"America Builds: Making Federal Real Estate Work for the Taxpayer"

1[House Hearing, 119 Congress]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34               AMERICA BUILDS: MAKING FEDERAL REAL ESTATE5                        WORK FOR THE TAXPAYER67=======================================================================89                                (119-11)1011                                HEARING1213                               BEFORE THE1415                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON16              ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND17                          EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT1819                                 OF THE2021                              COMMITTEE ON22                           TRANSPORTATION AND23                             INFRASTRUCTURE24                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES2526                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2728                             FIRST SESSION29                               __________3031                             MARCH 5, 202532                               __________3334                       Printed for the use of the35             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure3637              [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3839     Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-40     transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/41                             transportation42                                ______4344                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE454661-312 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 20254748             COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE4950                    Sam Graves, Missouri, Chairman51                Rick Larsen, Washington, Ranking Member52Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford,           Eleanor Holmes Norton,53  Arkansas, Vice Chairman              District of Columbia54Daniel Webster, Florida              Jerrold Nadler, New York55Thomas Massie, Kentucky              Steve Cohen, Tennessee56Scott Perry, Pennsylvania            John Garamendi, California57Brian Babin, Texas                   Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Georgia58David Rouzer, North Carolina         Andre Carson, Indiana59Mike Bost, Illinois                  Dina Titus, Nevada60Doug LaMalfa, California             Jared Huffman, California61Bruce Westerman, Arkansas            Julia Brownley, California62Brian J. Mast, Florida               Frederica S. Wilson, Florida63Pete Stauber, Minnesota              Mark DeSaulnier, California64Tim Burchett, Tennessee              Salud O. Carbajal, California65Dusty Johnson, South Dakota          Greg Stanton, Arizona66Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey       Sharice Davids, Kansas67Troy E. Nehls, Texas                 Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois68Tracey Mann, Kanas                   Chris Pappas, New Hampshire69Burgess Owens, Utah                  Seth Moulton, Massachusetts70Eric Burlison, Missouri              Marilyn Strickland, Washington71Mike Collins, Georgia                Patrick Ryan, New York72Mike Ezell, Mississippi              Val T. Hoyle, Oregon73Kevin Kiley, California              Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio,74Vince Fong, California                 Vice Ranking Member75Tony Wied, Wisconsin                 Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan76Tom Barrett, Michigan                Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina77Nicholas J. Begich III, Alaska       Christopher R. Deluzio, Pennsylvania78Robert P. Bresnahan, Jr.,            Robert Garcia, California79Pennsylvania                         Nellie Pou, New Jersey80Jeff Hurd, Colorado                  Kristen McDonald Rivet, Michigan81Jefferson Shreve, Indiana            Laura Friedman, California82Addison P. McDowell, North           Laura Gillen, New York83  Carolina                           Shomari Figures, Alabama84David J. Taylor, Ohio85Brad Knott, North Carolina86Kimberlyn King-Hinds,87  Northern Mariana Islands88Mike Kennedy, Utah89Robert F. Onder, Jr., Missouri90Vacancy9192                                ------                                79394      Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and95                          Emergency Management9697                  Scott Perry, Pennsylvania, Chairman98                 Greg Stanton, Arizona, Ranking Member99Mike Ezell, Mississippi              Eleanor Holmes Norton,100Kevin Kiley, California                District of Columbia101Tom Barrett, Michigan                Kristen McDonald Rivet, Michigan102Robert P. Bresnahan, Jr.,            Shomari Figures, Alabama103  Pennsylvania                       John Garamendi, California104Kimberlyn King-Hinds,                Dina Titus, Nevada105Northern Mariana Islands             Laura Friedman, California,106Mike Kennedy, Utah                     Vice Ranking Member107Robert F. Onder, Jr., Missouri,      Rick Larsen, Washington (Ex Officio)108  Vice Chairman109Sam Graves, Missouri (Ex Officio)110111                                CONTENTS112113                                                                   Page114115Summary of Subject Matter........................................     v116117                 STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE118119Hon. Mike Ezell, a Representative in Congress from the State of120  Mississippi, and Member, Subcommittee on Economic Development,121  Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, opening statement..     1122    Prepared statement...........................................     2123Hon. Greg Stanton, a Representative in Congress from the State of124  Arizona, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Economic125  Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management,126  opening statement..............................................     3127    Prepared statement...........................................     5128Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of129  Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and130  Infrastructure, opening statement..............................     6131    Prepared statement...........................................     8132133                               WITNESSES134135David Marroni, Director, Physical Infrastructure, U.S. Government136  Accountability Office, oral statement..........................    10137    Prepared statement...........................................    11138David Winstead, Board Member, Public Buildings Reform Board, oral139  statement......................................................    17140    Prepared statement...........................................    18141142                                APPENDIX143144Questions to David Marroni, Director, Physical Infrastructure,145  U.S. Government Accountability Office, from Hon. Greg Stanton..    41146Questions to David Winstead, Board Member, Public Buildings147  Reform Board, from Hon. Greg Stanton...........................    44148149[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]150151                           February 28, 2025152153    SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER154155    TO:      LMembers, Subcommittee on Economic Development,156Public Buildings, and Emergency Management157    FROM:  LStaff, Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public158Buildings, and Emergency Management159    RE:      LSubcommittee Hearing on ``America Builds: Making160Federal Real Estate Work for the Taxpayer''161_______________________________________________________________________162163                               I. PURPOSE164165    The Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings,166and Emergency Management of the Committee on Transportation and167Infrastructure will hold a hearing on Wednesday, March 5, 2025168at 2:00 p.m. E.T. in 2167 of the Rayburn House Office Building169entitled, ``America Builds: Making Federal Real Estate Work for170the Taxpayer.'' The hearing will examine strategies to171transform Federal real estate by consolidating, relocating, and172selling unused and underutilized spaces. It will build on the173Committee's work during the 118th Congress, highlighting recent174reforms to compel Federal agencies to maximize or relinquish175unused space. Participants will include the General Services176Administration (GSA), the Government Accountability Office177(GAO), and the Public Buildings Reform Board (PBRB). The178hearing will also examine the findings of GAO's 2023 report on179the Federal Government's utilization of its real estate180portfolio, a report which GAO conducted at the Committee's181request.182183                             II. BACKGROUND184185FEDERAL BUILDING FUND186187    In 1972, Congress authorized and established the Federal188Buildings Fund (FBF) under the Public Buildings Act Amendments189of 1972 (P.L. 92-313).\1\ GSA funds new construction,190alterations and repairs, building maintenance, and lease191payments, as well as the Public Buildings Service (PBS),192through commercially equivalent rental payments by GSA's tenant193agencies into the FBF.\2\ While the FBF is funded through194agency rents paid to GSA, it is not a true revolving loan195fund.\3\ The funds are made available via annual appropriations196bills.\4\ GSA has not had full access to the FBF since 2011,197when appropriators began using the FBF to offset other198unrelated costs in the Financial Services and General199Government appropriations bill.\5\ The FBF accrued $11.9200billion in revenue in 2021, 59 percent of which was generated201by five customer agencies: the Department of Justice, the202Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Judiciary, the203Social Security Administration, and the Department of the204Treasury.\6\205---------------------------------------------------------------------------206    \1\ Pub. L. No. 92-313, 86 Stat. 216.207    \2\ GSA, Federal Buildings Fund (Feb. 1, 2021), available at208https://www.gsa.gov/reference/reports/budget-performance/annual-209reports/2020-agency-financial-report/managements-discussion-and-210analysis/financial-statements-summary-and-analysis/federal-buildings-211fund.212    \3\ See 40 U.S.C. Sec.  592(c)(1).213    \4\ Id.214    \5\ GSA, Fiscal Year 2024 Congressional Justification, Federal215Buildings Fund (2024), available at https://www.gsa.gov/reference/216reports/budget-and-performance/annual-budget-requests/previous-217congressional-justifications/fy2024-congressional-justifications.218    \6\ GSA, 2021 Agency Financial Report (2021), available at https://219www.gsa.gov/system/files/GSA_AFR_FY21.pdf.220---------------------------------------------------------------------------221222FEDERAL REAL ESTATE PORTFOLIO223224    GSA currently manages more than 8,300 owned and leased225assets, totaling over 365 million square feet, and 500 historic226buildings.\7\ GAO reports that operating, maintaining, and227leasing office space costs more than $8 billion annually.\8\228GSA has made efforts to reduce the amount of leased space, but229the portfolio remains underutilized. With more than half of230GSA's operating leases (96 million square feet) expiring in the231next five years, GSA must pivot to an efficient, cost-232effective, and modern portfolio.\9\ While reviewing 24233headquarters buildings in 2023, GAO found that 17 of the234agencies under review were utilizing 25 percent or less of235their capacity.\10\ That same year, anonymized cell phone data236showed an average building occupancy of 12 percent from January237to September due to the sustained prevalence of remote and238hybrid work models among the Federal workforce.\11\239---------------------------------------------------------------------------240    \7\ Press Release, GSA, GSA Accelerates Efforts to Right-size241Federal Real Estate with Plans for 1.5 Million Square Feet in242Reductions and More than $475 Million in Cost Avoidance to Taxpayers243(Dec. 4, 2024), available at https://www.gsa.gov/about-us/newsroom/244news-releases/gsa-accelerates-efforts-to-rightsize-federal-real-estate-24512042024.246    \8\ GAO, GAO-24-106919, Federal Real Property: Actions Needed To247Better Assess Office Sharing Pilot's Broader Applicability (2024),248available at https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106919.249    \9\ GSA, Inventory of GSA Owned and Leased Properties (Sept. 9,2502022), available at https://www.gsa.gov/tools-overview/buildings-and-251real-estate-tools/inventory-of-gsa-owned-and-leased-properties.252    \10\ GAO, GAO-23-107060, Federal Real Property: Preliminary Results253Show That Increased Telework and Longstanding Challenges Led to254Underutilized Federal Buildings (2023), available at https://255www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-107060.256    \11\ PBRB, Public Buildings Reform Board Final Interim Report to257Congress (Mar. 21, 2024), available at https://www.pbrb.gov/files/2024/25803/3.21.24-FINAL-PBRB-Interim-Report.pdf.259---------------------------------------------------------------------------260    There have also been increasing reports of ``shadow'' or261``dark'' space in Federal buildings and leases--unassigned,262unused space.\12\ On January 20, 2025, the White House directed263all departments and agencies of the Executive Branch to264terminate remote work arrangements and require employees to265return to work in-person at their respective duty stations.\13\266Given all these factors, GSA has a unique opportunity to267significantly reduce space and dispose of underutilized and268unused Federal real estate.269---------------------------------------------------------------------------270    \12\ GSA, Unused & Underused Space (Jan. 25, 2023), available at271https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/gsa-properties/unused-underused-space.272    \13\ The White House, Return to In-Person Work (Jan. 20, 2025)273available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/274return-to-in-person-work/.275---------------------------------------------------------------------------276277ECONOMIC IMPACT IN THE D.C. METROPOLITAN AREA278279    At the end of 2024, office occupancy in Washington, D.C.280hit a new post-pandemic low of 19.9 percent.\14\ The high281vacancy rates have significant economic implications for the282District, particularly in the downtown area, as a surplus of283available office space can lead to a decline in property284assessment values.\15\ The D.C. government found that 86285percent of its commercial office buildings are expected to lose286more than $12 billion in real estate value, which would have a287significant negative effect on municipal tax rolls.\16\288---------------------------------------------------------------------------289    \14\ Jeff Clabaugh, Upside to Downsizing for D.C.'s Office Market?,290WTOP News (Jan. 13, 2025), available at http://wtop.com/business-291finance/2025/01/upside-to-downsizing-for-dcs-office-market-more-trophy-292demand/.293    \15\ Daniel Muhammad, D.C. Office of Revenue Analysis, The294Increasing Levels of Vacant Office Space: The Achilles' Heel of DC's295Office Market, (July 15, 2024), available at http://ora-cfo.dc.gov/296blog/increasing-levels-vacant-office-space-achilles%E2%80%99-heel-dcs-297office-market.298    \16\ Id.299---------------------------------------------------------------------------300301ALTERNATIVE FINANCING302303    Following scoring rules changes in 1991, the Office of304Management and Budget (OMB) prohibited GSA from negotiating305discounted purchase options in its leases.\17\ Discounted306purchase options provide the ability for the Federal Government307to decide at the end of a lease whether it wants to purchase308the property at a discounted purchase price, negotiated and309included in the initial leasing term, rather than continuing to310lease, which effectively causes the government to pay beyond311the cost to construct the building outright while garnering no312equity.\18\ Although GSA is allowed to negotiate purchase313options for full market value, those purchase options do not314account for the funding the Federal Government may have already315invested in a leased property.\19\316---------------------------------------------------------------------------317    \17\ Dorothy Robyn, Reforming Federal Property Procurement: The318Case for Sensible Scoring, Brookings (Apr. 24, 2014), available at319https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2014/04/24/reforming-federal-320property-procurement-the-case-for-sensible-scoring/.321    \18\ Id.322    \19\ Id.323---------------------------------------------------------------------------324    The Department of Transportation (DOT) headquarters in325Southeast Washington, D.C., is a prime example. GSA sold 11326acres of land to JBG Companies, with an agreement for JBG to327construct a new building, and upon completion, GSA would lease328the space through a 15-year operating lease set to expire in3292021.\20\ When the lease expired, GSA had two options: lease330the space for an additional ten years or purchase the property331at fair market value.\21\ However, due to massive332redevelopment, real estate value had increased an average of 41333percent in Southeast Washington, D.C., since 2009.\22\ Not only334did GSA have no equity with an annual lease payment of $64.5335million over the 15 year term, but they had to pay a much336higher cost for fair market value than would have been337negotiated in 2006 when the lease agreement was signed.\23\338---------------------------------------------------------------------------339    \20\ Andy Winkler, et al., Fixing Federal Infrastructure: The $750340Million DOT Headquarters and the Perverse Effects of Budget Scoring,341Bipartisan Policy Center, (July 13, 2017), available at https://342bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/fixing-federal-infrastructure-the-750-343million-dot-headquarters-and-the-perverse-effects-of-budget-scoring/.344    \21\ Id.345    \22\ Id.346    \23\ Id.347---------------------------------------------------------------------------348    H.R. 2220, to Amend title 40, United States Code, to Modify349the Treatment of Certain Bargain-Price Options to Purchase at350Less than Fair Market Value, was enacted in December 2022 (P.L.351117-257). This law conforms GSA's leasing authority to OMB352scoring rules that would allow for GSA to negotiate discounted353purchase options.\24\ However, OMB refused to allow GSA to354implement the legislation. On May 10, 2023, the Committee sent355a letter to OMB urging the agency to implement H.R. 2220.\25\356---------------------------------------------------------------------------357    \24\ Pub. L. No. 117-257, 136 Stat. 2371.358    \25\ Letter from Sam Graves, Chairman, H. Comm. on Transp. &359Infrastructure to Shalanda Young, Director, OMB (May 10, 2023) (on file360with Comm.).361---------------------------------------------------------------------------362    OMB has also prohibited GSA from utilizing, or even363testing, the use of Public-Private Partnerships (P3s) to364attract private investment in Federal building projects.\26\365While GSA has the legal authority to execute such arrangements,366OMB will score these activities as ``capital'' leases, instead367of operating leases.\27\ ``Capital'' leases require GSA to368obligate the entire cost of the multi-year lease upfront, as369opposed to an operating lease which is scored on an annual370basis.\28\ P3s would provide options for the Federal Government371to leverage the value of owned land to replace aging facilities372and make a profit.\29\373---------------------------------------------------------------------------374    \26\ Kim Slowey, P3s: A growing alternative with potential to375capitalize on `privatized innovation' Construction Dive (Mar. 23,3762016), available at https://www.constructiondive.com/377news/p3s-a-growing-alternative-with-potential-to-capitalize-on-378privatized-inno/416190/ [hereinafter Slowey].379    \27\ GSA, PBS Leasing Desk Guide, Appendix F, Determination of380Operating or Capital Lease Classification for Budget Scoring (2023),381available at https://www.gsa.gov/382system/files/General/383Appendix_F_Determination_of_Operating_or_Capital_Lease_384Classification_for_Budget_Scoring_C.pdf.385    \28\ Kurt Stout, Federal Leasing 101: What is Scoring?, Colliers,386(June 25, 2015), available at https://knowledge-leader.colliers.com/387kurt-stout/federal-leasing-101-what-is-scoring/.388    \29\ Slowey, supra note 27.389---------------------------------------------------------------------------390391                      III. PRIOR COMMITTEE ACTIONS392393FREEZE/REDUCE THE FOOTPRINT394395    In 2013, the Obama Administration's OMB announced the396``Freeze the Footprint'' initiative, which directed Federal397agencies to offset requests for new space with disposal of398unneeded space.\30\ Subsequently, in 2015 the initiative399progressed into ``Reduce the Footprint'' with targeted400reductions to the Federal Government's real estate profile.\31\401These efforts did result in the shrinking of the Federal402footprint, with an 8.2 million square footage reduction from403fiscal year (FY) 2016 to FY 2020, but did little to assess404actual space utilization, and instead focused on the official405number of employees assigned to a given building.\32\406---------------------------------------------------------------------------407    \30\ Press Release, The White House, Freezing the Footprint, (Mar.40814, 2013), available at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2013/40903/14/freezing-footprint.410    \31\ OMB, Performance.Gov, Reduce the Footprint, (Mar. 25, 2015),411available at https://obamaadministration.archives.performance.gov/412initiative/reduce-footprint.html.413    \32\ OMB, Performance.Gov, Real Property Metrics, GSA, available at414https://www.performance.gov/real-property-metrics/; see also GAO, GAO-41522-105105, Federal Real Property: GSA Could Further Support Agencies'416Post-Pandemic Planning for Office Space Use (2022), available at417https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-105105.418---------------------------------------------------------------------------419420FEDERAL ASSETS SALE AND TRANSFER ACT (FASTA) AND THE FASTA REFORM ACT421            OF 2023422423    In 2016, FASTA was enacted, which established a temporary424board--the Public Buildings Reform Board (PBRB)--composed of425non-governmental experts to make recommendations to OMB on the426sale, disposal, or redevelopment of high value, underused or427unneeded Federal real property.