that comes to mind, is there any

benefit to centralize it, number one, versus having three. In other words, have

your effort in one place, and handle the volume that way. And then the other

question about having -- as I understand it, 225 of these things at the local level,

and the relationship between them and yourself as 911 calls come in. I guess

we’re asking that because there is not a whole lot of money to spread around,

and we all have similar needs.

MR. FOSTER: Yes. I just wonder if it’s locally, if it’s just because

it deals with their local law enforcement versus the State Police.

MR. BRUNE: Thank you.

MS. MOLNAR: Any other questions or comments? (no response)

If not, I want to thank you for your presentation.

Our next department is Juvenile Justice Commission. I’d like to

welcome Howard Beyer, Executive Director.

H O W A R D L. B E Y E R: Good morning, everyone.

I’m Howard Beyer, Executive Director, and to my left is Keith

Commission. I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here this morning

to present the Juvenile Justice Commission’s capital budget request. I may go

off the script a little bit, because I just want to tell you, a little bit, who we are.

I’d like to say that we are very proud to be a part of the Department of Law and

Public Safety, but many times we’re like the best kept secret in New Jersey,

41

because we have a very unique role. We take care of troubled and delinquent

kids. And it’s a very special responsibility, because we represent, really, the last

stop for kids who have really failed everywhere along the line. Or we are trying

very hard to prevent them to come into the system, by funding counties and

trying to divert them from coming into places like the Training School in

Monroe, or going into a detention center in one of the local localities. And if

we fail, then the kids will become adult inmates, and that’s what we’re trying

very hard to avoid.

The Commission has very carefully examined its needs, and is only

requesting funds for projects that severely impact on the services we provide.

The request presented here allows the Commission to continue to provide safe

and secure facilities for youth in our custody, meet building safety and fire

codes, or to initiate projects that provide cost savings later down the line.

Nothing in our request will come as a surprise. Our ’05 requests are

primarily for projects that have not been funded in the past and become more

critical every year they are delayed. Most of the projects have been identified

as priorities for a period of time. We have also requested funds for emergency

evacuation and continuation of operation purposes.

We are seeking funds for seven priority categories: critical repairs,

a replacement residential dormitory, emergency/continuation of operation funds,

our most critical fire and life safety needs, roof replacements, suicide safety

improvements, and security enhancements that will improve safety for our staff

and residents.

42

And before I detail this year’s requests, I would like to bring you

up-to-date on a few major projects that the Commission has completed in the

last year through funding provided by the Capital Commission.

Last summer, and this was really -- I can only explain this to you.

We celebrated the reopening of the Essex Residential Community House in

Newark. I’d like to describe it as sort of an oasis in the middle of the city that

could use the kind of renovation that our housing unit had. It was really

renovated from top to bottom. It really gave a warm type of living circumstance

for kids who have gone through a very tough time in life. Today, the building

is safe. It has an adequate fire suppression system, and it’s really conducive to

what we are responsible for, and that’s rehabilitation. I just want to say we are

not the Department of Corrections and we are not the Department of Human

Services. We have a very specific role, and that is to rehabilitate kids --

children, boys and girls.

I’m very proud to say that we really don’t have a single inmate in

the Juvenile Justice Commission. What we really have are residents or students.

We don’t call them inmates anymore. Because if you call a kid an inmate long

enough, they will become an inmate. And ultimately, that’s what we really

don’t want to happen.

So I’d like to invite you up someday, if you’re ever in Newark, to

come see what you have approved for us. Because it is really beautiful, and

because it did take a long time to get, and it was a lot of work to get it to the

condition that it’s in. I want to assure you of this, we are working very hard to

keep the place looking beautiful so that any guest who comes in, or any resident

43

who comes in, that you’re finding a very safe, secure, and well-kept

environment.

Any day now, we are going -- the renovations of our Turrell

Building, which houses some of the JJC’s most difficult youth, will be complete.

This program is designed for youth who have serious emotional problems and

have been adjudicated delinquent. The young people are carefully screened for

this placement. And because the needs of this population is so great, the

Commission has taken great lengths to ensure that the residents are as safe as

possible. The Turrell Building is truly a model of suicide safety. I know that

this is a subject that is very sensitive to some people in this room. But I come

out of adult corrections, which I spent nearly 25 years in, I know what it’s like

to lose somebody through suicide. But to lose somebody who is a child,

whether it be a boy or a girl, is even more heart wrenching, because they really

haven’t had a chance to really have a shot at life. So we take this issue very

seriously in the Commission.

From top to bottom, the facility has been analyzed and outfitted

to prevent a young person from hurting himself. We’re very proud of this

accomplishment. Here’s another place that we’d love for you to come take a

look and see what we’re doing and how well it’s working.

We also believe in being a good neighbor -- and whether that means

in participating in community cleanups or providing funds for important

community programs -- the Commission understands our role as being part of

the communities which we are in. And as a good neighbor, the Commission has

played an active part in commemorating an important part of the Johnstone

Campus, which is in Bordentown. The site is the former Manual Training and

44

Industrial School, the first vocational school for African Americans. The JJC

and the State Arts Council thought it only right to help the alumni association

and erect a monument marking its history. About a year ago, that monument

was unveiled, and we hosted the event for several hundred guests, including the

Secretary of State, who made it a stop on her Underground Railroad March;

alumni, family, and friends. It was truly a wonderful day, and it brought, really,

all communities and walks-of-life together for a very nice afternoon.

Other projects that we are in progress, include a campus-wide

electrical upgrade at our largest facility, in the New Jersey Training School in

Monroe; and electrical and fire suppression upgrade at four of our facilities --

Green, Warren, and Pinelands residential community homes, and our Life Skills

and Leadership Academy, which we now call it. It used to be known as the

boot camp. I just want to tell you why we changed it to the Life Skills and

Leadership Academy. Because we really never ran it as a real boot camp. We

never brought a kid in only to tear him down, only to build him up. And we

have reprioritized what we do at the Academy. We’ve made education the most

important thing to our residents, as opposed to the physical issues.

We are our own school district. Every child, boy or girl, in our

system must go to school. And at the Academy, that’s what we’re focusing on

now -- education and vocational skills. We still have drill instructors, and we

still have physical endeavors, but education is the most important thing we do.

So it’s another great unit within the Juvenile Justice Commission.

As we speak, the JJC administrative offices are locating to our new

home on Spruce Street, here in Trenton. I want to say we’re very grateful for

this as well. For the first time, the Commission -- by April of next year, the

45

Commission will be under one roof. It’s like a statement that we are for real,

and we’re really here. When the opportunity came up for this placement, it was

a building that was renovated and they needed a tenant. We were eager to take

it. One, because it gave us a home that we could all be in; and we’re saving the

State over $400,000 a year in rent. So there’s two good things that are

happening. And we’d like to invite you to come see us over there, as well.

The Juvenile Justice Commission has a challenge goal -- to turn

around the lives of juveniles who are headed down the wrong track and to help

them become productive members of the community, instead of becoming adult

inmates, and jeopardize safety and further burden the taxpayer.

Our new motto is, "Realizing Potential and Changing Futures,"

because that’s exactly what we do. We are a Commission of hope, as we do it

through education, counseling, and building self-respect. And we do it in

buildings that are 50, 60, and sometimes 80 years old. Sometimes they have

leaky roofs. Sometimes they’re overcrowded or poorly designed for the purposes

for which we have designed them. But we do it in a world that is much different

than it was a few years ago, and it’s a world that requires us to be able to

evacuate and relocate the 1,200 kids we are responsible for.

Our first priority has been, as it’s been in other years, is -- remains

critical repairs. Last year, the JJC did not receive funds for critical repairs.

However, last week, and I want to thank the Executive Director, a $500,000

critical repairs allocation from an inter-departmental account was approved. A

spending plan for these funds will be submitted to OMB for their approval,

which includes addressing fire codes, health, and environmental violations.

46

Even with these much-needed funds, the Commission will not be able to fund

other essential building repairs.