\33\ OMB would then approve or428disapprove the packages of proposals and, if approved, GSA429would execute the recommendations, allowing agencies to retain430a portion of the proceeds.\34\ Under FASTA, agencies would be431able to retain a portion of the sale proceeds from such432transactions as an incentive to dispose of excess properties,433but they would not be able to access those funds until after434the termination of the Board.\35\ FASTA also codified the435Federal Real Property Profile (FRPP) government-wide database436of real property and made it available to the public.\36\437---------------------------------------------------------------------------438    \33\ FASTA Reform Act of 2023, Pub. L. No. 114-287, 130 Stat. 1463.439    \34\ Id.440    \35\ Id.441    \36\ Id. at Sec.  21.442---------------------------------------------------------------------------443    In 2024, Congress passed the FASTA Reform Act of 2023,444which extended the authorization and enhanced the authority of445the PBRB and required the board to report annually to Congress446on Federal properties it recommends for disposal.\37\ The FASTA447Reform Act enables agencies to access these incentive funds448more quickly, fostering better collaboration and increasing the449efficiency of the Federal property management system for450taxpayers.\38\451---------------------------------------------------------------------------452    \37\ FASTA Reform Act of 2023, Pub. L. No. 118-272.453    \38\ Id.454---------------------------------------------------------------------------455456PUBLIC BUILDINGS REFORMS IN THE WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2024457458    Last Congress, Title III of the Thomas R. Carper Water459Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2024 introduced new460authorities to improve the management of Federal real461estate.\39\ In addition to the FASTA Reform Act, other reforms462were enacted to ensure that the Federal real estate portfolio463is better aligned with current operational needs.464---------------------------------------------------------------------------465    \39\ WRDA, Pub. L. No. 118-272.466---------------------------------------------------------------------------467    The Utilizing Space Efficiency and Improving Technologies468(USE IT) Act of 2023 mandates GSA and OMB establish469standardized methods for measuring office occupancy across470Federal agencies.\40\ The Act introduces a government-wide 60471percent occupancy metric, directing Federal agencies to472consolidate, repurpose, or sell underused office space to473increase operational efficiency and reduce real estate474costs.\41\ This initiative aims to maximize space utilization,475particularly in light of the ongoing shift to hybrid and remote476work models.\42\ The USE IT Act also specifically directs that477department and agency headquarters buildings in the National478Capital Region be consolidated and excess space sold to meet479the minimum 60 percent occupancy metric.\43\480---------------------------------------------------------------------------481    \40\ Utilizing Space Efficiency and Improving Technologies Act of4822023, Pub. L. No. 118-272.483    \41\ Id.484    \42\ PBRB, Public Buildings Reform Board Final Interim Report to485Congress (Mar. 21, 2024), available at https://www.pbrb.gov/files/2024/48603/3.21.24-FINAL-PBRB-Interim-Report.pdf.487    \43\ Utilizing Space Efficiency and Improving Technologies Act of4882023, Pub. L. No. 118-272.489---------------------------------------------------------------------------490    The Federal Use It or Lose It Leases (FULL) Act requires491GSA and tenant agencies to annually report their office space492utilization rates to Congress.\44\ Under the FULL Act, if an493agency's utilization rate falls below the 60 percent threshold494for six months out of a year, the tenant agency would be495required to return that underused space to GSA.\45\ This496provision creates an incentive for agencies to actively manage497their real estate holdings and reduce the financial burden of498maintaining vacant or underutilized property.499---------------------------------------------------------------------------500    \44\ Federal Use It or Lose It Leases Act, Pub. L. No. 118-272.501    \45\ Id.502---------------------------------------------------------------------------503504                            IV. PARTICIPANTS505506     LDavid Marroni, Director, Physical Infrastructure,507Government Accountability Office508     David Winstead, Board Member, Public Buildings509Reform Board510511                   AMERICA BUILDS: MAKING FEDERAL REAL512                      ESTATE WORK FOR THE TAXPAYER513514                              ----------515516                        WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5, 2025517518                  House of Representatives,519      Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public520               Buildings, and Emergency Management,521            Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,522                                                    Washington, DC.523    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:03 p.m. in524Room 2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mike Ezell525(Member of the subcommittee) presiding.526    Mr. Ezell. The Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public527Buildings, and Emergency Management will come to order.528    I ask unanimous consent that the chairman be authorized to529declare a recess at any time during today's hearing.530    Without objection, so ordered.531    I also ask unanimous consent that Members not on the532subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at533today's hearing and ask questions.534    Without objection, so ordered.535    As a reminder, if Members wish to insert a document into536the record, please also email it to DocumentsTI@mail.house.gov.537    I now recognize myself for the purpose of an opening538statement for 5 minutes.539540     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE EZELL OF MISSISSIPPI,541      MEMBER,   SUBCOMMITTEE  ON   ECONOMIC  DEVELOPMENT,542      PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT543544    Mr. Ezell. I want to thank our witnesses for being here545today to discuss how we can make Federal real estate work for546the American taxpayer.547    At the beginning of last Congress, this subcommittee hosted548a roundtable with industry stakeholders to help Members better549understand current market trends in office space and how to550right-size the Federal real estate portfolio.551    Building on that roundtable, this subcommittee held a552hearing that highlighted a report published by the Government553Accountability Office on the use of space for Federal agencies554in their headquarters buildings. The information that GAO555uncovered in this report was shocking. While many Federal556workers' workspace was underused, I don't think any of us557expected to see just how devastating the usage numbers are. GAO558found that a majority of the agencies reviewed used 25 percent559or less of their headquarters building space. In the case of560some agencies, the utilization rate was closer to 9 percent.561Let that number sink in, 9 percent.562    Even under the Trump administration's return to the office563directives, we know there will be unused space, because in the564same report, at least one agency admitted that even if 100565percent of their employees returned to the office, 33 percent566of their space would still be empty.567    As Mr. Marroni has testified in previous hearings, the568Federal Government spends $2 billion a year to operate and569maintain Federal office buildings, regardless of whether the570building is being used. This means that American taxpayers are571literally paying billions for Federal office space just to sit572empty.573    In response to the findings from GAO, subcommittee members574put forward a slate of bills to improve the use of office575space, increase the transparency, and hold agencies576accountable. Two key pieces of legislation enacted included,577first, the USE IT Act, which sets targets for space usage,578requires deployment of technology to count actual employees579using Government space, and establishes timelines, meaning if580agencies don't use their space, they will lose it. Secondly,581the FASTA Reform Act strengthens the authority of the Public582Buildings Reform Board to identify Federal properties that583should be sold.584    On January 5, 2025, these reforms and others put forth by585committee members became law as part of the Water Resources586Development Act, or WRDA, of 2024. With some deadlines in those587reforms approaching quickly, I look forward to working with588GSA, OMB, and the Public Buildings Reform Board on WRDA589implementation. I am pleased that the Trump administration hit590the ground running by identifying the waste in Federal real591estate and promptly taking action to ensure that taxpayer592dollars are not wasted on empty buildings.593    This is not a partisan issue: even the mayor of Washington,594DC, has highlighted the negative impact of empty Federal595offices on the local economy here in DC.596    American taxpayers expect Congress to hold the Federal597Government accountable for all of its wasteful spending, and I598look forward to working with the Trump administration to599achieve results for our constituents. Getting a handle on the600waste in Federal real estate can save the taxpayers billions of601dollars annually. Members of both parties should be supportive602of this goal.603    [Mr. Ezell's prepared statement follows:]604605  Prepared Statement of Hon. Mike Ezell, a Representative in Congress606  from the State of Mississippi, and Member, Subcommittee on Economic607        Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management608    I want to thank our witnesses for being here today to discuss how609we can make federal real estate work for the American taxpayer.610    At the beginning of last Congress, the Subcommittee hosted a611roundtable with industry stakeholders to help Members better understand612current market trends in office space and how to right-size the federal613real estate portfolio. Building upon that stakeholder roundtable, the614Subcommittee held a hearing that highlighted a report published by the615Government Accountability Office (GAO) on space utilization for federal616agencies in their headquarters buildings. The information that GAO617uncovered in their report was shocking.618    While many knew federal space was underused for a long time, I619don't think any of us expected to see such devastating usage numbers.620Specifically, GAO found that a majority of the agencies reviewed used62125 percent or less of their headquarters buildings' space. In the case622of some agencies, that utilization rate was closer to nine percent. Let623that number sink in, nine percent.624    Even under the Trump Administration's return to the office625directives, we know there will still be unused space because in that626same GAO report, at least one agency admitted that even if 100 percent627of their employees returned to the office, 33 percent of their space628would still be empty.629    As Mr. Marroni has testified to in previous hearings, the federal630government spends two billion dollars a year to operate and maintain631federal office buildings, regardless of whether the building is being632used. This means that American taxpayers are literally paying billions633for federal office space to just sit empty.634    In response to the findings from GAO, Subcommittee Members put635forward a slate of bills to improve the utilization of office space,636increase transparency, and hold agencies accountable. Two key pieces of637legislation enacted included: First, the USE IT Act, which sets targets638for space usage, requires deployment of technology to count actual639employees using government space, and establishes timelines, meaning if640agencies don't use their space, they will lose it. Secondly, the FASTA641Reform Act strengthens the authority of the Public Buildings Reform642Board to identify Federal properties that should be sold.643    On January 5, 2025, those reforms and others put forth by Committee644Members became law as a part of the Thomas R. Carper Water Resources645Development Act (WRDA) of 2024. With some deadlines in those reforms646approaching quickly, I look forward to working with GSA, OMB, and the647Public Buildings Reform Board on WRDA's implementation.648    I am pleased that the new Administration hit the ground running by649identifying the waste in federal real estate and promptly taking action650to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not wasted on empty buildings.651    This is not a partisan issue--even the Mayor of Washington, DC, has652highlighted the negative impact of empty federal offices on the local653economy here in the Nation's capital. American taxpayers expect654Congress to hold the federal government accountable for all of its655wasteful spending, and I look forward to working with the Trump656Administration to achieve results for our constituents.657    Getting a handle on the waste in federal real estate can save the658taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Members of both parties should659be supportive of this goal.660661    Mr. Ezell. I now recognize the ranking member, the662Honorable Mr. Stanton, for 5 minutes for an opening statement.663664     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREG STANTON OF ARIZONA,665      RANKING MEMBER,  SUBCOMMITTEE ON  ECONOMIC DEVEL-666      OPMENT,  PUBLIC BUILDINGS,  AND EMERGENCY MANAGE-667      MENT668669    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And before670I talk about the issue at hand, I just want to speak on behalf671of all Members of Congress that are present.672    We lost a colleague last night. Our colleague, Sylvester673Turner, a brandnew Congress Member representing Houston, the674former mayor of Houston, and before that, a member of the State675legislature, sadly passed away after the State of the Union.676And I just--I have known him for many, many years as a former677mayor myself. In fact, he and I had a chance to work together678when Houston hosted the Final Four, and then Phoenix was the679next city to host the Final Four the next year. So he trained680me up, if you will, on how to be a good host for the Final681Four. He is a legend of public service in Texas, and we are682glad to have the time that we had with him here in the United683States Congress. We offer our condolences to his family and to684all of the people of Houston. We will miss him.685    Today, we are here to talk about the General Services686Administration's Public Buildings Service. GSA is the agency in687charge of managing Government buildings, essentially the688Federal Government's real estate agent.689    Now, many public buildings are underutilized. That is a690sentiment shared by both Republican and Democratic691administrations in the past. But rather than going through the692proper channels to measure building utilization, the Trump693administration moved straight to the lease termination and694building disposal stage, announcing plans to dispose of more695than 400 buildings and terminate 2,500 leases, more than half696of the GSA's real estate portfolio.697    To be clear, this Congress, in a bipartisan way, agrees698that we need improved efficiency. In fact, as the chair699mentioned, the 2024 Water Resources Development Act, which was700signed into law by President Biden in January, directed GSA,701the Office of Management and Budget, and Federal agencies to702measure building utilization over a 2-month period and dispose703of space if utilization was below 60 percent.704    There is a logical and orderly way to do this, but the705Trump administration clearly has no intention of following the706WRDA directive. Instead, there has been mass confusion.707    Landlords are getting termination letters that their708tenants know nothing about. Parties in the middle of lease709negotiations don't know what to do.710    These space disposals are happening at the same time711President Trump has mandated a return to work for all Federal712employees at the same time that they are making mass layoffs713among Federal employees. This appears to be a policy at war714with itself.715    Federal employees are returning to the offices that are716being disposed of.717    Landlords are getting termination notices for leases that718are still in the firm term period.719    Constituents are concerned that they will not have access720to VA health centers, Social Security field offices, or721customer service for IRS needs if they want to do anything face722to face.723    All of this is happening, and the GSA staff can't or won't724communicate. In fact, to get information, we have had to rely725on word of mouth from Federal employees and reports on the DOGE726website, which lists hundreds of lease terminations--Social727Security offices, VA offices, and IRS offices--while we are in728the swing of tax season.729    In my home State of Arizona, the list includes the Small730Business Administration, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the731Railroad Retirement Board, the Forest Service Supervisor's732Office--the entity that processes permits and disseminates733information for the entirety of the Tonto National Forest734northeast of my district, the largest national forest in our735State.736    The Forest Service building is an important hub for737monitoring Tonto. If this building is shuttered, we don't know738where this work will be done. It is a concern for those of us739as we enter the fire season in the State of Arizona. The loss740of those buildings can have implications. With the loss of a741supervisor's office, this could mean problems for communication742and coordination for wildfire response in our national forests.743    As you can tell, I have a lot of questions about all of744this. And a few weeks ago, I met with the GSA's new745Commissioner of Public Buildings, Mike Peters, who was leading746the Trump administration's Federal real estate right-sizing747efforts. Commissioner Peters, at that meeting with me, accepted748an invitation to participate in this hearing, and for some749reason--we don't know why--he has changed his mind, and he is750not present today. I don't understand. We need to provide751oversight over this process.752    Commissioner Peters has a responsibility to be here to753explain this to Congress so that we can provide our appropriate754oversight duties. So instead of asking Commissioner Peters my755questions, I will pose my questions to the two witnesses who756are here today--and thank you for being here--Dave Winstead757from the Public Buildings Reform Board and David Marroni from758the Government Accountability Office.759    Mr. Marroni, thank you for testifying before the760subcommittee and sharing your research and knowledge of Federal761real estate. I admire your fortitude.762    Mr. Winstead, thank you for your public service on the763Public Buildings Reform Board, and I look forward to hearing764how the Board identifies underutilized Federal assets and how765the process of recommending disposals to GSA and OMB can be766improved upon.767    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.768    [Mr. Stanton's prepared statement follows:]769770 Prepared Statement of Hon. Greg Stanton, a Representative in Congress771from the State of Arizona, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Economic772        Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management773    Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing.774    Today, we're here to talk about the General Services775Administration's Public Buildings Service. GSA is the agency in charge776of managing government buildings--essentially the federal government's777real estate agent.778    Now, many of these public buildings may be underutilized--that is a779sentiment that has been shared by both Republican and Democrat780Administrations in the past. But rather than going through the proper781channels to measure building utilization, the Trump Administration782moved straight to the lease termination and building disposal stage,783announcing plans to dispose of more than 400 buildings and terminate7842,500 leases--more than half of the GSA's real estate portfolio.785    To be clear, Congress--in a bipartisan way--agrees we need786efficiency. In fact, the 2024 Water Resources Development Act, which787was signed into law by President Biden in January, directed GSA, the788Office of Management and Budget and federal agencies to measure789building utilization over a two-month period and dispose of space if790utilization was below 60 percent.791    There is a logical way to do this. But the Trump Administration792clearly has no intention of following the WRDA directive. Instead,793there has been mass confusion.794    Landlords are getting termination letters that their tenants know795nothing about. Parties in the middle of lease negotiations don't know796what to do.797    These space disposals are happening at the same time President798Trump mandated a return to work for all federal employees. This is a799policy at war with itself.800    Federal employees are returning to offices that are being disposed801of.802    Landlords are getting termination notices for leases that are still803in firm term.804    Constituents are concerned that they will not have access to VA805health centers and Social Security field offices.806    All of this is happening, and GSA staff can't or won't communicate.807    In fact, to get information, we've had to rely on word-of-mouth808from federal employees and reports on the DOGE website, which lists809hundreds of lease terminations--Social Security offices, VA offices and810IRS offices--while we're in the swing of tax season.811    In my home state of Arizona, the list includes the Small Business812Administration, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Railroad Retirement813Board and the Forest Service supervisor's office--the entity that814processes permits and disseminates information for the entirety of815Tonto National Forest northeast of my district, the largest national816forest in the state.817    The Forest Service building is an important hub for monitoring818Tonto. If this building is shuttered, we do not know where this work819will get done.820    The loss of these buildings can have implications--with the loss of821the supervisor's office, I have concerns about what this could mean for822communication and coordination of wildfire response in the National823Forest.824    As you can tell, I have a lot of questions about all of this.825    A few weeks ago, I met with GSA's new Commissioner of Public826Buildings Mike Peters who is leading the Trump Administration's federal827real estate right-sizing efforts.828    Commissioner Peters accepted an invitation to participate in this829hearing, and then he changed his mind.830    I don't understand. We need to provide oversight of this process.831Commissioner Peters has a responsibility to be here.832    Instead of asking Commissioner Peters my questions, I will pose my833questions to the two witnesses who are participating today: David834Winstead from the Public Buildings Reform Board and David Marroni from835the Government Accountability Office.836    Mr. Marroni, thank you for once again testifying before this837subcommittee and sharing your research and knowledge of federal real838estate. I admire your fortitude.839    Mr. Winstead, thank you for your service on the Public Buildings840Reform Board. I look forward to hearing how the Board identifies841underutilized federal assets and how the process of recommending842disposals to GSA and OMB can be improved upon.843    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back the balance of my time.844845    Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize Mr.846Larsen, the ranking member.847848     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN OF  WASH-849      INGTON, RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPOR-850      TATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE851852    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.853Congratulations. You have now two chairmanships on this854committee.855    Mr. Ezell. I am telling you.856    [Laughter.]857    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Congratulations. I want to thank858Ranking Member Stanton, as well, and thank you for holding this859timely hearing on the state of Federal real estate.860    So, recent administration actions to reduce both telework861and the Federal real estate footprint have created confusion862and upheaval within the Federal real estate landscape. And the863proposed changes have the potential to have a negative impact864on the workforce, on communities where the workforce lives, the865private-sector landlords, and on construction contractors.866    Now, the GSA owns 1,500 buildings and has about 7,500867private-sector leases. According to press reports, the868administration plans to reduce GSA's owned and leased portfolio869by 50 percent.870    In justifying this push for property disposals, GSA's new871Public Buildings Commissioner has pointed to ``guidance'' from872the 2024 WRDA bill, which many of us worked on. But WRDA did873not direct the GSA to jump immediately to large-scale874disposals. The WRDA bill directed GSA and OMB to work with875agencies to measure building occupancy over a 2-month period876before making any recommendations for space disposals.877    Congress gave GSA steps 1 through 5, but GSA is skipping878from step 1 directly to step 5. That is causing confusion and879chaos in the Federal real estate market. The lease terminations880are happening quickly and at the same time as there is a881return-to-office mandate, as well as the firings, as well as882the RIFs. But how can an agency know how much space they883require if they don't know how many employees they will have?884    The only certainty we have is a certain lack of clarity885from the administration. These actions are reckless and886potentially very costly for taxpayers. For example, last week,887the National Transportation Safety Board was notified that its888lease was going to be terminated in 4 months. It is my889understanding, although we don't have any proof of this in890writing, it is my understanding that the termination decision891has now been reversed. It is fortunate that the NTSB was not892put in this position of having only 4 months to move not just893their offices but their laboratory space while also894investigating 1,195 transportation accidents and incidents at895the same time, including the recent mid-air collision near896Reagan National Airport.897    After consistently declining to provide staff with898information about building disposals, late yesterday, GSA899shared a list of 400-plus ``non-core assets being considered900for divestment from Government ownership.'' The list included901the Bonneville Power Administration, or BPA, headquarters902building in Portland. Many utilities in Washington State and903throughout the Pacific Northwest, including the largest public904utility in my district, get large amounts of their power from905the BPA system.906    The selling of the building would be very disruptive to907BPA's operations and, therefore, to ratepayers throughout the908Pacific Northwest, especially disruptive to all the employees909who have been ordered to return to work, to work in the office,910which is fine, and I support that they do that, but they need a911place to go to.912    Now, BPA leases the building from the GSA and pays for the913lease with ratepayer money, not taxpayer money. I pay for the914lease space at BPA because I pay rates to my public utility915district. I don't think anyone else in this room does that.916Selling this building would not lead to taxpayer savings from917the BPA budget.918    People are confused about GSA's activities, and Congress919has little visibility into what exactly GSA is doing. And I920don't know if GSA knows what it is doing. My own staff is921largely getting news of GSA activities from the press, from a922Reddit thread titled ``GSA RIF megathread''--you will never923hear me say that again----924    [Laughter.]925    Mr. Larsen of Washington [continuing]. And occasionally926from ex-GSA employees. One building owner was told that GSA was927terminating a lease, but because that lease was still in its928firm term, GSA was obligated to pay for the space until 2029.929    GSA's actions have led to confusion amongst the project930managers, general contractors, and engineers who are working on931construction projects for GSA's Public Buildings Service. GSA932recently rescinded the P100 Facilities Standards which933established the design, architecture, engineering, fire934protection, historic preservation, and performance requirements935for new buildings and major repair and alteration projects.936    How does this rescission of the design standards impact937construction and renovation projects? Do they need to be938redesigned? Do contracts need to be redrafted?939    Delay and risk are challenging for contractors and940expensive for the Government, and therefore for taxpayers.941    On January 24th, GSA paused all acquisitions and lease942activities, including the National Deep Energy Retrofit943program, and according to one publicly traded energy company,944``the current NDER pause may have detrimental impacts on945projects currently in construction. We''--that is, this946company--``have spent substantial sums on project design,947engineering, material procurement, and employee hiring. A948prolonged pause of these projects will negatively impact949business investment and chill business certainty.''950    So, I too am disappointed that Mr. Peters is not with us951today, but I do have some questions that we are sending to him:952    If agency headcounts are in flux, how does GSA know how953much space agencies need?954    Does GSA have the funding and authority to pay expenses955associated with closing offices, eliminating leases, and956relocating agencies to new space?957    As GSA cuts its own budget and staff, who is going to do958the labor-intensive work of terminating leases and relocating959agencies? Is GSA going to hire contractors to replace Federal960employees?961    So, Director Marroni and Mr. Winstead, I hope you can962answer some of these questions. I don't expect you to be able963to answer all those questions, but based on your experience, I964hope we can get some insight into that. I look forward to your965testimony and hope you will be able to answer some of my966questions.967    And with that, I yield back.968    [Mr. Larsen of Washington's prepared statement follows:]969970 Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress971    from the State of Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on972                   Transportation and Infrastructure973    Chairman Ezell and Ranking Member Stanton, thank you for holding974this timely hearing on the state of federal real estate.975    Recent Administration actions to reduce both telework and the976federal footprint have created confusion and upheaval within the977federal real estate landscape. The proposed changes have the potential978to have a negative impact on the federal workforce, communities,979private sector landlords and construction contractors.980    The General Services Administration (GSA) owns 1,500 buildings and981has about 7,500 private-sector leases.982    According to press reports, the Administration plans to reduce983GSA's owned and leased portfolio by 50 percent.984    In justifying this push for property disposals, GSA's new Public985Buildings Commissioner has pointed to ``guidance'' from the WRDA 2024986bill.987    But WRDA did not direct GSA to jump immediately to large-scale988disposals. The WRDA bill directed GSA and OMB to work with agencies to989measure building occupancy over a two-month period before making990recommendations for space disposals. Congress gave GSA steps one991through five, but GSA is skipping from step one directly to step five.992That is causing confusion, chaos, in federal real estate.993    The lease terminations are happening quickly and at the same time994as return-to-office mandates, firings and RIFs.995    But how can an agency know how much space they require if they996don't know how many employees they will have?997    The only certainty we have is a certain lack of clarity.998    The administration's actions are reckless and potentially costly999for taxpayers.1000    For example, last week the National Transportation Safety Board was1001notified that its lease was going to be terminated in four months. It1002is my understanding, although I don't have any proof of that in1003writing, that the termination decision has now been reversed.1004    It is fortunate that the NTSB was not put in the position of having1005only four months to move offices and laboratory space while1006investigating 1,195 transportation accidents at the same time--1007including the recent midair collision near Reagan National Airport.1008    After consistently declining to provide my staff with information1009about building disposals, late yesterday, GSA shared a list of 400-plus1010``non-core assets being considered for divestment from government1011ownership.''1012    The list included the Bonneville Power Administration's (BPA) HQ1013building in Portland.1014    Many utilities in Washington state and across the Pacific1015Northwest, including the largest public employer in my district, get1016large amounts of their power from BPA and hundreds of federal employees1017work in that building.1018    Selling the building would be very disruptive to BPA's operations1019in the Pacific Northwest, especially as all employees have been ordered1020to return to work. I support that, but they need a place to go to.1021    BPA leases the building from GSA and pays for the lease with1022ratepayer money--not taxpayer money--I pay for the lease space at BPA1023because I pay rates through my public utility district, and I don't1024think anyone else in this room does that. Selling this building would1025not lead to taxpayer savings from the BPA budget.1026    People are confused about GSA's activities, and Congress has little1027visibility into what exactly GSA is doing. I don't know if GSA knows1028what it is doing.1029    My own staff is largely getting news of GSA's activities from the1030press, from a Reddit thread titled ``GSA RIF Megathread'' and1031occasionally from ex-GSA employees.1032    One building owner was told that GSA was terminating a lease, but1033because that lease was still in its firm term, GSA was obligated to pay1034for the space until 2029.1035    GSA actions have also led to confusion amongst the project1036managers, general contractors and engineers who are working on1037construction projects for GSA's Public Buildings Service (PBS).1038    GSA recently rescinded the P-100 Facilities Standards which1039establish the design, architecture, engineering, fire protection,1040historic preservation and performance requirements for new buildings1041and major repair and alteration projects.1042    How does the rescission of the design standards impact construction1043and renovation projects? Do they need to be redesigned? Do contracts1044need to be redrafted? Delay and risk are challenging for contractors1045and expensive for the government, and therefore for taxpayers.1046    On January 24th, GSA paused all acquisitions and lease activities1047including the National Deep Energy Retrofit program (NDER). According1048to one publicly traded energy company, ``the current NDER pause may1049have detrimental impacts on projects currently in construction. We have1050spent substantial sums on project design, engineering, material1051procurement, and employee hiring. A prolonged pause of these projects1052will negatively impact business investment and chill business1053certainty.''1054    I, too, am disappointed that GSA's new Commissioner of Public1055Buildings Mike Peters is not with us today. I have questions we are1056sending to him:1057      If agency headcounts are in flux, how does GSA know how1058much space agencies need?1059      Does GSA have the funding and the authority to pay1060expenses associated with closing offices, eliminating leases and1061relocating agencies to new space?1062      As GSA cuts its budget and staff, who is going to do the1063labor-intensive work of terminating leases and relocating agencies? Is1064GSA going to hire contractors to replace federal employees?10651066    So, Director Marroni and Mr. Winstead, I hope you can answer some1067of these questions. I don't expect you to be able to answer all of1068these questions, but based on your experience, I hope we can get some1069insight on that. I look forward to your testimony and hope that you1070will be able to help answer some of my questions.1071    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.10721073    Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields. I would now like to1074welcome our witnesses and thank them for being here today.1075    Briefly, I would like to take a moment to explain our1076lighting system to our witnesses. There are three lights in1077front of you. Green means go, yellow means you are running out1078of time, and red means conclude your remarks.1079    I ask unanimous consent that the witnesses' full statements1080be included in the record.1081    Without objection, so ordered.1082    I ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing1083remain open until such time as our witnesses have provided1084answers to any questions that may be submitted to them in1085writing.1086    Without objection, so ordered.1087    I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain open1088for 15 days for any additional comments and information1089submitted by Members or witnesses to be included in the record1090of today's hearing.1091    Without objection, so ordered.1092    As your written testimony has been made part of the record,1093the subcommittee asks that you limit your oral remarks to 51094minutes.1095    With that, Mr. Marroni, you are recognized for 5 minutes1096for your testimony.10971098      TESTIMONY OF DAVID MARRONI, DIRECTOR, PHYSICAL IN-1099       FRASTRUCTURE,  U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OF-1100       FICE;  AND DAVID WINSTEAD,  BOARD MEMBER,  PUBLIC1101       BUILDINGS REFORM BOARD11021103      TESTIMONY OF DAVID MARRONI, DIRECTOR, PHYSICAL IN-1104       FRASTRUCTURE,  U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OF-1105       FICE11061107    Mr. Marroni. Thank you, Chairman Ezell, Ranking Member1108Stanton, and members of the subcommittee. I am happy to be here1109today to discuss GAO's views on how to make Federal real1110property work better for the American taxpayer.1111    For more than 20 years, we have identified the management1112of Federal real property as a high-risk area in need of1113substantial transformation. The Federal Government has held on1114to too much space and has been too slow in shedding unneeded1115properties. Federal buildings are often in poor condition and1116not well configured for the modern workplace, and the data1117needed to make good, real property decisions has often been1118unreliable--in some cases, nonexistent.1119    The pandemic shined a spotlight on these longstanding1120problems and created a unique opportunity to right-size the1121Federal Government's property holdings. There have been1122important actions in recent years to take advantage of these1123opportunities, but progress has been slow. Agencies have stayed1124in a wait-and-see mode for too long.1125    Since January, there has been a notable shift in momentum.1126GSA is now rapidly moving forward with plans to terminate1127leases and dispose of large amounts of Federal real property.1128As it does so, it is important that GSA and other agencies1129balance the goal of speedy reductions with the need for1130deliberate planning and analysis to help ensure the most1131effective result for the American taxpayer. There are a lot of1132moving parts right now that will shape Federal real property1133for years to come.1134    First, the Trump administration's return-to-office policy1135and its planned reductions in force are still early in their1136implementation. By summer, there will be clearer information on1137the size and shape of the Federal workforce and what that means1138for real property needs.1139    Secondly, under the USE IT Act, agencies are now required1140to measure building utilization across their portfolios for the1141first time. As a result, by this summer, GSA and agencies will1142have important new data to inform long-term decisions on the1143Federal real property portfolio.1144    Third, it will take time and money to move out of one1145property and to consolidate into another. GSA and other1146agencies need to think through which of the reductions to1147prioritize, and a funding strategy to implement those1148reductions in a way that makes the most sense. Gauging how much1149space is really needed under new workforce policies and then1150proceeding with reductions in a deliberate and planned-out1151manner could generate substantial savings and mitigate the risk1152of mistakes and unexpected mission impacts.1153    In conclusion, right-sizing the Federal Government's real1154property holdings is long overdue. As GSA and other agencies1155move forward with reductions, they should do so deliberately1156and in a strategic way that balances speed and thoughtful1157analysis and planning. Doing so will best position the Federal1158Government to achieve the most efficient and effective result1159for the American taxpayer, while ensuring agencies have the1160right space to successfully carry out their mission.1161    Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening remarks. I will be1162happy to take any questions.1163    [Mr. Marroni's prepared statement follows:]11641165Prepared Statement of David Marroni, Director, Physical Infrastructure,1166                 U.S. Government Accountability Office1167Federal Real Property: Congress and Agencies Have Acted To Address Key1168                 High-Risk Issues but Challenges Remain1169                               Highlights1170What GAO Found1171    Better management of the federal government's real property1172portfolio is needed to effectively dispose of underused buildings,1173collect reliable real property data, enhance the security of federal1174facilities, and improve the condition and configuration of federal1175buildings. These management challenges have led GAO to include Managing1176Federal Real Property on GAO's High-Risk List since 2003.11771178      Underused buildings. Federal agencies have long struggled1179with underused space, which costs millions of dollars. Enacted in1180January 2025, the Utilizing Space Efficiently and Improving1181Technologies Act requires agencies to measure building utilization and1182plan to dispose of underused space. This Act, combined with effective1183implementation, would address GAO's 2023 recommendation on the need for1184governmentwide guidance on measuring space utilization.11851186      Data reliability. Without reliable data, it is difficult1187to support effective real property management and decision-making. The1188General Services Administration has worked with federal agencies to1189improve its Federal Real Property Profile database but has not yet1190fully corrected property location data. The Department of Defense1191improved its real property data as well, but further efforts are1192needed, including better coordination with military services to fill1193key vacant real property positions.11941195      Facility security. The Department of Homeland Security1196has taken steps to improve facility security, but more progress is1197needed. Contract guards did not detect prohibited items being brought1198into federal facilities in about half of GAO's 27 covert tests in 2024.1199This is a rate comparable to the Federal Protective Service's (FPS) own1200covert testing results. In addition, FPS has not yet fully deployed the1201Post Tracking System. Under development since 2013, the system was1202supposed to verify that all guards are qualified but faces technical1203and data reliability problems.12041205      Building condition. This year GAO added ``Building1206Condition'' to the existing real property high-risk area. The federal1207government's annual maintenance and operating costs for its 277,0001208buildings were about $10.3 billion in fiscal year 2023. Further,1209federal agencies have deferred maintenance and repairs on many1210buildings, creating a backlog. GAO found that these needs had more than1211doubled, from $170 billion to $370 billion between fiscal year 2017 and12122024. In addition, agency officials told GAO that headquarters1213buildings are poorly configured and need renovations to meet present-1214day workforce requirements.1215Why GAO Did This Study1216    The federal government's real property holdings are vast and1217diverse, costing billions annually to occupy, operate, and maintain.1218GAO added federal real property to its High-Risk List in 2003 for1219several reasons.1220    These reasons include that the government retained more real1221property than it needed, did not have reliable property data to support1222decision making, and struggled to secure federal buildings.1223    This statement discusses key actions taken by Congress and the1224executive branch since the High-Risk update in 2023 and actions needed1225to address four federal real property issues: (1) underused buildings,1226(2) data reliability, (3) facility security, and (4) building1227condition. This statement is based on GAO's prior work and reflects1228GAO's 2025 High-Risk update, released in February 2025.1229What GAO Recommends1230    While the government has implemented many of GAO's recommendations1231on key real property issues, 57 GAO recommendations in this area are1232not yet fully implemented. Actions to implement these recommendations1233can help address underused property, unreliable data, insecure1234facilities, and unsafe building conditions.1235                               __________12361237    Chairman Perry, Ranking Member Stanton, and Members of the1238Subcommittee:1239    The federal government owns over 460 million square feet of office1240space that cost billions annually to occupy, operate, and maintain. For124122 years, managing federal real property has remained on GAO's High-1242Risk List. The reasons for this include that the government has1243retained more property than it needs; it has not had reliable real1244property data to support decision-making, and it has struggled with1245facility security. This year, we added another reason that federal real1246property is high risk--building condition.1247    Since federal real property was added to GAO's High-Risk List, the1248highest levels of government have given serious attention to these1249issues, but more work remains. While federal agencies have addressed1250many of our recommendations on key real property issues, we have 571251recommendations that have not been fully implemented related to1252underused property, data reliability, facility security, and building1253condition. Most of these recommendations were made over the past 51254years.1255    This statement discusses key actions taken by Congress and the1256executive branch since the High-Risk update in 2023 and actions that1257would help improve federal real property management. This statement is1258based on GAO's prior work and reflects GAO's 2025 High-Risk update,1259released on February 25, 2025.