As you know, structural and mechanical problems that are not

addressed don’t go away. They only get worse. Prior to this recent 500,000

allocation, our critical funds had been exhausted, leaving us with no funds to

address an emergent situation. If a tree falls on a building, as we were afraid of

in Hurricane Isabel, or a heating system were to fail during the winter months,

we would not have the funds to fix them. Furthermore, we do not have the beds

to relocate juveniles. It would become necessary to take a building off-line. We

cannot afford to lose a building, even for a short period of time. We really need

to fix these buildings as it occurs.

Last year, we asked you to consider funding a project to allow us

to replace a dormitory building at our Voorhees Residential Community home.

The current building has deteriorated and is not designed to accommodate

residential needs. And it isn’t just that we can move the kids out. One of the

issues -- a real-world issue, as far as where our residential places are -- that if we

close the place, it’s not easy to find a community that will just let us come in.

Because even though we are trying desperately to change our image and tell

communities that you don’t have to be afraid of our kids, that’s much easier

said than done. We need those beds, and we need to keep them where they are.

We just need to fix the places that they’re in, and so that they can be in a safe

and secure environment. This remains the same as it did last year when you sat

here.

The construction permits will be completed and issued by the first

month of the new year and will be valid for one year. If this project is not

47

funded in Fiscal Year ’05 capital budget, new building permits will have to be

obtained. The overall design will need to be modified to conform to

International Building Codes, and will severely impact the cost of the project.

The Commission has spent $135,000 in design funds. We do not want to see

these funds wasted, and we do not want to incur further costs to redesign this

project. We really, really, really want to provide a safe, secure, modern housing

for the young people in our care. And by funding this project, we can do that

for more than 30 children.

As you know, the Governor and the Attorney General have directed

every State agency to be prepared for any type of emergency. This affects some

states differently than others. But the Commission needs to be prepared to

evacuate and house any or all of our kids, located through the state. That will

require the purchase of buses, tents, and trucks. To meet this mandate, the

Commission needs to upgrade telecom and data lines, augment our information

technology systems, and renovate our control center in Bordentown. We have

requested funds for some of these projects in the past, such as the renovation of

our command center, but now they have taken on greater urgency and

importance. The past has taught us how important communications become in

a severe emergency. The safety of our children lies with us, and we cannot

afford not to be prepared for that safety issue.

Not all of our requests are high-profile or flashy. They do not lend

themselves to ribbon-cuttings or openings, but they are critical to us. Projects

such as the second phase of the campus-wide electrical upgrade at the Training

School in Monroe Township, and the installation of a new fire suppression

48

critical to our operations. Also important is the health and safety of our

residents and staff. The Commission is requesting funds to conduct an analysis

of the lead and asbestos hazards at our Johnstone Campus, particularly since

some of the rooms in question are currently being used by staff. These projects

represent real needs, ones that we feel cannot be overlooked.

Fire safety continues to be one of our biggest concerns, particularly

at our facilities. Our kids, as you know, can’t go home. We are responsible for

them 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. It came to our

attention recently that the water tower at the Training School in Monroe

Township will need to be repaired. The tower was recently drained after a leak

was detected, and it’s now been determined that the water tower is needed to

provide enough water pressure to operate the fire suppression system and the fire

hydrants simultaneously. This last-minute discovery requires the tower to be

repaired and refurbished to meet building and fire codes, at an estimated cost

of $350,000. We cannot afford to ignore this fact without jeopardizing the

issue of safety.

Our fifth priority is roof replacement. This has always been a very

sensitive subject for me, personally. I remember when I bought my first house.

The rugs in the house were beat up and the floor was warped, and I wanted to

buy news rugs. My dad told me, "Your roof leaks, fix the roof before you fix the

rug. Straighten the floors out, then buy the rug." Well, because we have kids

living with us all the time, the issue of the roof repair is tremendous. These

roofs continue to deteriorate. In the past year alone, the Commission has

replaced or repaired six roofs under emergency conditions. That is something

that we do our best to avoid, but funds have not been allocated for this use in

49

either ’03 or ’04, and we have no choice. Roof repair and replacement alone has

drastically deteriorated our reserve of critical fund repairs. And by funding these

projects, we can ensure that we’re getting the best product and price through the

competitive bidding process.

The overwhelming majority of the youth in the Commission’s care

are troubled. Some have been physically abused, some mentally abused, many

with multiple factors that are difficult to overcome. Many of these young

people are on medication to prevent them from being harmful to themselves or

others. And so, suicide safety, which I had mentioned before, is an

extraordinarily important issue.

I want to thank the Capital Commission for recognizing this in the

past. As a result, the State of New Jersey has become a national leader in

suicide-safe institutions. While the Commission has made improvements in this

area over the past few years with your help, we still have further to go. It is

essential that we prevent kids from injuring themselves. With your continued

support, we’ll be able to do that.

Our final request pertains to the safety of our front-line staff. The

Commission is proud of our staff. It’s not an easy task dealing with 20, 30,

sometimes 50 kids for seven, eight hours at a stretch. While our staff is trained

to the very best within our ability to handle the challenge that they bring, there

are dangerous times. It is our responsibility to protect our staff by giving them

the knowledge and the training to handle difficult situations, and hopefully, to

do that without the use of physical force, but also by giving them the equipment

to alert us when something is wrong. The Commission has requested a quarter

of a million dollars to install a Duress System, an alarm system, at our most

50

secure facility in Bordentown, the Juvenile Medium Security Facility, and thus

completing the final phase of a man down system for all of the Juvenile Justice

Commission’s secure facilities. This will accomplish a major goal for the

Commission.

I want to thank you for your honest evaluation of our request and

for your past support. Please remember that the Commission is responsible for

New Jersey’s most difficult children, who without out help really don’t have a

chance to succeed. And we do really, and I do mean this from the bottom of

my heart, we really do want to change those lives, so that they can be productive

citizens and not go on to be a continued burden to New Jersey as adult inmates.

So thank you very much for listening to me this morning.

MS. MOLNAR: Thank you. Thank you for your compassion.

I have one question. Regarding the education component. Do you

bill the local Board of Ed, where the child was resident, for the cost of the

education?

MR. BEYER: My Director of Administration is here.

MS. MOLNAR: All right. Could you give your name for the

stenographer?

R O S A N N E F A I R B A N K S: Hi. Good morning. I’m Rosanne

Fairbanks. I’m the Director of Administration for the Commission. We receive

education moneys much as the school district’s do for kids. So we get education

money only for the kids. We don’t get any structural money to supply the

classrooms. That’s the SFEA Act in the 1970s that indicates that we can use the

funds for books, for classrooms, for teachers, but not the infrastructure.

MS. MOLNAR: Thank you.

51

Any other questions or comments?

Assemblyman Cryan.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: I do. I have a couple comments and

then a couple questions. It’s too bad when the school construction money

wouldn’t help there. I do want to make a comment to my colleagues up here

in terms of how important I view the work of the JJC. Particularly, your

compassion comes through today, Howard. But this is an ongoing issue for us,

obligation that we all have. We talk often here about -- well, we try to look at

cost benefits. At least, I know, in the past year, we certainly have talked about

that. Any time you can rehabilitate a kid and keep him out of our system, if

you want to just be cold and calculating on the dollar as to cost savings--

Besides, the quality of life is something we should all factor in. I do want to

make it clear that this is a major area for me, of concern in this part of the

process, which is the first time I’ve done that up here.

I wanted to ask -- on Page 6, the fact that -- in terms of some

questions -- the $500,000 critical repair allocation. I hate to do this to you, but

do you take it off the top of Priority 1? Do you take it off the top of Priority

1 or is it in addition to?

K E I T H P O U J O L: The funds requested in Fiscal Year ’05 are in addition

to the $500,000 that was provided to Executive Director Vrancik yesterday.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Okay, so they’re separate.

Do you have a maintenance schedule for this stuff? I mean, I

looked through it, and I didn’t -- maybe it’s here and I just didn’t get it, or

didn’t understand it. Is there some sort of schedule?