\1\1260---------------------------------------------------------------------------1261    \1\ GAO, High-Risk Series: Heightened Attention to High-Risk Areas1262Could Yield Billions More in Savings and A More Efficient and Effective1263Government, GAO-25-107743 (Washington, D.C.: Feb 25, 2025).1264---------------------------------------------------------------------------1265    We conducted the work on which this statement is based in1266accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those1267standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain1268sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our1269findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe the1270evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and1271conclusions based on our audit objectives.1272                          Underused Buildings1273    Federal agencies have long struggled to determine how much space1274they need to fulfill their missions. Issues with underused space were1275further complicated with increased telework during and following the1276COVID-19 pandemic. Retaining this underused space costs millions of1277dollars and is one of the main reasons that federal real property1278management has remained on GAO's High-Risk List since 2003. The1279following are key actions that Congress and the executive branch have1280taken to address underused buildings since our High-Risk update in12812023.1282      Enacted in January 2025, the Utilizing Space Efficiently1283and Improving Technologies (USE IT) Act requires agencies to measure1284building utilization and plan to dispose of underused space.\2\1285Specifically, it requires that agencies measure the utilization of1286public buildings by comparing the capacity of each space to the number1287of people who are working in the building. If building utilization1288remains below 60 percent capacity for two consecutive years, the1289General Services Administration (GSA), in consultation with the Office1290of Management and Budget (OMB), must take steps to reduce the amount of1291underused space. This Act, combined with effective implementation,1292would address our 2023 recommendation on the need for governmentwide1293guidance on measuring space utilization.\3\1294---------------------------------------------------------------------------1295    \2\ Thomas R. Carper Water Resources Development Act, Pub. L. No.1296118-272, S. 4367, 118th Cong., div. B, tit. III Sec.  2302 (2025).1297    \3\ GAO, Federal Real Property: Agencies Need New Benchmarks to1298Measure and Shed Underutilized Space, GAO-24-107006 (Washington D.C.:1299Oct. 26, 2023).13001301      GSA initiated a full portfolio assessment in November13022023 to identify real property assets for disposal. As of December 4,13032024, GSA had identified 34 assets to begin the disposal process. GSA1304estimates that disposing of these buildings will reduce GSA's inventory1305---------------------------------------------------------------------------1306by over 6 million square feet and save $1.8 billion over 10 years.13071308      In addition, the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of13092016 (FASTA) established a temporary process to help the federal1310government identify and dispose of unneeded federal real property.\4\1311As of December 2024, the FASTA process had identified 12 properties for1312disposal, 10 of which sold for a total of $194 million. In October 20221313we reported that GSA had not developed an approach to leveraging1314knowledge from setbacks that agencies experienced implementing the1315FASTA process.\5\1316---------------------------------------------------------------------------1317    \4\ Pub. L. No. 114-287, 130 Stat. 1463 (codified as amended 401318U.S.C. Sec.  1303 note.) FASTA originally included three rounds, but1319recently enacted legislation directed an additional, fourth round to1320identify additional properties. Thomas R. Carper Water Resources1321Development Act, Pub. L. No. 118-272, S. 4367, 118th Cong., div. B,1322tit. III Sec.  2301 (2025).1323    \5\ GAO, Federal Real Property: GSA Should Leverage Lessons Learned1324from New Sale and Transfer Process, GAO-23-104815 (Washington D.C.:1325Oct. 7, 2022).13261327    The following steps would help to address some of the government's1328challenges with underused space:1329      OMB should continue to assist agencies in monitoring1330utilization to help identify unneeded space, as recommended in our1331October 2023 report.\6\ The USE IT Act includes additional requirements1332which may assist in this work.1333---------------------------------------------------------------------------1334    \6\ GAO-24-107006.13351336      GSA should help federal agencies improve the disposal of1337underused property by applying lessons from the FASTA process to1338improve future disposal efforts, as recommended in our October 20221339report.\7\1340---------------------------------------------------------------------------1341    \7\ GAO-23-104815.1342---------------------------------------------------------------------------1343                            Data Reliability1344    Without reliable data, it is difficult to support effective real1345property management and decision-making. GSA relies on federal agencies1346to submit accurate data to the Federal Real Property Profile, the1347governmentwide database of federal real property that GSA uses to1348manage buildings, structures, and land. We have identified problems1349with the reliability of federal real property data since we first1350placed the management of federal real property on the High-Risk List.1351The following are key actions that the executive branch has taken to1352address this issue since our High-Risk update in 2023.1353      GSA has worked with federal agencies to improve the1354reliability of federal real property data. In 2020, we reported that 671355percent of addresses in the Federal Real Property Profile database were1356incorrectly formatted or incomplete.\8\ GSA took actions to improve its1357process for validating and verifying addresses in this database. In13582023, we found that over 98 percent of addresses were correctly1359formatted, but that location data continue to have errors. In August13602024, the Federal Real Property Council, an interagency council of1361which GSA is a member, published program guidance to help federal1362agencies improve the quality of data they submit to the Federal Real1363Property Profile.\9\ The guidance instructs agencies to concentrate1364their initial data quality improvement efforts on data elements such as1365property type and property use because these elements are most easily1366verified with external information. GSA established a strategic1367initiative to improve real property data accuracy through data1368standards and management in its strategic plan for fiscal years 2022-13692026. GSA also implemented a tool that alerts agencies to potentially1370incorrect location data in the Federal Real Property Profile database.1371---------------------------------------------------------------------------1372    \8\ GAO, Federal Real Property: GSA Should Improve Accuracy,1373Completeness, and Usefulness of Public Data, GAO-20-135 (Washington,1374D.C. Feb. 6, 2020).1375    \9\ Federal Real Property Council, Agency-Level Federal Real1376Property Profile Data Quality Improvement Program Guidance (August13772024).13781379      The Department of Defense (DOD) has worked to improve1380monitoring of its real property data. In November 2018, we found that1381DOD was not effectively recording and reporting data, which led to1382inaccurate and incomplete real property information.\10\ Subsequently,1383DOD has defined and documented the data elements that are most1384significant for decision-making and is taking a department-wide1385approach to improving its data quality. In addition, the Navy, Air1386Force, and Army improved monitoring of their respective processes for1387recording all required real property information. However, DOD has not1388yet prioritized and coordinated with the military services to identify1389opportunities for filling vacant real property positions. This has1390contributed to workload backlogs and prevented them from sufficiently1391maintaining their real property data.1392---------------------------------------------------------------------------1393    \10\ GAO, Defense Real Property: DOD Needs to Take Additional1394Actions to Improve Management of Its Inventory Data, GAO-19-731395(Washington, D.C. Nov. 13, 2018).13961397    The following steps would help to address federal real property1398data challenges:1399      GSA should take steps to fully implement our 20201400recommendation to help federal agencies improve their data reliability1401by implementing the data quality standards identified in the Federal1402Real Property Council's August 2024 guidance and ensure street address1403information is accurate.\11\ In the meantime, we are continuing to1404assess federal real property data and plan to issue new work on the1405topic.1406---------------------------------------------------------------------------1407    \11\ GAO-20-135.14081409      DOD should take steps to fully implement our 20181410recommendation to develop a strategy that identifies and addresses1411risks to real property data quality and information accessibility.1412                           Facility Security1413    Past attacks on federal buildings demonstrate that the security of1414federal facilities remains a high-risk issue. The challenges inherent1415in addressing threats to federal facility security have persisted since1416we placed the management of federal real property on the High-Risk1417list. The following are key actions that Congress and the executive1418branch have taken to address facility security since our High-Risk1419update in 2023.1420      In November 2023, President Biden issued Executive Order142114111, superseding and updating Executive Order 12977, which1422established the Interagency Security Committee (ISC) now chaired by the1423Department of Homeland Security (DHS).\12\ This update clarifies the1424Committee's oversight role in monitoring agencies' compliance with1425ISC's physical security standards.1426---------------------------------------------------------------------------1427    \12\ Exec Order No. 14111, 88 Fed. Reg. 83,809 (Dec. 1, 2023).14281429      Congress passed legislation and the ISC took action to1430improve oversight of Federal Protective Service (FPS)-recommended1431security countermeasures to protect federal facilities, as we1432recommended in May 2023.\13\ Specifically, the Improving Federal1433Building Security Act of 2024 requires facility security committees to1434inform DHS of their decisions to implement FPS recommendations within143590 days.\14\ In January 2025, the ISC updated its annual questionnaire1436to include questions that will assess agencies' implementation of FPS-1437recommended countermeasures. The ISC has also developed standard1438operating procedures to assess how agencies document risk acceptance1439when they do not implement FPS-recommended countermeasures in their1440facilities.1441---------------------------------------------------------------------------1442    \13\ GAO, Federal Facilities: Improved Oversight Needed for1443Security Recommendations, GAO-23-105649 (Washington, D.C. May 8, 2023).1444    \14\ Pub. L. No. 118-157, Sec. 2(a), 138 Stat. 1719, 1719 (to be1445codified 40 U.S.C. Sec.  1315 note).14461447      In response to recommendations we made after the January14482021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, the Capitol Police Board and the1449Capitol Police developed procedures to obtain outside assistance in an1450emergency as well as to either implement recommended security1451countermeasures or document risk acceptance if those countermeasures1452are not implemented.\15\1453---------------------------------------------------------------------------1454    \15\ GAO, Capitol Attack: The Capitol Police Need Clearer Emergency1455Procedures and a Comprehensive Security Risk Assessment Process, GAO-145622-105001 (Washington, D.C. Feb. 17, 2022).14571458    The federal government has shown sustained leadership commitment to1459improving the security of federal buildings, but challenges remain to1460ensure that federal facilities remain safe. These challenges and our1461key recommendations to address them are highlighted below.1462      FPS employs contract guards at 2,500 federal facilities.1463In 2024, we conducted 27 covert tests at selected federal facilities1464and found that FPS's contract guards failed to detect prohibited items1465about half the time.\16\ These results, which are consistent with FPS's1466findings in its internal covert testing program, raise questions about1467how effectively the guards detect prohibited items. We recommended that1468FPS collect more consistent data about the causes of test failures,1469analyze those data, and then use that analysis to improve contract1470guards' detection capabilities.1471---------------------------------------------------------------------------1472    \16\ GAO, Federal Facility Security: Preliminary Results Show That1473Challenges Remain in Guard Performance and Oversight, GAO-24-1075991474(Washington, D.C. Jul. 23, 2024).14751476      In 2024, we also found the data system that FPS uses to1477verify if contract guards are qualified to stand post--the Post1478Tracking System--continues to face technology and data reliability1479challenges.\17\ In 2025, we recommended that DHS determine whether to1480replace the Post Tracking System, which has been under development1481since 2013, or make corrective actions to address problems with the1482system.\18\1483---------------------------------------------------------------------------1484    \17\ GAO-24-107599.1485    \18\ GAO, Federal Protective Service: Actions Needed to Address1486Critical Guard Oversight and Information System Problems, GAO-25-1487107047U (Washington, D.C. Jan. 28, 2025).1488---------------------------------------------------------------------------1489                           Building Condition1490    In the 2025 High-Risk Update, we added building condition as a1491High-Risk topic for federal real property due to large increases in the1492cost of addressing deferred maintenance in federal buildings. The1493federal government's annual maintenance and operating costs for its1494277,000 buildings exceeded $10.3 billion in fiscal year 2023. Since1495this is a new High-Risk topic, we are focusing on our recent findings1496and actions needed to improve the condition of federal buildings.1497Federal agencies are taking steps to improve building condition and1498configuration, but the challenges led us to include the topic in the1499High-Risk update.1500      DOD and federal civilian building repair backlogs have1501more than doubled, going from $171 billion to $370 billion from fiscal1502year 2017 through 2024 (see fig. 1). Unless this trend reverses,1503federal assets will continue to deteriorate and need premature1504replacement, which can be significantly more expensive than the cost of1505repairs had they not been delayed.15061507  Figure 1: U.S. Department of Defense and Federal Civilian Agencies'1508 Reported Estimates of Deferred Maintenance and Repairs, Fiscal Years1509                               2017	202415101511[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]15121513      In 2023, we determined that federal agencies' spaces are1514not well configured to meet modern office needs.\19\ If agencies1515continue to operate in poorly configured office buildings, they will1516continue to underuse space, spending unnecessary operating funds.1517Agencies ranked budget shortages to reconfigure space as the top1518challenge to increasing utilization of their headquarters buildings.1519For example, U.S. Department of Agriculture officials said they would1520need millions of dollars to update their two-building headquarters to1521support higher density and possible office sharing.1522---------------------------------------------------------------------------1523    \19\ GAO-24-107006.15241525      In 2023, we reviewed four agencies and found they did not1526fully communicate the potential costs of maintenance backlogs to1527Congress.\20\ For example, none of the agencies provided sufficient1528information in their financial and budget documents to explain how much1529of their backlog compromised agency missions. As a result, Congress and1530the public do not have a clear picture of the anticipated costs to1531address the deferred maintenance that may impact critical government1532functions. We recommended that GSA and the Departments of Health and1533Human Services, Interior, and Energy fully communicate repair needs to1534Congress and the public.1535---------------------------------------------------------------------------1536    \20\ GAO, Federal Real Property: Agencies Should Provide More1537Information about Increases in Deferred Maintenance and Repair, GAO-24-1538105485 (Washington, D.C. Nov. 16, 2023).15391540      In 2023, we found that military barracks were in poor1541condition, including some with safety risks like sewage overflow and1542inoperable fire systems.\21\ We recommended that the Department of1543Defense clarify guidance, and that the service branches update minimum1544health and safety standards. We also recommended that DOD update and1545clarify guidance on assessing barracks conditions, obtain complete1546funding information, and increase oversight of barracks programs. DOD1547has implemented several of our recommendations, including updating1548guidance on how the military branches should conduct condition1549assessments for barracks.1550---------------------------------------------------------------------------1551    \21\ GAO, Military Barracks: Poor Living Conditions Undermine1552Quality of Life and Readiness, GAO-23-105797 (Washington, D.C. Sept.155319, 2023).15541555      In 2024, the GSA Inspector General found that GSA has not1556effectively monitored its maintenance contractors to ensure they1557implemented required maintenance and repairs. Specifically, operations1558and maintenance contractors did not complete all work orders for1559service requests and preventive maintenance.