52

MR. POUJOL: In our secure environments at the Training School

and the Johnstone Campus, both of which have maintenance staffs -- and they

do have rudimentary computerized maintenance systems where they attempt to

replace light bulbs and filters for HVAC systems -- they’re continually

monitoring the condition of the roofs and other systems. So they have a little

more leeway than our community-based program. We have 21 residential and

day programs where we have absolutely no maintenance staff, not even a repair.

Our maintenance is left to institutional trade instructors and the kids, through

a learning environment, and mostly contractors. We spent $932,000 of critical

repair moneys and bond moneys last year, until the well dried up two days ago.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Going back to the school -- are you

actually a -- you’re not a school district, per se, are you?

MR. POUJOL: No, we’re a school district.

MS. FAIRBANKS: Yes, we’re considered a school district.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Really?

MS. FAIRBANKS: Yes.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Would they be eligible for school

money? I mean, they teach kids. Is that so far a stretch?

MR. VRANCIK: I have to check that one out.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: That’s interesting.

My last comment is just a reiteration of what I said. I absolutely

believe that this is a cost-effective-- Do we have any sort of stats that show --

and I know you’re in an ongoing situation, and I know you’ve dealt with

dilapidated facilities -- but like, for example, in Essex, would you be able, in the

out-years, where you’ve seen an improvement in the facilities -- don’t have rats

53

anymore and those sort of things. We know environment counts. I know it

from representing Union County, what environment means in a youth facility.

Is there any sort of data that shows an improvement, in terms of the fact that

when we supply the right -- that things that we’re really obligated to, as a State,

in terms of facilities, that it does show an impact in terms of kids not being back

into the system? Do we have anything that shows that at all?

MR. BEYER: I don’t think there is, but I could just tell you this,

being in this business for almost 29 years. It’s almost like -- the only way I can

describe it, it’s like being at home. That’s the way we look at the way we do our

work. It’s like being the head of a household. If you keep your house right, if

you have a house that’s run with respect, with dignity, with love, caring, you

keep the place clean, hopefully -- and there’s no guarantee -- people that come

out of that house that you’re running are going to be successful and productive

citizens. That’s the route we’re going. I can’t tell you that there’s a study that

says it, but I think it’s the right way to go.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: I would have to agree with you, and

hopefully, we can help you here, in a limited-time income.

I thank you for your time.

MR. BEYER: Thank you very much.

MS. MOLNAR: Gary.

MR. BRUNE: Howard, a couple of questions about -- that stem

from the prioritization of the projects. You’ve listed the dorm building second,

and fire safety down around four. I guess we’re trying to understand the options

here, and how you came to the ranking. Maybe that’s the first question. How

did you come to the ranking, which is essentially, as I understand it, might have

54

some fire safety aspects to it, with the sprinkler system. But it seems to be a bed

space issue, with fire safety further down the list?

MR. BEYER: Well, no. Fire safety is -- it’s very hard. We spend

a lot of time trying to come up -- which is the most important, what is more

important. The renovation is critical because we don’t want to leave kids in an

unsafe house. Let’s put it that way. So I don’t want the roof to cave in. I don’t

want it to burn down, but I don’t want the roof to cave in or the support beams

that are holding it up to cave in on the kids.

MR. BRUNE: So there are safety issues at the facility?

MR. BEYER: Huge safety issues, though.

MR. BRUNE: Okay. Have you looked at the repair -- kind of a

cost benefit, the cost of repairing the facility versus building-- As I understand,

you want -- tried to build a new building, right? Can we presume that the cost

of repairing exceeds the cost of a new building?

MR. POUJOL: Yes, you can. We did do a study in March of 2000.

We have a consultant report that identifies just the structural issues associated

with the former governor’s residence there. And Priority 16 is an out-year, for

the design, will cost in the neighborhood of $505,000, just to deal with the

structural issues alone. And that does not address the fact that the building,

with its age, does not meet current code requirements, does not have fire

suppression, does not have adequate indoor air quality, and is not ADSA

accessible. Part of the cost for the $2-million request is a very difficult site. It’s

a mezzanine-type of facility on the side of a hill. So, just the site work in this

complex is very difficult and a leading factor to the cost of this initiative, but it

is a good site for our needs.

55

MR. BRUNE: I might ask, through the Chair, if we could see a

copy of that report. Otherwise, the $2 million, does that include -- do you need

land or are you building on existing land?

MR. POUJOL: We are building on the existing site. We’ve secured

-- it’s a historic site, and secured the approval of Department of Environmental

Protection. We will be demolishing three small cottages to make room for this.

MR. BRUNE: So it’s kind of a fully allocated cost when we look

at the $2 million, demolishing?

MR. POUJOL: Yes it is.

MR. BRUNE: Okay.

One other question. You mentioned how, in your testimony, about

the International Building Code and the fact that the cost would go up because

we’d have to modify the current plans. I’m not familiar with the International

Building code. What is that?

MR. POUJOL: We meet with our folks from Treasury, Division of

Property Management and Construction, every month, and this has been a

barometer. Next year the International Building Code will replace the Uniform

Building Code that New Jersey is using now. This design was started two years

ago and is a difficult site. So it’s taken a substantial amount of time. If, in fact-

- When the permits are released, as we expect they will be, they’re good for one

year. After that year is up, the window of opportunity to permit that, under the

old code, expires. That will require Treasury to rebid the design to meet the

new, stricter requirements of the International Building Code.

56

MR. BRUNE: So it sort of sounds like the replacement for the

Uniform Building Code. Okay.

Just one last question on the security aspect, Priority No. 3. In my

understanding, in an emergency there is a need to communicate between the

campuses. That’s one thing we’re trying to understand. You mentioned some

IT work.

MR. POUJOL: In the Bordentown complex, all of communication

from both sides of the campus, on the Johnstone side as well as the J-Rex

(phonetic spelling) side, all is hubbed to the center control at the Juvenile

particular area is not fire rated, so that all of the communications that are

coming in there, in the event that there’s a major issue going in that portion of

the building, would essentially knock out the entire communications network

on both campuses. So this, I think it’s Priority 32 on the center control

upgrades, is to expand the center control by about a third, and to provide

integration of these systems and redundancies.

MR. BEYER: The other thing is, when you do have a catastrophe

or something like 9/11, we need to know where every one of our kids are. So

we have designated a spot that everybody, whether you’re in secure care or

residential care, must feed in, depending how big the emergency. It could be

every 15 minutes, every half hour, every hour. We need to know where

everybody is all the time.

MR. BRUNE: Thank you.

MS. MOLNAR: I had one other question. You provide a

tremendous service to the counties. Do they provide you any funding?

57

MR. BEYER: No.

MS. FAIRBANKS: No. On the contrary, we provide them quite

a bit of funding.

ASSEMBLYMAN CRYAN: Quite a bit of stress, too.

MS. MOLNAR: Yes, thank you.

Any other questions or comments? (no response)

If not, I want to thank you for your presentation.

MR. BEYER: Thank you very much.

MS. MOLNAR: Okay. Our last department is the State Library.

I’d like to welcome Norma Blake, State Librarian.

N O R M A E. B L A K E: Good morning, Chairperson Molnar and

Commission members. I’m here today with Michael Scheiring, Vice President

and Treasurer of Thomas Edison State College, and Diane Koye, our Business

Manager. It’s a pleasure to meet with you this morning to discuss the facility’s

needs of the New Jersey State Library.

As State Librarian, I manage both the State Library and the State

House Complex, and the Library for the Blind and Handicapped on Stuyvesant

Avenue, to serve New Jersey’s over 8 million residents. The State Library serves

all of State government, but also the library community and the general public.

The State Library is also the largest law library open to the public in New Jersey.

We see visitors from all over the state and country using our special collections

on New Jersey and genealogy.

The State Library also provides high quality information services to

individual citizens through the state’s 451 public libraries. Last year, about 42

million New Jersey residents visited public libraries in the state, checking out

58

almost 52 million items, an increase in visits of almost 1 million and an increase

in circulation of almost 3 million. The databases and Internet access supplied

through these libraries comes in large part from the State Library, which provides

the infrastructure for many of our state’s libraries.