\22\ In some cases,1560operations and maintenance contractors marked work orders as complete1561even though the work was not actually completed. The Inspector General1562recommended that GSA improve its oversight of contractors.1563---------------------------------------------------------------------------1564    \22\ GSA Office of Inspector General, Building Maintenance1565Contracts Are Not Complying with Their GSA Contracts Due to Poor1566Performance and Ineffective Oversight, Report Number A230032/P/2/R240041567(Washington, D.C.: May 3, 2024).15681569    Chairman Perry, Ranking Member Stanton, and Members of the1570Subcommittee, this completes my prepared statement. I would be pleased1571---------------------------------------------------------------------------1572to respond to any questions that you may have at this time.15731574    Mr. Ezell. Thank you, Mr. Marroni.1575    Mr. Winstead, you are recognized for 5 minutes for your1576testimony.15771578      TESTIMONY OF DAVID WINSTEAD, BOARD MEMBER, PUBLIC1579                   BUILDINGS REFORM BOARD15801581    Mr. Winstead. Chairman Ezell, Ranking Member Stanton,1582Delegate Norton, who chaired the subcommittee when I was Public1583Buildings Commissioner--so, good to see you again--I am David1584Winstead, and I am a member of the Public Buildings Reform1585Board. As I mentioned, I did have the pleasure of serving as1586Public Buildings Commissioner about 15 years ago.1587    I wanted to thank this committee for creating this Board,1588supporting its extension, which, as a result, we are really1589realizing the potential to save billions of dollars for the1590Federal taxpayer by recommending assets that are truly no1591longer needed to house Federal employees and have value in1592terms of redevelopment on a local level.1593    The Board has independently analyzed 47 properties and a1594total of 35 million square feet. Our Board is a very diverse1595Board and a very bipartisan Board. Two former Members of1596Congress, Nick Rahall and Mike Capuano, are members of the1597Board; myself; the former staff director of this subcommittee;1598and two major real estate executives that have holdings in New1599York City and around the country. And our strategy is really to1600right-size--help GSA and work with OMB to right-size the1601portfolio. We are reviewing these targeted buildings under the1602FASTA authority based on reinvestment needs, occupancy levels,1603building significance, as well as the mission of that agency.1604    Consolidation recommendations will be targeted towards1605higher quality Federal buildings that Congress has appropriated1606funds for that we have had the opportunity to re-invest and1607have a longer life cycle, and also the flexibility of leased1608options during the interim transition.1609    We are reaching out to every Member of Congress in the1610districts where these assets lie. We are reaching out to the1611county commissioners and mayors of those jurisdictions, as1612well. So we are doing that in preparation for our1613recommendations.1614    As has been stated, the Federal portfolio average age is1615over 50 years. And if you look at what they need in terms of1616renovation costs, most of these buildings that, really, have1617had deferred maintenance for decades, would cost $700 to $1,0001618per square foot to renovate. And so each year GSA sees a1619deferral, if you will, of $2 billion of capital liability1620because they do not have the appropriated funds to invest in1621those buildings.1622    The Government really has two options. One is disposal of1623buildings that really are no longer needed, and secondly,1624provide for consolidation of employees in buildings that do1625have a life cycle that justifies their maintenance and1626reinvestment. There are really two groups of buildings in that1627category, pre-war properties and post-war properties.1628    Very interestingly, as an aside, one of the top architects1629in the District of Columbia looked at some of the pre-air-1630conditioned historic buildings and said many of those lend1631themselves to housing renovation and reconversion, more than1632some of the last-50-year buildings.1633    So we are really under our final review of looking at a1634series of assets. In the next round, we hope that we will1635identify approximately $18 billion in cost avoidance over 301636years.1637    The Board found in 2023 that there was a 70-percent1638decrease in occupancy in these Federal buildings. An example of1639that is the Department of Commerce, where if you count the1640number of Federal employees in that building on an average1641daily basis, it is about $330,000 to house that Federal1642employee. Another one was the Department of Labor, $182,000 per1643year to house that employee. And we are therefore looking at1644properties in the District, primarily Miami, L.A., Boston, and1645Atlanta, and we are doing outreach to those communities now.1646    As an example of one of the recommendations that might be1647on our report, there is an older building in L.A. called the1648Wilshire Building, and it houses the FBI and the passport1649office. It is not seismically stable. They haven't had the1650money to renovate it. So we are looking at innovative ways to1651report that asset out and to have it redeveloped. The1652university, UCLA, is an adjoining landowner and needs expanded1653space, so there are opportunities there.1654    Just in conclusion, I did, with the testimony, put a list1655of some of the properties that we are currently evaluating. We1656anticipate we will have a report to Congress within a month or1657so, and we will be happy to answer any questions that might1658come up when that report comes out. So thank you, Mr. Chairman.1659    [Mr. Winstead's prepared statement follows:]16601661 Prepared Statement of David Winstead, Board Member, Public Buildings1662                              Reform Board1663    Chairman Perry, Ranking Member Greg Stanton and Members of the1664Subcommittee, thank you for giving me the opportunity to update you on1665the progress of the Public Buildings Reform Board and highlight1666important changes we have already experienced since the passing of the1667Public Buildings Reform legislation. My name is David Winstead and I am1668a Board member of the Public Buildings Reform Board.1669    I wanted to thank this committee for creating this Board,1670supporting its extension, and as a result, we are finally going to1671begin realizing the Board's potential to save billions of taxpayer1672dollars. Since the Board was established in late 2016, we have1673recommended the sale of approximately $775 million in proceeds of1674federal real property. Since we submitted our last round of1675recommendations in 2022, the Board independently analyzed 47 properties1676totaling 35 million square feet. Out of this, the PBRB analysis has1677identified approximately $19 billion in cost avoidance over 30 years1678which it plans to submit for recommended disposal. And the Board1679recognizes this is just the start of the consolidation opportunities1680that abound.1681    Our strategy to right size the portfolio recognizes the poor1682physical condition of many buildings and the financial constraints on1683federal real estate. We reviewed buildings based on reinvestment needs,1684occupancy levels, and building significance or criticality. Buildings1685that have high renovation needs, low occupancy levels, and low1686significance are at the top of our list for disposal.1687    Our recommendations will assume appropriations for consolidations1688may be limited. Consolidation recommendations will be directed towards1689quality owned buildings that require little renovation and leased1690locations.1691    The average age of the Federal portfolio is over 50 years. Most of1692them require full renovations that cost between $700 and $1000 per1693foot. This can average close to $72 billion in capital needs if we1694assume a $400 per square foot average for the 180 million square foot1695GSA owned portfolio. Each year, GSA accrues about $2 billion in new1696capital liabilities as these portfolio ages. There is little prospect1697that Congress will provide anywhere near this level of appropriations.1698    Therefore, the government has two options: house employees in1699failing, aging buildings or, dramatically increase disposals of its1700inventory. We believe disposal is the only financially viable choice.1701This will also provide the opportunity for consolidating space and1702providing better working environments for federal employees by1703relocating them to owned buildings in better condition, or leased1704commercial space.1705    There are two groups of buildings we are proposing for disposal:1706pre-war properties that have extremely high renovations costs, low1707occupancy and not particularly significant; and post-war buildings.1708Most of these post-war buildings, particularly in Washington, DC, were1709low-cost construction, and are at the end of their useful lives, and1710now require whole building renovation. The taxpayer has realized their1711money's worth out of these facilities and is now time to monetize these1712properties for future taxpayer benefit.1713    We lately have been working very closely with the General Services1714Administration and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to1715collaborate on our next round of recommendations, which are due to OMB1716no earlier than December 27, 2024. Our plan is to introduce our next1717round of recommendations sometime this spring. The Water Resources1718Development Act also allows us to submit a third round of1719recommendations before our sunset date of December 31, 2026.1720    In our next round, we have identified approximately $19 billion in1721cost avoidance over 30 years. The Board recognizes this is just the1722start of the consolidation opportunities that abound.1723    To illustrate this tremendous opportunity, the Board found in 20231724that there was a 70% decrease from pre-COVID levels in occupancy in a1725study of a group of department headquarters buildings in Washington,1726DC.1727    Another example is the Department of Commerce headquarters building1728in Washington, DC, the Herbert C. Hoover Building, which costs1729taxpayers an average of $332,428, including deferred maintenance, in17302023 per assigned employee. The Frances Perkins Building, Department of1731Labor Headquarters, in Washington, DC, cost the taxpayer on average of1732$182,346 in 2023 per person in operating and maintenance costs and GSA1733rent. By comparison, 200 square feet of leased Class B office space in1734Washington, DC, would cost approximately $9,600 per person annually.1735    The Board has conducted portfolio studies in other regions as well,1736including Miami, FL; Los Angeles, CA; Boston, MA; and Atlanta, GA. One1737property we are considering for disposal recommendation is the Wilshire1738Federal Building in Los Angeles, CA. This 55-year-old building required1739extensive work including modernization of HVAC and electrical systems,1740asbestos remediation, and window upgrades. GSA requested funds in 20221741to address these deficiencies, although the property is deemed a1742seismically high-risk building. The PBRB has conducted market analyses1743to determine housing alternatives for the tenant agencies and to allow1744the government to take advantage of depressed office market conditions1745in Los Angeles.1746    The Board's analysis also demonstrated time and again that market1747conditions are uniquely set to provide federal agencies the opportunity1748to move into spaces which are often of better quality than the federal1749offices. Our analysis has demonstrated that:1750      Federal divestment from under-utilized properties1751provides cities and towns opportunities to address critical needs such1752as housing shortages.1753      The commercial office market is soft, and federal1754dispositions will need to be made context dependent.1755      Consolidations offer agencies the opportunity to create1756healthier, more efficient, safer, and operationally supportive1757workspaces.17581759    The current set of properties the Board is assessing for its second1760set of recommendations is comprised of (17 million) SF of office space1761in 11 cities across the U.S. The greatest preponderance of properties1762is in Washington, DC, where decades of underinvestment combined with1763underutilization have created a situation where there are billions of1764dollars of capital liabilities accruing to the taxpayer to support a1765dwindling work force. The Board is preparing its list of1766recommendations in D.C. that encompasses approximately (15 million)1767gross square feet of space, mostly concentrated around the National1768Mall. This is a huge amount of space that can be turned back to the1769private sector, some of which can be repurposed for badly needed1770housing, some could be used by the Smithsonian for additional museums,1771and some could be redeveloped into modern office space. A renewal of1772the monumental core could promote a connection between the National1773Mall and the Waterfront, providing tourists with facilities and food1774options currently not available on the mall, provide increased tax1775revenues to the city, and support growth. However, the sale of such a1776huge amount of space must be done carefully and within a reasonable1777context that supports market absorption of space. Done correctly, our1778recommendations will provide enhanced tax revenue for local governments1779and provide redevelopment opportunities. With careful planning and1780disposition the Board estimates that taxpayer savings could be ($6.51781billion over 30 years).1782    The list of properties we are considering will be submitted with1783our testimony.17841785    List of properties under consideration by the PBRB as of Feb 24,17862025:17871788      Lipinski FB, Chicago, IL1789      Captain Williams Coast Guard, Boston, MA1790      LaBranch FB, Houston, TX1791      Kefauver FB, Nashville, TN1792      Peachtree Summit, Atlanta, GA1793      Brickell FB, Miami, FL1794      4700 River Road, Riverdale, MD1795      7th and D St SW, Washington, DC1796      Cohen FB, Washington, DC1797Under Consideration: NCR1798      1800 F St NW, Washington, DC1799      Theodore Roosevelt FB, Washington, DC1800      Perkins FB, Washington, DC1801      Orville Wright, Washington, DC1802      Wilbur Wright, Washington, DC1803      Jamie L. Whitten Building, Washington, DC1804      Forrestal FB, Washington, DC1805      Agriculture South, Washington, DC1806      J. Edgar Hoover FB, Washington, DC1807      Robert Weaver Building, Washington, DC1808Under Consideration: Rest of the Country1809      Wilshire FB, Los Angeles, CA1810      312 N. Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA1811      Anthony J. Celebrezze FB, Cleveland, OH1812      United States Custom House, Philadelphia, PA18131814    Mr. Ezell. Thank you both for your testimony. We will now1815turn to questions from the panel. I will recognize myself for 51816minutes for questions.1817    Question 1, Mr. Marroni, to give some context, in 2023, you1818testified before this subcommittee detailing the results of1819GAO's review of the actual utilization of agency headquarters1820buildings here in Washington, DC. At that time, you found that1821a majority of the buildings had a utilization rate of 251822percent or less, and some as low as 9 percent. Is that correct?1823    Mr. Marroni. Yes.1824    Mr. Ezell. Today, you point out that the Federal Government1825spends about $10.3 billion a year just maintaining and1826operating Federal buildings. With that, deferred maintenance1827has doubled from $170 billion in 2017 to $370 billion today. Is1828that correct?1829    Mr. Marroni. Yes, that is correct.1830    Mr. Ezell. Mr. Winstead, you mentioned in your testimony1831that the Department of Commerce headquarters in Washington, DC,1832in 2023 cost the taxpayers an average of $322,428 per employee,1833and the Labor Department headquarters $182,346 per employee,1834compared to the average cost per person in the private sector1835being $9,600. This is a massive liability.1836    To both of you, I would like for both of you to try to1837answer: How did we get to this point, and how do we get this1838massive liability off the books and reduce the cost of Federal1839real estate?1840    Mr. Marroni. Sure. So this is a longstanding challenge. We1841have had this on our high-risk list for 20 years.1842    A number of reasons how we got here. One would simply be1843agencies did not have an incentive to dispose of their real1844property, the funding needed. The upfront costs needed to1845consolidate, to move, to relocate is something that agencies1846often didn't have, and it would have come out of their mission.1847Other reasons include simply the age of the buildings. They1848have gotten older, they were created at a different time for a1849different workplace, these agencies and these buildings that no1850longer really fit their needs. And so huge buildings, smaller1851workforce, they don't need the same amount of space to do the1852work they did 50 years ago.1853    And the end result is also deferred maintenance to these1854buildings. These buildings, in many cases, are not well1855maintained, in poor condition. And so what is the solution to1856that?1857    One solution is targeting buildings that do have those high1858deferred maintenance backlogs and that are not well used. Those1859should definitely be top targets for disposal. That kills two1860birds with one stone. You are getting rid of some of your1861liabilities, and you are also getting rid of some underused1862space that you can consolidate into more appropriate1863facilities.1864    Mr. Ezell. Mr. Winstead, anything to add?1865    Microphone.1866    Mr. Winstead. The GSA portfolio is roughly 180 million1867square feet of owned and about the same of leased.1868    And I think all of us must recognize the reality of the1869market and what happened during COVID, candidly. The onset of1870telework, which was 100 percent in the early years of COVID,1871and then the adoption of new work practices did increase the1872number of people teleworking. Our law firm gave up 50 percent1873of its space between COVID and today, 2025, because more1874lawyers are working from home.1875    And so what we are really dealing with is an aged1876inventory, where we have really got to focus on the best1877maintained core buildings that are worth the Federal Government1878taxpayer to invest in, and then we have really got to look at1879backfilling space that is available.1880    But the reality is, in the marketplace now, more people are1881teleworking, and that really vacated a lot of these buildings1882for the last 3 or 4 years.1883    Mr. Ezell. As both of you know, Congress enacted1884significant Federal real estate reforms as part of the 20241885WRDA, including the USE IT Act. These reforms mandate that1886agencies either use their space or lose it. I understand,1887however, GAO and the Public Buildings Reform Board have both1888found challenges in how GSA sells properties.1889    Can you discuss this issue you see in how GSA prepares and1890places properties up for sale, and is this process too1891bureaucratic?1892    Mr. Marroni. So again, we have reported for years that this1893has been also a longstanding problem.1894    A complicated process to dispose of a Federal building.1895There are many steps to take. Those are policy choices,1896ultimately, to go through the public benefit conveyance system,1897to go through some of the statutory requirements that are in1898place now. So that is something Congress could certainly1899consider.1900    Other parts of the disposal process also is how GSA puts1901the properties up for sale, what sales strategies it uses to1902dispose of properties. Typically, it defaults to an online1903auction site. That may not always be the best method to take.1904And putting up properties as-is sometimes may not be the best1905approach, either. Thinking about ways to make it clear to1906buyers what they would be getting so that you might have a bar1907to market to put in, say, put in sales offers.1908    Mr. Winstead. In terms of the process of GSA, it has proven1909to be very, very lengthy and drawn out. We recommended 3 years1910ago 12 major assets for disposal, and GSA worked their way1911through them, and all but 1 is sold now. It is actually on the1912market. But it is a very protracted process.1913    In the wisdom of Congress, they exempted our high-value1914round from both title V and public benefit conveyance. The1915assets we report out now are exempted from public benefit, so1916you really are able to streamline, you know, you can't have1917local government or other Federal agencies raise their hand for1918the assets we report out.1919    So we feel strongly that our recommendations, with the1920analysis that we have done around them, will allow GSA to move1921much more expeditiously through the disposal process and really1922get rid of that property, return it to the tax roll for1923redevelopment and housing, affordable housing. So that is1924really what our report is targeted at, is making strong1925recommendations, both reporting to Congress about our1926recommendations, but also to GSA.1927    Candidly, I think many of the members of the Board, two1928former Members of Congress, are disappointed in some of the1929methods GSA has proceeded on. In reality, a public auction1930process is not monitored by the highest real estate interests,1931and REITs, and other investors in the country. They just don't1932look at a public auction site. So we are recommending to GSA,1933because of these complicated assets, some of the ones that we1934may report out of here in the District, are large, older1935buildings no longer needed. And there is a better way, more1936expeditious way to do it, and also, in our judgment, bring in1937advisory groups to help them determine highest and best use,1938and get the best value back.1939    Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields. I now recognize Mr.1940Stanton for 5 minutes of questioning.1941    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. In your1942statement, you made a strong case as to why we need to do this,1943so why we need to improve efficiency in our public building1944utilization and why we needed to analyze that and dispose of1945buildings that are no longer needed.1946    As we have made clear, that is exactly why we passed what1947we passed in the 2024 WRDA. That was done in an overwhelmingly1948bipartisan way. And we are improving those processes, and we1949are in agreement. We want to make sure that we get the highest1950and best use of those buildings, and those that are appropriate1951for public benefit we utilize for public benefit. These are all1952things that we agree on in a bipartisan way.1953    I guess the issue that we are dealing with right now is we1954are in the world of DOGE, and we are trying to figure out how1955DOGE overlays with the bipartisan policy that we passed through1956this committee. I mean, I think the theory of DOGE is move fast1957and break things, which may or may not work in certain1958instances. But disposing of public properties, there is a very1959good reason why we go through the process, and that is to make1960sure that we are protecting the taxpayers, that we get the most1961value of those buildings.1962    So with that, I am going to ask the question to Mr.1963Marroni: return to work. Was GSA, as far as you know, consulted1964before the return-to-work Executive order was signed by the1965President?1966    Mr. Marroni. I do not know.1967    Mr. Stanton. If the agency headcounts are in flux, how does1968GSA know how much space agencies need?1969    Mr. Marroni. That is a challenge. It is important to know1970what your workforce is going to be.1971    Mr. Stanton. It is a point I made at the beginning, which1972is that it is unfortunate Mr. Peters is not here. GSA should be1973here, answering these appropriate questions so that we could do1974our duty of oversight over the Administration.1975    Mr. Marroni, GSA does have a new Public Buildings1976Commissioner, and soon after he took the position, he said,1977``It is clear that the footprint of non-DoD Federal buildings1978should be reduced by at least 50 percent.'' That is a pretty1979remarkable statement for being on the job for only a short1980period of time. How could the new Commissioner possibly know1981that key information after only 4 days on the job?1982    Mr. Marroni. I don't know. It does take some analysis to1983figure out what you need.1984    Mr. Stanton. Have you personally seen any data that would1985lead you to determine that a 50-percent reduction was1986warranted?1987    Mr. Marroni. We have not done that analysis.1988    Mr. Stanton. Mr. Winstead, do you have any idea--I am kind1989of moving in a different direction here, but it is important.1990It was listed as recently as yesterday