The Library for the Blind and Handicapped serves not only the

blind and deaf, but also anyone who cannot see or hold a book. Due to the

aging of the general population, we are experiencing a 10 percent increase in

requests for service at LBH each year, especially in the 80-to-89-year-old range.

More than 126,000 residents of New Jersey are eligible for service from LBH,

and we are reaching out daily to sign them up for services.

I’d like to take this opportunity to thank you for your past support,

which enabled us to improve telecommunications services at the Library for the

Blind in Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002. With these funds, we are able to extend

Audiovision, a radio reading service for the blind, throughout the state.

This year, the State Library needs capital funding for its facility,

which is over 40 years old and in need of repair. The building has some major

problems requiring remediation due to the presence of moisture. The building

is not accessible to the handicapped, who may wish to use our services. The

building was designed for library service in the 1960s, not for the technology and

information needs of today. Only two of five floors were ever renovated, a

decade ago. The building suffers from inadequate cabling and wiring for

computers. The telephone system is maxed out, limiting our ability to answer

requests and to respond to our customers.

In 1995, an independent State House Campus Facilities Study

identified a water infiltration problem at the State Library. To remediate the

59

problem, the firm recommended that the roof and windows be replaced, roof

drains be installed, and joints caulked between the marble panel cladding on the

outside of the building. To date, no work of this nature has been performed.

Last year, a Treasury Occupational/Environmental Health specialist

was called on to determine if the water infiltration problem caused mold to grow

around the windows. Each year, if left unattended, the problem will eventually

cost more to remediate and may lead to structural problems. In the same 1995

study, the firm recommended that the entrance doors, toilet facilities, and stairs

be modified to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Earlier I thanked the Commission for past support of our efforts to

upgrade technology. The State Library must continue to acquire library

technology in order to provide high quality information service, both within the

State Library for the use of our customers and for the state’s libraries, which

utilize our infrastructure.

A brief overview of our request: To upgrade local area network and

servers; install a new telephone system; provide a telephone-based public access

catalog for the Library for the Blind and Handicapped; install a customer

self-select system for Audiovision, our radio reading service for the blind, so that

customers of the Library for the Blind can choose the times they want to listen

to their programs; and create a modest wireless training lab for the use of the

public.

With the move of the State Archives to newly renovated quarters

at 225 West State Street, the State Library has planned a periodicals reading

room in that vacated space. Almost one-sixth of the State Library’s collection

is now housed at the Library for the Blind. The proposed collection moves

60

would not only complete the relocation of the periodicals collection to the new

space, but also return the entire collection to the State Library facility.

In 2002, the Capital Commission approved $400,000 for a

feasibility study for a new State Library facility, later eliminated from the

Governor’s budget. This feasibility study and subsequent building project would

address the long-term capital needs of the State Library.

A new Federal law, the Child Internet Protection Act, was recently

upheld that requires public libraries to provide content filtering on all computers

that access the Internet in order to be eligible for Federal Library Services and

Technology Act funds and E-rate discounts beginning July 1, 2004. We plan to

study the filtering needs of our libraries, make recommendations to the library

community, and first make our own computers compliant with the Act at a cost

of $20,000, out of the $200,000 requested.

In summary, I urge the Commission to move forward on our

request to remediate the water infiltration problem, to preserve the State’s

investment, as well as to modify the State Library to permit us to comply with

ADA requirements, and to serve all of our patrons. I urge the Commission to

consider all of our needs so that the State Library can strive to be the best

information resource for State government, the state’s libraries, and the general

public.

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the capital needs of the

State Library and the Library for the Blind and Handicapped, and I’d be happy

to answer any questions that you have.

MS. MOLNAR: Thank you.

61

As a member of the West Hill Memorial Library Board, I want to

thank you for your services. People don’t realize the services you do provide.

Any questions or comments? (no response)

Wow! I think you covered it all.