as one of the items I1991think has been removed--it has been a moving target about what1992is on the DOGE list, what is not on the DOGE list--do you have1993any idea what the current administration's plans are for the1994FBI's headquarters?1995    Mr. Winstead. Congressman, I do not. This--the House is--I1996do not. I can't speak for GSA. Obviously, there have been plans1997and actions in the past to move the FBI headquarters to1998Greenbelt, Maryland, I guess, is the recommendation. I do not1999know what the current status is.2000    Mr. Stanton. Mr. Winstead, as you well know, based on your2001vast experience, not all Federal space is the same. In addition2002to general office space, agencies have specialty spaces:2003science labs, warehouses, data centers, SCIFs, shooting ranges,2004and more. Should the Federal Government own specialty space and2005lease all-purpose office space, in your opinion?2006    Mr. Winstead. Congressman, yes. When I was Commissioner,2007specialized governmental space that has high security demands,2008FBI field office, Federal courthouse, border stations, firing2009ranges, those are specialized uses that, when I was2010Commissioner and the Congress oversaw a budget, those were2011preserved and should be, in my judgment, preserved as federally2012owned space.2013    Mr. Stanton. And many times a Government agency that has2014long-term leases is going to make tenant improvements, major2015improvements, sometimes very specialized improvements because2016of the nature of the work that they do. Should the GSA dispose2017of lease space where the tenant agencies have made significant2018investments and tenant improvements like holding cells,2019evidence rooms, counterintelligence equipment? What are your2020thoughts on that?2021    Mr. Winstead. I think that in the decision about what the2022continued tenancy costs are, evaluating investment by that2023agency and the tenant fit-outs is very important. There are2024cases where specialized equipment has been paid for by the2025taxpayer through the agency's budget, and so a very careful2026analysis needs to be made to justify moving an agency out of a2027utilized, fully utilized--more than 60 percent--when there is2028specialized equipment.2029    There are wonderful cases in maybe your district and2030elsewhere where there are leased facilities. A large part of2031the 32 field offices of the FBI were done under a lease2032process. So there you are leveraging private sector efficiency,2033but it is a leased space but a specialized Government use.2034    Mr. Stanton. All right, thank you very much.2035    Let me just reiterate that it is so important that Mr.2036Peters appear before this subcommittee. I am going to ask2037Chairman and Chairman Perry, as well, to have another hearing2038as soon as possible so that we can get substantive answers on2039these very fair questions. A lot of angst associated with2040public buildings these days, with return-to-work, termination,2041large-scale terminations, and the desire to sell off2042underutilized assets as quickly as possible, so GSA needs to be2043here ASAP.2044    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.2045    Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields. The Chair now recognizes2046Mr. Bresnahan.2047    Mr. Bresnahan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I didn't know if I2048heard a Barrett or Bresnahan there.2049    Mr. Ezell. I will just----2050    Mr. Bresnahan. So yesterday we found out that three Federal2051buildings in my district are being considered for sale by the2052GSA and classified as non-core assets. Three buildings. Roughly2053an hour ago, Bloomberg reported that the list of properties2054potentially for sale was taken off of GSA's website and the2055decision reversed. In my district, this list originally2056includes the Wilkes-Barre Federal Building, the Social Security2057Administration Data Operations Center in Plains Township, and a2058maintenance building in Wilkes-Barre.2059    The Social Security Data Center employs nearly 1,4002060workers, and I want to express my extreme frustration that I2061learned about this on the news, not from the GSA or the2062administration.2063    Mr. Winstead, you had mentioned that you were going to be2064notifying Members of Congress as to how the course of action2065would proceed. When was the Member of Congress going to be2066notified that there could be implications to facilities inside2067of his district?2068    Mr. Winstead. Congressman, the list that came out of GSA2069that has now been pulled off the website was, as I understand2070it--I am not speaking for GSA--was the result of a long-term2071review by the portfolio office. That is distinguishable--we2072hope that more assets will come our way to be considered under2073the more expeditious sales process of FASTA. But we were not2074involved in that side of it.2075    But I will tell you, it is very important, in any asset2076that comes through FASTA, that we are engaging broadly with the2077community and listening to both the agency need in that2078location, as well as engage with the elected officials on the2079local, State, and Federal level.2080    Mr. Bresnahan. And I think that brings me to my next2081question is some of our concerns is we need the PBRB and the2082GSA to ensure the sale would support our local communities and2083not become a strain. And I am very familiar with these two2084different physical structures, but definitely have grave2085concerns when this is kind of a shell shock, and we are sprung2086into action behind the eight ball.2087    So obviously, I know you are not speaking on behalf of the2088GSA, but I would welcome another conversation to make sure that2089we are all lockstep on what the future plans are for these2090buildings.2091    My next question for Mr. Marroni, the Director of Physical2092Infrastructure, correct?2093    Mr. Marroni. Correct.2094    Mr. Bresnahan. You had mentioned in your testimony about2095some deferred maintenance costs on the facilities. Whose2096responsibility is that to make sure the buildings are2097maintained and adequately upkept to remain marketable?2098    Mr. Marroni. So that is going to be GSA and the agencies,2099depending on who has control of that facility.2100    Mr. Bresnahan. Do they provide guidance, or does your2101office provide guidance? How does that work?2102    Mr. Marroni. In terms of--GSA has policies and procedures2103for that, and agencies that have control of that would, as2104well, in terms of how they maintain facilities.2105    Mr. Bresnahan. What is the most common form of deferred2106maintenance that you have observed?2107    Mr. Marroni. I don't know if there is a most common I could2108point out. There is a range of things, everything from basic2109repairs to your elevators being out to major structural2110repairs. It depends on the building.2111    Mr. Bresnahan. Back to Mr. Winstead. In your testimony, you2112have identified $19 billion in cost avoidance over 30 years on2113recommended properties to dispose of, approximately $6332114million per year in Federal savings. How does the annual cost2115savings compare to impacts on local economies and services like2116Head Start or other benefits within the community?2117    Mr. Winstead. I think, Congressman, the assets that we2118report out are largely surplus and underutilized, right? So we2119are not talking about--it is not like the BRAC process. We are2120not talking about moving jobs. We are just talking literally2121about housing Federal employees in better buildings, better2122workspace.2123    So I think the real opportunity for the assets that we are2124looking at and will be reporting to Congress, number one,2125everybody will be notified and all their input will be2126considered. But it really is--we are trying to engage very,2127very much not just with the elected officials, but with the2128community in that area.2129    For example, 40 percent of the GSA inventory is in2130Washington, DC. We have reached out to Eleanor Norton, Delegate2131Norton, 2 years ago on this. We are talking to the mayor2132constantly, the director of planning for the District, the2133National Capital Park and Planning. So we are really trying to2134get everybody's involvement in what is the best option and what2135is the best redevelopment potential for those properties.2136    So I really don't see a negative downside to this, these2137buildings. Even with the return of Federal employees, these2138buildings are no longer needed, basically. So how do you turn2139them back? What tools do the Federal Government, local2140government, and the developer bring to the table to redevelop2141it with more vibrancy, better amenities, more housing, maybe2142some office space--probably not--and it goes on the local tax2143roll.2144    One of the things the District is suffering from is a huge2145drop in property tax valuations right now. I mean, everybody2146is, most metropolitan areas are.2147    So I think that, looking at the potential, we are2148actually--we are analyzing what is the highest and best use. It2149is a buyer that would take that through the process. But we are2150trying to get a handle on taking this asset or building, what2151is the best use and what is the value.2152    Mr. Bresnahan. Thank you both for being here.2153    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.2154    Dr. Onder [presiding]. The Chair recognizes Ranking Member2155Larsen for 5 minutes.2156    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you. Thank you very much,2157Mr. Chair.2158    Mr. Winstead and Mr. Marroni, I will answer Representative2159Bresnahan's question about when are they planning to tell us.2160Never. And I think the process that we hope they use is one2161when they notify us sooner than never next time.2162    And we passed this bill as part of the Water Resources2163Development Act and developed it in a bipartisan way under the2164leadership of Scott Perry, Representative Perry, so that there2165was a process, because we wanted to be very clear to GSA we2166have too much space, they need to methodically look at the2167space, look at the numbers of people, and then make some2168decisions about what to keep and what not to keep. But as I2169noted in my opening statement, it seems that instead of doing2170steps 1 through 5, they, the GSA, just started at step 1 and2171jumped to step 5 of the USE IT Act. And it seems like that is2172where we are right now.2173    But I do think that, for Mr. Marroni, thinking about the2174bill, the law that we passed that was part of WRDA--it is2175really not WRDA, it was a bill we tacked onto it--can you talk2176to me about how, like, given what we put out, how many months2177would it have taken GSA to just kind of walk through that2178process to get to where GSA got overnight?2179    Mr. Marroni. So under the USE IT Act, within 6 months of2180the law passing, which was in January----2181    Mr. Larsen of Washington [interposing]. January.2182    Mr. Marroni [continuing]. So basically June, they would2183have needed to--agencies would need to start measuring their2184utilization. So that is a really key data point. So by summer.2185    Mr. Larsen of Washington. By summer. I don't know--it is2186not your job to answer this question, but it doesn't seem to me2187why we can't wait until summer for that, because there is2188bipartisan support for that bill. It is not like they are2189racing against Congress catching up with them. We told GSA to2190do this. We want them to do this. And it seems like they are2191racing ahead to do something for some other reason, and I don't2192know what it is, but we have a process we put in place. We just2193want them to use it. And then, if we don't like the answer,2194shame on us, right, for passing the law. But that would be the2195answer.2196    Can you talk to me a little bit about the 2019 relocation?2197I think you were asked to look at the moving of Department of2198Ag and Bureau of Land Management staff from DC to Kansas and2199Colorado. You studied that. Can you talk to us about, did that2200reduce cost? Did it attract highly qualified staff? What was2201your assessment of the move of those two parts to different2202parts of the country?2203    Mr. Marroni. So I am familiar with that report.2204    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Okay.2205    Mr. Marroni. Not in detail.2206    What I can say is that any relocation is going to involve2207real property costs. There are going to be transactional costs2208for the move. I would say there are other issues as well to2209consider, in addition to real property. But we can certainly2210get back to you with information on that.2211    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Can you get back specifically2212about that, just to learn some lessons? There might be some2213good reasons and some really bad reasons to move folks or2214functions out of DC or back into DC, as well.2215    Mr. Winstead, if you could just answer for me, your first2216round of recommendations from the group was 47 properties. Is2217that right?2218    Mr. Winstead. Congressman, the first round was the 12 high-2219valued assets, which----2220    Mr. Larsen of Washington [interposing]. Twelve high-value2221assets.2222    Mr. Winstead [continuing]. Have all been sold, but for one2223in Palo Alto, which is now on the market.2224    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Okay. And then what is the next2225step?2226    Mr. Winstead. The next is the report we will be sending to2227you, to Congress and OMB, and obviously working weekly with2228GSA, of properties that are in the second round that we have2229analyzed. We have attached a page in my testimony that2230highlights some of the buildings that we have been analyzing,2231so these are the ones that are going to be addressed in that2232report. And----2233    Mr. Larsen of Washington [interrupting]. And some of those2234buildings, if not all of those buildings, are on the list of2235400-plus, the list that was put online and taken offline.2236    Mr. Winstead. Right.2237    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Is that right?2238    Mr. Winstead. Yes, but many others, right? These are only2239maybe 50 assets, so there are a lot of others that appeared on2240the list that GSA posted.2241    Mr. Larsen of Washington. I am talking about your list. The2242ones on your list were on the GSA list that was pulled off.2243    Mr. Winstead. I assume so.2244    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes.2245    Mr. Winstead. Yes, I assume so. Because we----2246    Mr. Larsen of Washington [interrupting]. They are. For the2247record, they are.2248    Mr. Winstead. Because we--okay.2249    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Is that your last set of2250recommendations, or do you have another set of recommendations2251after this----2252    Mr. Winstead [interrupting]. Oh, then we have another2253round. So we will be reporting this next round out within a2254month or so, and then we will have another round at the end of22552026. Congress extended the Board until the end of 2026.2256    And I think what is significant about that, Congressman, is2257we really are seeing the impacts of telework. And obviously,2258the directive of Federal employees coming to the office how2259many days a week will have an impact on that. But I think 22260more years will give us even more time to look at assets in2261more detail, and then in that last round, really recommend2262properties that are no longer needed.2263    And we do have the authority----2264    Mr. Larsen of Washington [interrupting]. Yes, thank you.2265    Mr. Winstead. All right.2266    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Sorry, I have run out of time. I2267just--want to just note that this spaghetti-on-the-wall2268approach is just not working for the administration. But if2269they worked with the law that we passed and they work with you2270all, I mean, by the end of 2026, we will all have a fairly2271decent story to tell about the amount of leased space and owned2272space that we got rid of. It may not be what everyone wants,2273but we will all be able to tell that story, and make it a good2274story, and it will line up with the numbers of people that we2275are expecting to come back into offices, as well.2276    It is flummoxing to me why there is this head-long rush2277from the GSA to do these things that they are having to pull2278back on anyway. We can help them do that. We are committed to2279the law we passed.2280    So I would just note that and yield back.2281    Mr. Winstead. Well, I do think that the WRDA----2282    Mr. Larsen of Washington [interrupting]. I have to yield2283back, so you are----2284    Mr. Winstead [interposing]. Oh.2285    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes, thanks.2286    Dr. Onder. Yes, the Chair yields to himself 5 minutes.2287    Mr. Marroni, the GAO's 2023 report found that 17 of 242288agency headquarters buildings were operating at 25 percent or2289less capacity. What structural or bureaucratic barriers do we2290have that prevent agencies from consolidating or relinquishing2291underutilized spaces?2292    Mr. Marroni. I mean, in terms of consolidation, the main2293factor is just having the planning and the funding to do it.2294There is not--agencies could consolidate. It does take time, it2295does take money, but they could consolidate.2296    Dr. Onder. Right. And the Office of Management and Budget2297has prohibited GSA from negotiating discounted purchases on2298leases, often forcing Government to pay more over time. What2299impact has this had on long-term costs, and how could that be2300changed to save the taxpayer?2301    Mr. Marroni. I didn't hear the first part.2302    Dr. Onder. Yes, the first part, OMB has prohibited the GSA2303from negotiating discounted purchases on buildings, and often2304that forces the Government to pay more than they might have2305otherwise. How could that be addressed?2306    Mr. Marroni. So how it could be addressed if it is a2307policy? I am not familiar with that specific policy.2308    Dr. Onder. Okay.2309    Mr. Marroni. But if it is a policy, it could be addressed2310by Congress, through law, or by OMB.2311    Dr. Onder. Got it, okay.2312    And then the Utilizing Space Efficiently and Improving2313Technologies Act, the USE IT Act, mandates a 60-percent2314occupancy threshold for Federal buildings. How can Congress2315ensure that agencies comply with that requirement?2316    Mr. Marroni. Right. Well, I think an important role for2317this subcommittee in itself is holding hearings, holding2318oversight with GSA and the other relevant agencies to make sure2319that they are following through on what is required by statute.2320    Dr. Onder. Okay, thank you.2321    And Mr. Winstead, you mentioned that the Board's analysis2322had saved $19 billion in cost avoidance over 30 years. Can you2323walk us through those savings and what factors contributed the2324most to those savings?2325    Mr. Winstead. Congressman, what we have done with the2326assets, some of which appear on the last page, is we have gone2327in basically assessing what the deferred maintenance has been,2328and we have analyzed what is needed if we--if the Government2329decided to keep that building, what would it take to reinvest2330it, to bring it up to workspace that the Federal employee can2331function. So that is how we are doing it, we are looking at2332basically the condition of the building, the utilization of the2333building, deferred maintenance in the building. And if those2334judgments say keep the building, then what is needed to be2335appropriated by Congress to the public building fund to bring2336that building up to standard.2337    And obviously, part of this is backfilling the buildings. I2338think Congress has been very--in the recent legislation said 602339percent utilization, data every year on what is being done in2340these buildings, housing plans from each Federal agency in2341terms of how they are using the space, how many employees are2342there.2343    But the other thing that needs to be done is the2344communication of the bottom line of our reports from GSA has to2345reach the top levels of Federal agencies. It has got to2346really--a decision--because some of the things we are looking2347at are underutilized Federal buildings here in DC, some of2348which have agencies' names on them, and they are no longer2349justified to be maintained. So convincing that Secretary,2350Assistant Secretary, administration that it is in the best2351interest of the taxpayer for them to move into another Federal2352building that is better maintained----2353    Dr. Onder [interposing]. Right.2354    Mr. Winstead [continuing]. And sell that building for2355redevelopment.2356    So that is the analysis, and we have a lot of analyses of2357the committee. All these assets have been totally analyzed, and2358we can send that to the committee, as well, how we have2359calculated those costs and that are backed up our decision to2360surplus the building.2361    Dr. Onder. Thank you.2362    I yield back. Ms. Norton is recognized for 5 minutes.2363    Ms. Norton. I strongly oppose OMB and OPM's recent decision2364to Federal agencies to ``propose relocations of agency bureaus2365and offices from Washington, DC, and the National Capital2366region to less likely parts of the country.''2367    I also strongly oppose the many bills that have been2368introduced this Congress to relocate the headquarters of four2369Federal agencies in the National Capital region to outside the2370National Capital region. These relocations, as we saw during2371the first Trump administration, would harm the operations of2372these agencies and waste taxpayer dollars. They would also harm2373the economy of the National Capital region. On Monday, I2374introduced a bill to prohibit such relocations.2375    However, there are specific Federal buildings in DC that2376GSA should dispose of and move the employees from those2377buildings into other buildings in DC. These disposals would2378save the Federal Government money, generate tax revenue for DC,2379increase housing supply in DC, and create new mixed-use2380neighborhoods in DC. Congress has passed many of my bipartisan2381bills to transfer unused and underutilized Federal buildings2382and land in DC to the DC government or the private sector,2383including the Webster School, with Chairman Perry; what became2384The Wharf and The Yards; and most recently, the RFK Stadium2385campus. I first introduced a bill in 2014 to facilitate the2386redevelopment of the Southwest Federal Center into a mixed-use2387neighborhood.2388    Mr. Winstead, please discuss the opportunity to dispose of2389Federal buildings in the Southwest