Well, thank you so much, and we’ll be looking at your request.

Thank you.

MS. BLAKE: Thank you for your time.

MS. MOLNAR: Now, we’re up to New Business, I guess -- other

business.

Number one, our next meeting will be on October 24. It will be in

Room 12, which is behind this. It’s been totally renovated. I believe that’s

where the Supreme Court justices, that sat here, would go in there and deliberate

on all these wonderful cases. So we’ll be meeting there next month.

One of our members sent me a little note, here, suggesting that if we

get the testimony ahead of time that perhaps we could dispense with the person

from the department reading it. I wasn’t sure if you want to discuss it at the

next meeting or get some feeling now.

MR. BRANNIGAN: That was actually my suggestion. I thought

that maybe we might give the presenter an option where they might just

summarize.

MS. MOLNAR: Summarize the bullet points, yes.

MR. BRANNIGAN: But if there’s something critically important

that would need more, and they want to be precise in what they say, they might

read it. But it seems that sometimes the reading is redundant, because we’ve

already read it.

62

MS. MOLNAR: I believe one of them did skip around, even

though they did have it in front of them. They did summarize a little bit.

Mr. Roth, do you have any strong feelings?

MR. ROTH: No, not on this.

MR. VRANCIK: I guess, how would we communicate this?

Would we tell them up front, please come with a briefer presentation?

MR. BRANNIGAN: As Executive Director, you could ask people

to try to be as -- to make their points, but to try to be concise.

MS. MOLNAR: Mr. Annese.

MR. ANNESE: The important part would be for them to give us

the information in our package, so we have the time to read over it.

MR. VRANCIK: We asked them to do that, but, unfortunately--

MS. MOLNAR: We don’t always get it.

MR. VRANCIK: --we don’t always get it in time to get it out to

everyone.

MS. MOLNAR: All right.

MR. ROTH: You know, in this day of e-mail, things can be

handled a lot faster. I would have no objection to getting all of this paperwork

by e-mail.

MS. MOLNAR: Wow. We’d save a lot of trees.

MR. ROTH: Off this subject just slightly, I noticed that,

particularly at this meeting today, there was a lot of noise generated by cell

phones.

MS. MOLNAR: There’s a sign out there that says to turn off their

cell phones. There is a sign.

63

MR. ROTH: Perhaps in future meetings, we can remind them to

do so.

MS. MOLNAR: They can put it on silent or something.

MR. BRANNIGAN: I don’t know if I was out of order, but I went

back and asked that individual to put their phone on vibrate, because I think

he had five calls, one person.

MR. VRANCIK: Yes, it’s not that hard.

MR. ROTH: One person.

MS. MOLNAR: Yes, I know if you go to a performance, they tell

you to turn it off. I will mention it at the beginning of each meeting.

So the consensus is to get their testimony ahead of time and ask

them, maybe, to give a quick overview. And if they feel more comfortable

reading it, fine, we won’t prevent it, but if--

MR. ROTH: Well, if they have anything to add.

MS. MOLNAR: Sure. All right.

MR. VRANCIK: If it’s possible, we’ll investigate how easy it is to

make available the stuff that’s mailed out to everyone, electronically distributed.

I guess the problem on your end is printing it all out.

MR. ROTH: Don’t you have a place on the Web where, for

example, minutes could be posted? I recall going through Google one time, and

I found minutes for this Commission there. I was stunned.

MS. MOLNAR: I did, too.

MR. VRANCIK: I’ll look into that.

MR. ROTH: Yes.

MR. VRANCIK: I think we can put them out there.

64

MR. ROTH: It’s an awful lot of paper.

MR. VRANCIK: It’s an issue of the turnaround.

MS. MOLNAR: Time.

They were last year’s minutes that you saw. They weren’t the last

meeting’s.

All right.

The next time we -- let me see the schedule -- next time we have

Corrections, Military and Veterans Affairs, Environmental Protection, and

Department of State -- and one of our Commission members will give an

overview of the Transportation DOT Trust Fund.

Any other business? (no response)

If not, meeting adjourned.

Thank you for coming.