Federal Center to create a2390new mixed-use neighborhood and connect the National Mall and2391The Wharf.2392    Mr. Winstead. Delegate Norton, as you know, because we2393have--it is in the report and we have briefed you, there are a2394number of buildings that are--Forrestal Building is the2395building right on L'Enfant Plaza, but there is the Whitten2396Building, the Agriculture South, that--many of the people that2397have looked at it--that are still very underutilized. And a lot2398of the NCPC, the mayor's office, your office, and the2399Department of Planning for the District have looked at it, and2400I think it is a wonderful opportunity to basically begin, as2401many people view it, opening up the Mall to the waterfront.2402    The Forrestal Building is one of those where it is costing2403$130,000 a year to house the Federal employees that show up. If2404you were able to take down the Forrestal Building, it would2405develop--there would be four parcels. There are ways to develop2406it for affordable housing, for mixed use, for amenities. But2407one of the visions that an architect at SOM has is it would2408really create a connection between the Mall and the waterfront.2409He described it as sort of the Spanish Steps of Washington, DC.2410You would get out into L'Enfant Plaza, and you could go down2411the steps and get over to the waterfront.2412    So these are some of the visions that are options, if you2413will, that need to be studied carefully by the Department of2414Planning for the District, by NCPC. But that is happening. ULI2415has advised our Board on some of these options, so I think it2416is--in that case, it is very exciting. You are taking grossly2417underutilized buildings, there are other opportunities to2418redevelop them if they are historic. One of the buildings in2419Southwest has already opened as a residential building. It was2420an historic building.2421    So I think that there are some great opportunities. We are2422working closely with all the players in the District in terms2423of what the impact of surplusing these properties is. Number2424one, the timing of them. There is concern generally that we2425don't want to--all these assets shouldn't come on the market at2426one time. They should be reported out, but maybe a phasing.2427Southwest assets I have just mentioned near Agriculture are a2428first phase, in my judgment.2429    So I think there are, I think, some very exciting things2430that people are envisioning. We have developers that have2431advised through ULI and NCPC, and I think your staff has2432probably seen those reports.2433    Ms. Norton. Mr. Winstead, how would the disposal of Federal2434buildings in the Southwest Center positively impact Federal2435taxpayers and the Federal Government?2436    Mr. Winstead. Well, the Board makes its recommendations to2437GSA, and their disposal division is the one that handles them.2438But we have in the past and will continue to make very specific2439recommendations of how they could be surplused and sold for2440redevelopment in a phased way.2441    The other thing the Board is saying is we have a couple2442major real estate people just understanding what the highest2443and best use of that asset is, really saying, what is it? Is it2444some residential? Is it some museums for the Smithsonian? In2445terms of the Forrestal Building, it is adjacent to the2446Smithsonian.2447    So--and how do you phase it? What should be brought to the2448market first? We will be working closely with the director of2449planning in the District and others to try to help and support2450that. It is really their actions. Our report and our action is2451really reporting them out. But we are looking at phasing, and2452we are looking at engaging users, investors, and getting their2453best ideas.2454    Dr. Onder. The gentleman from California, Mr. Kiley, is2455recognized for 5 minutes.2456    Mr. Kiley of California. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't know2457that there could be a more potent symbol of Government waste2458and inefficiency than the spectacle of Federal office buildings2459just sitting there, empty, with taxpayers footing the bill.2460    I am seeing that GSA manages more than 8,300 owned and2461leased assets, totaling over 365 million square feet--that is2462easy to remember, it is 1 million square feet for every day of2463the year; that the cost of operating, maintaining, and leasing2464office space costs $8 billion annually. And yet a report last2465year showed an occupancy rate, an average building occupancy2466rate, of just 12 percent, 12 percent.2467    So it is interesting because we have this emerging set of2468talking points here in the Capitol among some that know the2469Federal Government is perfect, there is no need to modernize2470it, no need to scale it back, no need to improve efficiency in2471the use of taxpayer resources. And then yet you can view2472alongside that sentiment this picture of all these Federal2473buildings just sitting there being paid for with no one in2474them. We even have reports of shadow or dark space in Federal2475buildings and leases, which are just not used at all, and not2476even assigned, simply just sitting there. This is something2477that American taxpayers have every right to be outraged about.2478    And I think that, Mr. Winstead, you put sort of a cost per2479employee on office space for some departments. Would you mind2480repeating those numbers? I believe it was in the hundreds of2481thousands.2482    Mr. Winstead. Yes, Congressman. In our report in March of2483last year, there was data in it that showed, based on the2484occupancy, as you suggest, 20 percent or average of 20 percent,2485what is the cost to GSA of maintaining that building per2486employee, and it varied from Commerce, 160, to Department of2487Energy, 130. But it is totally----2488    Mr. Kiley of California [interrupting]. An employee that is2489actually present, or per just employee----2490    Mr. Winstead [interrupting]. That show up.2491    Mr. Kiley of California. That show up.2492    Mr. Winstead. Per employee that show up----2493    Mr. Kiley of California [interposing]. Right.2494    Mr. Winstead [continuing]. Versus per day during the course2495of the year.2496    Mr. Kiley of California. Because for every one that shows2497up, four don't show up is what----2498    Mr. Winstead [interposing]. Yes.2499    Mr. Kiley of California. Yes.2500    Mr. Winstead. And in a private-sector office building, the2501cost of employee space is about $10,000 a year.2502    Mr. Kiley of California. Interesting.2503    Mr. Winstead. So----2504    Mr. Kiley of California [interrupting]. So the average cost2505is over 10 times higher for the Government than for the private2506sector.2507    Mr. Winstead. Yes, more than that. And again, it is an2508impact of COVID, it is an impact of telework policy and work2509habits since telework happened. It is obviously an impact of2510OPM and their directive in terms of Federal employees' presence2511in the office. But it really has, in the last 2 or 3 or 4 years2512since we have been looking at this, it has really gotten worse,2513right, in terms of the utilization.2514    Mr. Kiley of California. I mean, that is fascinating,2515because even the private sector has had underutilization2516issues. And you are saying, even given that, we are paying 102517times more per employee than they are in the private sector.2518    Mr. Winstead. In the instance of those buildings----2519    Mr. Kiley of California [interposing]. Right.2520    Mr. Winstead [continuing]. At the time we looked at2521utilization versus the cost the GSA pays to maintain that2522building per year, yes, it is over 10 times.2523    Mr. Kiley of California. I also found it interesting that2524the GAO has noted that agencies are reluctant to share their2525headquarters with other agencies, and they cite a lack of2526mission alignment, which is a little hard for me to understand.2527Because after all, these are all agencies that are serving2528Americans, are part of the Federal Government. That seems like2529enough of a mission alignment.2530    But even if there was none whatsoever, I walk into2531buildings all the time that have completely unrelated2532businesses working next to each other. But also, maybe it would2533be good if the agencies were talking to each other a little2534more. One of the problems that we have in our bureaucracy is2535that things are so siloed. So you get an approval from this2536agency, but then you are waiting years to get one from this2537agency, or you ask this agency to get the approval and they say2538they need to wait for that agency, and apparently they have no2539way to talk to each other and coordinate. So maybe if they2540could pick up the paper and walk it across the hall to someone2541down the hall, that might make the Federal Government work2542better together a little bit.2543    So what do you think, Mr. Marroni, is there something to be2544said for trying to get agencies under the same roof?2545    Mr. Marroni. Oh, definitely. Agencies--that reluctance is2546not acceptable.2547    Mr. Kiley of California. Thank you very much. Hopefully,2548that is something that we can work on. And I think that we can2549not only save taxpayers a lot of money, but send a message2550about the newfound paradigm of efficiency and modernization2551that we are trying to usher in at the Federal level.2552    I yield back.2553    Dr. Onder. The gentlewoman from Michigan, Ms. McDonald2554Rivet, is recognized for 5 minutes.2555    Ms. McDonald Rivet. Thank you very much. I am trying to put2556these pieces together when we are talking about data2557collection.2558    And so, very clearly, we have to be the best stewards of2559taxpayer dollars, and we should not be paying for space that is2560not utilized. We should not be paying for buildings that have2561very low occupancy.2562    What I am a little concerned about--so Mr. Winstead, you2563talked about the data that you have been collecting and the2564work that you have been doing--which sounds excellent, by the2565way--about the impact of telework. But we are seeing return to2566work, we are seeing telework ended very abruptly. And just this2567week, we are starting to see reports in the news that are2568talking about the messiness of that due to poor planning. We2569have got workers showing up in places where there are no desks,2570no Wi-Fi, no lights, and there is a lot of chaos that is2571happening right now.2572    So I am really encouraged, Mr. Marroni, when you were2573talking about the collection of data, that we should be able to2574have something solid to work from. But when I think about the2575data that you are both talking about over the last several2576years, as well as what is being collected right now when we2577have got mass chaos on the return-to-work policy, isn't the2578data you are collecting now going to be somewhat invalid 2, 32579months from now? Isn't there a place where, in the best2580interest of efficiency and saving taxpayer dollars, we want to2581be logical and methodical in this?2582    What validity will your data have this summer with so much2583chaos in the landscape right now?2584    Mr. Marroni. You need good data to make good decisions.2585That has been a problem in real property for a long time. And2586with the use of that, there is a chance to have utilization2587data for the first time.2588    When we did our study in 2023, we could only really do2589headquarters buildings because, once you got outside of the2590National Capital region, that data really didn't exist. So the2591use of data is a really important step to both set benchmarks2592and get the kind of data you are describing. And that data is2593really important if you are deciding what buildings to dispose2594of, because understanding the utilization profile is really2595essential, in addition to knowing how many people are going to2596be coming into those buildings.2597    Ms. McDonald Rivet. Of course, no argument here. My2598question is around the data collection.2599    So as we are seeing a little bit of a hiccup around this2600return to work, how are those data collected, and in what2601timeline?2602    So can you really count utilization if people are in2603offices where there are no lights or no Wi-Fi, as we try to2604work through this?2605    Mr. Marroni. So under the law, agencies will be required to2606at least use badging data, swipe data. So understanding the2607problems you are highlighting for people working in those2608spaces, if they don't----2609    Ms. McDonald Rivet [interrupting]. I am sorry sir, but over2610what time period?2611    Mr. Marroni. Pardon?2612    Ms. McDonald Rivet. Over what time period?2613    Mr. Marroni. Over what time period? The badging data, I2614believe, they are required to start measuring in 6 months. So2615June, summer.2616    Ms. McDonald Rivet. They start measuring in June?2617    Mr. Marroni. Yes. They have to start measuring in June, and2618use at least badge swipe data. They can use other technologies,2619as well. That is part of the law. But badge swipe data would2620allow you, if someone is coming into the building, regardless2621of the quality of the workspace they are in, it would give you2622a sense of how many people are coming into the building.2623    Ms. McDonald Rivet. Okay. Thank you. I yield back.2624    Dr. Onder. The gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Figures, is2625recognized for 5 minutes.2626    Mr. Figures. Thank you, Mr. Chair.2627    Mr. Marroni, I think most of my questions will be for you,2628and I just want some clarity, because I am down in Mobile,2629Alabama, and that is where I am from. My district covers a few2630other cities, including Montgomery, Alabama. But we hear2631through media reports of different facilities being identified.2632Some are on the DOGE list, some are not on the website. And so,2633in hopes of getting some clarity around the process of how2634these decisions are being made, I am hoping that we can get2635some understanding here.2636    Do you personally communicate with anybody on the DOGE2637team?2638    Mr. Marroni. Personally communicate with DOGE? We have not.2639    Mr. Figures. Oh, is that just for you and your component2640office, or is that for the entire organization?2641    Mr. Marroni. So GAO, I know, has had some limited2642interactions with DOGE. But in our overall work, most of our2643work is with GSA, since they are the action on Federal2644property.2645    Mr. Figures. Right. But during the GSA process for2646acquisition, you guys are in contact with GSA.2647    Mr. Marroni. For any of our audit work that is on Federal2648real property, we are almost certainly going to be in contact2649with GSA.2650    Mr. Figures. And before the DOGE process, did you guys have2651a role in the--let's call it getting rid of any physical2652property?2653    Mr. Marroni. So our role is to investigate and look at ways2654to do disposals more effectively and efficiently, just overall2655Government operations more effectively and efficiently.2656    So we have been involved over the years in looking at this2657challenge of underused space, of how to dispose of that2658property, and right-size real property holdings, but as an2659independent auditor, not as a--involved in the----2660    Mr. Figures [interposing]. Yes.2661    Mr. Marroni [continuing]. Decisionmaking process.2662    Mr. Figures. Got it. But you guys have that expertise in2663that----2664    Mr. Marroni [interrupting]. We do have that expertise.2665    Mr. Figures [continuing]. In terms of investigating, yet2666you guys are not being consulted in the process currently.2667    Mr. Marroni. No, although we typically would not be. We are2668not involved in executive branch decisionmaking.2669    Mr. Figures. Yes.2670    Mr. Marroni. So we ask questions based on our audit2671objectives, and we want information back on those questions,2672but we aren't involved in the decisionmaking process.2673    Mr. Figures. Absolutely. And Mr. Winstead, I do have one2674for you, as well. As we are making these--my concern is that2675these decisions are being made so fast, and I am in, I think,2676the same boat as everybody, I don't think anybody wants us to2677be sitting on unused real estate and paying for it. But I get2678the feeling that these decisions are being made so fast, and2679so--just in such a rush that there is not sufficient2680investigation going on or sufficient collaboration going on in2681terms of what are the long-term needs or what are the possible2682needs of leases that we are terminating.2683    And I am also--we are getting reports that DOGE is saying2684that they terminated leases that were terminated months ago, if2685not years ago, before the Trump administration came in. And so2686it just leads me to being very concerned about communication2687and streamlined communication as the decisionmaking process is2688going forward with which leases to terminate.2689    Again, if we don't need it, we should terminate it, but can2690you talk to us a little bit about the suggestions that you2691would provide in terms of making sure that the decision process2692is being as informed as it can possibly be?2693    Mr. Winstead. Sure, Congressman. So with the assets that I2694referred to in this report and that we were really examining2695and have been, we have done it over a longer period of time,2696and this isn't something that has just happened. We have really2697been looking at it for 2\1/2\ years.2698    And our engagement with the administration is both directly2699with the Commissioner on a weekly basis, and also OMB on a--not2700a weekly, but a regular basis in terms of what we are finding,2701in terms of the sustainability of that building and the lack of2702need for it over the long term, so that our recommendations are2703fully vetted with the agency and that their review, GSA's2704independent review of their portfolio, can consider what we are2705looking at in the assets that we have targeted as the highest2706value that grossly--most of them totally unutilized, and the2707best return to that host jurisdiction in terms of redeveloping2708that property for--it goes on that local tax roll, it creates2709new construction jobs, and that kind of thing.2710    So we are very much engaged, coordinating with the2711Commissioner of Public Buildings Mike Peters, his team, and2712also the new OMB people that are overseeing GSA.2713    Mr. Figures. Thank you.2714    Mr. Speaker, I yield back. Or Mr. Chairman, I am sorry.2715    Dr. Onder. The chairman recognizes the gentleman from2716Tennessee, Mr. Cohen.2717    Mr. Cohen. Thank you, sir.2718    I was watching my television, and I saw Mr. Stanton asking2719questions about this issue, and it is something that concerns2720me because I was informed by my staff yesterday that they got2721some Bloomberg report that showed that the GSA and Mr. Genius2722from South Africa were proposing closing the Memphis Federal2723Building, which contains our courthouse, our U.S. attorney, our2724U.S. marshals, the Corps of Engineers, probation office, and my2725office. So it came as a bit of a shock to me.2726    I knew some of the judges had been trying to find a new2727building for Memphis to have a courthouse, where--I don't think2728we are very high up on the prospective courthouse list, and it2729seems like we should at least be on the list for a new2730courthouse before they get rid of the courthouse we are in. The2731Federal building we have now is 98 percent occupied. The judges2732claim that there are a lot of problems in the building, and2733they have shown me pictures of the vents with lots of black2734gook in it and whatever. They tote those around with them like2735Hugh Hefner probably would have carried centerfolds. And it is2736pretty strange, but that is what they do.2737    I have no problem with the Federal Building. I have been2738there for 18-plus years and have never had a problem. They say2739they might have a problem with the security, and that the2740elevators could take the prisoners up and down and from holding2741tanks to court. There has never been a prisoner, I think, ever2742escape or ever try to escape in 35, 40 years. All of a sudden,2743oh, we have got to have a new building.2744    Do either of you all know anything about the Memphis2745Federal Building, and how it got put on the list, and what the2746story is?2747    Mr. Marroni. No, not me.2748    Mr. Winstead. Congressman, I do not know what the current2749review by GSA is on that property.2750    I will tell you that GSA, from my background, 15 years ago,2751the Federal courthouses and the mixed-tenanted Federal2752courthouses, where there is other--a lot of the renovation that2753has been driven was really to improve the security in that2754courthouse in terms of the flow between the visitors, the2755members of the jury, the judges, and the defendants. So GSA put2756in billions of dollars over the last 15 years upgrading2757courthouses.2758    I don't know the Memphis specifically. I haven't had the2759pleasure of going there. But there could be some issues there2760about the value of maintaining and renovating that building2761versus a new courthouse. That is the only thing I can--but at276295 percent occupancy, I mean, that is a utilized building.2763    Mr. Cohen. Right.2764    Mr. Winstead. I mean, that is highly utilized. So it is not2765on the parameters that the committee and the new legislation2766directs that--it is higher than 60 percent.2767    Mr. Cohen. So----2768    Mr. Winstead [interrupting]. But there could be some2769rationale about the safety of that building because of the2770court function and the need to separate. The older courthouses2771do not have the separation that the newer courthouses do.2772    Mr. Cohen. Yes, well, it is more difficult to get into the2773building with the security we have and the limited entrance2774they have now than it would be to get into Charlie Palmer's by2775giving steak away, and Charlie Palmer isn't here anymore, the2776Capital Grille, or whatever.2777    So yes, I was just shocked. And I guess--I don't know if2778GSA is out there listening. GSA, if you are listening, please2779find the tapes, the letters--it was the letters. Well, the2780emails. The emails, yes. But I imagine they are listening.2781    The Congressman has more to do with that building than the2782judges. The judges have--I don't know how they found the time2783to spend all this time trying to find a new building when they2784have got all these cases to deal with, but it seems like if2785they are going to sell a building--and they have to have a2786buyer, and there hasn't been a lot of buyers for buildings in2787that neighborhood recently--but they should at least have a2788place to put the courts and the other offices that are housed2789there now before they decide they are going to sell the2790building and tear it down.2791    Mr. Winstead. Absolutely. And I am sure GSA is monitoring2792this, so I know that they will get back to you.2793    Mr. Cohen. Thank you, GSA. My name is Steve Cohen, C-o-h-e-2794n.2795    [Laughter.]2796    Mr. Cohen. I am on the third floor of the Odell Horton2797Building, which I had named for Odell Horton, a famous jurist,2798an African-American jurist, and named for him because he is an2799inspiring figure for young people who want to go into the law.2800And he was a great judge, and a great prosecutor, and African2801American, and don't tear him down. Thank you, GSA.2802    Dr. Onder. The chair recognizes the gentlelady from New2803Jersey, Ms. Pou.2804    Ms. Pou. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you2805to our Ranking Member Stanton for letting me participate in2806this very important meeting, and especially the timely--what a2807timely hearing it is.2808    I want to ask our witnesses if you would please turn around2809and see if you--do you know the man who is in that portrait2810right there that I am pointing to?2811    So let me just tell you who he is. He is Robert Roe, one of2812my predecessors in Congress. Bob Roe was the chairman of this2813committee. Then it was called the Public Works Committee. I2814asked because Bob Roe's name adorns the Federal building in my2815home city of Paterson, the same Federal building we just2816learned just today is on a list of 440 properties to be2817disposed by the Trump administration. The IRS and the Social2818Security Office have public offices facing there at this very2819moment, serving the people of the third largest city in the2820State of New Jersey and all of our other neighboring towns.2821    The lines to access needed services form very early in the2822morning. The Roe Building is a critical resource for our2823community. Just last year in October, the GSA awarded a2824contract for $5.8 million, courtesy of the Inflation Reduction2825Act, for the much-needed renovations and repair. So now, less2826than 6 months later, the proposed sale of the Roe Building2827strikes me as totally nonsensical, and I will vigorously, as2828you can see, will indeed oppose this.2829    So I want to ask, and I want to start with Mr. Winstead,2830can you please explain to me and to this body here how the list2831of the buildings to be sold was compiled?2832    And can you explain the Trump Government's criteria and2833rationale?2834    Mr. Winstead. Congresswoman, that building, the Roe2835Building, is not on the list that our Board is looking at. It2836was issued on a list that came out, I think, Tuesday.2837    Ms. Pou. Right.2838    Mr. Winstead. And then was withdrawn. I think--again, I2839think that GSA will fully get in touch with you on that, and I2840will, obviously, convey that, as well.2841    So that list was withdrawn, I think, last night.2842    Ms. Pou. So let me just say, well, first of all, I am very2843happy to hear that. But to be honest with you, for us to be2844hearing--I know one of my fellow colleagues spoke about it just2845before I did--to hear that these lists or these properties--to2846hear from the public, which is how I actually learned about it,2847because it was in the newspaper, not because anyone notified--2848and the fact that, if it was in fact withdrawn, we get2849absolutely no notification and information.2850    So I really believe, Mr. Chairman, and our two folks that2851are here today presenting testimony, we really have to have a2852better line of communication so that we can avoid these things2853from happening.2854    I am very happy to hear that. I look forward to GSA2855communicating with my office to letting us know what is the2856real status. Believe me when I tell you, we are dealing with2857one of the most highly needed--and I listened very carefully to2858your point earlier, when you were mentioning or responding that2859it is based on the highest and best use of the building. There2860could be no better use for that building than for the use of2861making sure that they are providing the much-needed services to2862the people of our district. And they are doing their jobs.2863    So I am going to just be looking out for that, and thank2864you so very much for your comment. So I will be looking out for2865that. Thank you.2866    I yield back. Thank you.2867    Dr. Onder. Thank you.2868    The gentlelady yields back. Are there further questions2869from any of the members of the subcommittee who have not yet2870been recognized?2871    Seeing none, that concludes our hearing for the day.2872    I would like to thank all of the witnesses who appeared2873before us today. The subcommittee stands adjourned.2874    [Whereupon, at 3:26 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]28752876                               Appendix28772878                              ----------28792880      Questions to David Marroni, Director, Physical Infrastruc-2881       ture,  U.S. Government  Accountability Office,  from Hon.2882       Greg Stanton28832884    Question 1. GSA is turning off the 654 electric vehicle charging2885stations installed at federal buildings and selling its fleet of 25,0002886electric vehicles purchased under the Biden Administration for almost2887$1 billion.\1\ How does destroying and selling off equipment that the2888government has already paid for benefit the taxpayer?2889---------------------------------------------------------------------------2890    \1\ https://www.eenews.net/articles/trumps-reversal-of-ev-program-2891could-carry-a-hefty-price-tag/2892---------------------------------------------------------------------------2893    Answer. We have not been asked to evaluate the Trump2894administration's plans for electric vehicle charging stations or the2895consequences for the federal budget. We are not aware of any official2896administration plans to sell electric vehicles currently in the federal2897fleet.2898    A March 2025 General Services Administration (GSA) Order changed2899GSA policy to allow for the discontinuation of ``non-mission critical''2900electric vehicle supply equipment infrastructure.\2\ Under this new2901order, customer agencies must provide GSA a written determination2902stating that they have a mission-critical need to charge electric2903vehicles at federally-owned facilities under GSA's control. If an2904agency already has parking with electric vehicle charging capabilities,2905GSA is to ensure the charging stations remain operational as long as2906the mission-critical need exists. This policy does not authorize any2907new installations of electric vehicle supply equipment but allows2908agencies to apply for an exemption for mission-critical needs.2909---------------------------------------------------------------------------2910    \2\ General Services Administration, GSA Order: Electric Vehicle2911Supply Equipment (EVSE) in Federally Owned Facilities Under GSA's2912Jurisdiction, Custody, and Control. GSA Order PBS 5605.1B. (Washington,2913D.C.: March 3, 2025).2914---------------------------------------------------------------------------2915    In December 2024, we reported on the costs and benefits of2916operating and maintaining electric vehicles in the federal fleet.\3\2917Agency officials told us that reaching the zero emission vehicle goals2918set by the Biden administration would largely depend on the2919availability of charging infrastructure.2920---------------------------------------------------------------------------2921    \3\ GAO, Federal Vehicle Fleet: Efforts are Underway to Facilities2922the Transition to Zero Emission Vehicles, GAO-25-106972, Washington,2923D.C. (Dec. 17, 2024).29242925    Question 2. In 2019 the Trump Administration moved some Department2926of Agriculture and Bureau of Land Management staff from Washington, DC2927to Kansas and Colorado. The Administration said the relocations were2928necessary to ``find highly qualified staff, place resources closer to2929users, and reduce costs.'' \4\ Last week the Trump Administration2930directed federal agencies to suggest relocations of offices out of the2931National Capital Region to less expensive areas of the country. GAO2932closely studied the 2019 USDA and BLM relocations. Did they reduce2933costs and attract highly qualified new staff to the agencies? How did2934the moves impact agency operations and what was the quantifiable2935benefit of ``placing resources closer to users''?2936---------------------------------------------------------------------------2937    \4\ https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-1045402938---------------------------------------------------------------------------2939    Answer. The relocation of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) from2940Washington, D.C. to Grand Junction, Colorado was announced in July 20192941and completed in August 2020. In November 2021, we reported on changes2942to BLM's workforce because of the relocation and the agency's workforce2943planning efforts.\5\ We found that the relocation affected the number2944of vacancies, the makeup of existing staff, and agency operations at2945BLM. Specifically, we found that BLM headquarters vacancies increased2946from 121 in July 2019--before the relocation was announced--to 326 in2947March 2020--after the relocation was announced but had not yet been2948completed. Furthermore, we found that from January 2016 to January 20212949the number of headquarters staff with at least 25 years of service2950declined from 171 to 113. BLM officials told us that the loss of2951experienced staff negatively affected their ability to conduct their2952duties. For example, one staff member said that the loss of2953institutional knowledge about laws and regulations meant that BLM was2954not able to provide knowledgeable input on proposed rules and2955legislation.2956---------------------------------------------------------------------------2957    \5\ GAO, Bureau of Land Management: Better Workforce Planning and2958Data Would Help Mitigate the Effects of Recent Staff Vacancies, GAO-22-2959104247, Washington, D.C. (Nov. 16, 2021).2960---------------------------------------------------------------------------2961    In September 2021, the Secretary of the Interior announced that2962BLM's national headquarters would return to Washington, D.C., and Grand2963Junction, Colorado, would become the bureau's Western headquarters. The2964scope of GAO's report did not include possible benefits or costs of2965BLM's headquarters relocation.2966    The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) relocated two of2967its research agencies--the Economic Research Service (ERS) and the2968National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA)--from Washington,2969D.C. to Kansas City, Missouri in September 2019. Our December 20222970report reviewed the changes in workforce size and productivity2971following the relocation.\6\ With regard to agency staffing, we found2972that the agencies initially each lost over half of their staff, with2973vacancies in key positions such as managers and economists. The decline2974in managers impacted the agencies' hiring because they did not have a2975sufficient number of managers to help make decisions on hiring. Two2976years after the effective date of the relocation, the agencies had2977hired enough staff in key positions such that, by the end of fiscal2978year 2021, they had reached or exceeded the levels of staff that they2979had as of the end of fiscal year 2018. However, two years after the2980relocation, the agencies' workforce was composed mostly of new2981employees with less experience at ERS and NIFA than the prior2982workforce.2983---------------------------------------------------------------------------2984    \6\ GAO, Agency Relocations: Following Leading Practices Will2985Better Position USDA to Mitigate the Ongoing Impacts on Its Workforce,2986GAO-23-104709 , Washington, D.C. (Dec. 14, 2022).2987---------------------------------------------------------------------------2988    Regarding agency operations, in fiscal years 2019 and 2020, ERS2989produced fewer research reports and journal articles than in previous2990years, and NIFA experienced delays in processing grants in fiscal year29912020. At ERS, as staffing increased in 2021--2 years after the2992relocation--the number of research reports and journal articles also2993increased substantially, with research report numbers similar to2994numbers for the few years prior to the relocation. At NIFA, the2995agency's processing timeliness for grants had recovered to previous2996fiscal years' levels by fiscal year 2021. The scope of GAO's report did2997not include possible benefits or costs of USDA's relocation.29982999    Question 3. GAO has had GSA real estate on the high-risk list for3000many years. What is your assessment of the Trump Administration's3001priorities for the federal real estate portfolio? What do you think of3002GSA shrinking space BEFORE agencies understand the impact of President3003Trump's recent return to work order, early resignation offer, and mass3004firings?3005    Answer. Federal real property management has been on GAO's High3006Risk List since 2003 in large part due to underused space. Federal3007agencies have long struggled to identify and shed unneeded space. In3008this administration, GSA is taking a more proactive approach to3009shedding space. However, agencies need reliable data to support real3010property management and decision-making. The Utilizing Space3011Efficiently and Improving Technologies (USE IT) Act now requires3012agencies to measure building utilization and plan to reduce underused3013space, but those measurements are not yet complete.\7\ Agencies are3014required to begin collecting utilization data by July 3, 2025 and3015publicly report utilization data in January 2026. The Act directs the3016Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and GSA to notify any agency that3017fails to achieve an average 60 percent building utilization of its3018excess capacity. At that point, agencies will need to start planning to3019consolidate or dispose of properties. After 2 years, GSA could take3020steps to dispose of those underused spaces.3021---------------------------------------------------------------------------3022    \7\ The USE IT Act was enacted as division B, title III, of the3023Thomas R. Carper Water Resources Development Act of 2024, Pub. L. No.3024118-272, div. B, tit. III, Sec.  2302, 138 Stat. 2992, 2318 (2025). The3025USE IT Act requires covered agencies to begin collecting utilization3026measurements beginning no later than July 3, 2025, 180 days after the3027date of enactment. Sec.  2302(b)(2).30283029    Question 4. President Trump recently ordered all federal workers to3030return to their offices. Was GSA consulted before the Return-to-Work3031Executive Order was signed by the President? If agency headcounts are3032in flux how does GSA know how much space agencies need?3033    Answer. GAO is not aware of the timing or nature of any Trump3034Administration consultations with GSA regarding orders for federal3035employees to return to offices. However, it would be difficult to fully3036understand agency space needs until the agencies complete the USE IT3037Act-mandated utilization measurements later in 2025. GSA is currently3038moving forward on disposing of some owned spaces that are already known3039to have low utilization.30403041    Question 5. In 2024 OMB established a space utilization standard of3042150 square feet per person. Is 150 square feet per person still the3043requirement or is the Trump Administration using a different metric?3044    Answer. The USE IT Act, enacted in January 2025, sets the3045utilization standard at 150 useable square feet per person to measure3046building utilization. The Act required GSA and OMB to establish3047standard methodologies for measuring occupancy in public buildings and3048federally-leased spaces by March 5th, 2025. As of April 2nd, 2025, GSA3049posted a list of occupancy data collection tools that agencies can use3050to meet the requirements of the USE IT Act on their website, but it did3051not post information on the standard methodologies.30523053    Question 6. The Administration has announced its intent to downsize3054the government, move some Federal employees/agencies out of DC, and3055sell some building assets. This would seem to require significant3056planning for space consolidation and reconfiguration of the offices and3057buildings that the agencies will retain and occupy. Can GSA support3058these consolidation needs with half of their staff? How can GSA ensure3059that contractors meet their obligations and provide quality services3060with a 50% reduction in staff? Does GAO see this as a risk of waste,3061fraud, and abuse by the contractors?3062    Answer. GSA officials told us that GSA's restructuring is ongoing,3063and a full reorganization will not be completed until later this year.3064Until then, it is difficult to determine how many staff it will retain3065or how it plans to meet its obligations. As we have reported, a highly3066skilled federal workforce is critical to address challenges, and skills3067gaps within federal agencies impede the government from achieving3068desired results.3069    The government is responsible for overseeing contractors and3070monitoring their performance and compliance with the terms and3071conditions of contracts. For example, to confirm their employees'3072eligibility to work in the U.S., most federal contractors must use the3073E-Verify program. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) expects3074agencies to ensure that their contractors comply, but not all agency3075officials are aware of this expectation. Also, the Department of3076Homeland Security previously gave agencies a quarterly list of3077contractors enrolled in and using E-Verify. However, it discontinued3078this report in 2022 due to data accuracy issues. Without clear3079expectations and useful data, agencies may not be checking their3080contractors' compliance with this requirement.\8\3081---------------------------------------------------------------------------3082    \8\ GAO, Federal Contracting: Agencies Can Better Monitor E-Verify3083Compliance, GAO-24-106219, Washington, D.C. (October 3, 2023).3084---------------------------------------------------------------------------3085    In a separate example from our 2024 report, the Department of3086Veterans Affairs (VA) increasingly relies on contractors for a wide3087range of services. But if contractors perform certain functions--e.g.,3088providing legal advice or supporting budget prep--without additional3089oversight, they could pose risks to government decision-making and3090accountability. OMB has issued guidance to help agencies determine3091which contracted services need this oversight, but VA has yet to fully3092implement this guidance.\9\3093---------------------------------------------------------------------------3094    \9\ GAO, VA Acquisition Management: Oversight of Service Contracts3095Needing Heightened Management Attention Could be Improved, GAO-24-3096106312, Washington, D.C. (Jan. 25, 2024).30973098    Question 7. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and the3099Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) provided GSA with funding to repair and3100construct Land Ports of Entry and utilize emerging and sustainable3101technologies in construction projects. What percentage of BIL and IRA3102funding has GSA obligated? Has GSA frozen any IRA or BIL funding? If3103so, how would that impact projects that are already underway? Are all3104the projects with approved prospectuses proceeding as approved?3105    Answer. According to GSA-provided data, as of January 31st, 2025,3106GSA had obligated roughly 49% of legislated funding from Inflation3107Reduction Act (IRA). According to GSA-provided data, all IRA3108disbursements remain on hold and IRA obligations are limited to active3109construction projects. GSA documents state that programs funded under3110the IRA are currently under review to comply with GSA's new core asset3111strategy and with Executive Order 14154--Unleashing American3112Energy.\10\3113---------------------------------------------------------------------------3114    \10\ Exec. Order No. 14154, 90 Fed. Reg. 8,353 (2025)31153116    Question 8. For 25 years, GSA has spelled out the requirements for3117major Federal projects in a policy titled P100. This policy has3118encapsulated Federal statutory and regulatory requirements, and other3119buildings provisions, to enable effective design and construction that3120meets these needs. Among other things, the P100 requires third party3121certification to verify that key aspects such as energy efficiency are3122met. GSA's new leadership recently revoked the P100. How might this3123affect efficiency and resilience of Federal buildings?3124    Answer. GSA rescinded PBS P100 on February 24, 2025--replacing the3125368-page set of standards with an 11-page interim list of laws,3126executive orders, codes, regulations, and standards for use by3127contracting officers, project teams, and others in developing contract3128documents for design, construction, renovation, or maintenance3129projects. However, GSA documents state that the interim standards are3130not a fully complete list of all applicable laws and regulations and3131stated it is the responsibility of contractors to comply with all3132requirements. GSA also indicated that the standards are interim until a3133process is developed to update the P100 in accordance with the Water3134Resources Development Act (P.L. 118-272).\11\ GAO has not evaluated the3135changes this rescission could have on the efficiency and resilience of3136federal buildings.3137---------------------------------------------------------------------------3138    \11\ The Thomas R. Carper Water Resources Development Act of 20243139included a provision directing GSA to revise the process by which the3140P100 is updated or changed. Pub. L. No. 118-272, div. B, tit. III Sec.31412309, 138 Stat. 2992, 3227 (2025).3142---------------------------------------------------------------------------31433144         Questions to David Winstead, Board Member, Public3145          Buildings Reform Board, from Hon. Greg Stanton31463147    Question 1. GSA uses brokers to negotiate leases and assist in3148property disposals. Brokers must be paid commission while GSA employees3149do not. Should GSA increase its use of brokers to dispose of3150properties?3151    Answer. The scale of the surplus federal buildings that the PBRB3152are analyzing are too large and complicated, to reach maximum sales3153return to the taxpayer through a public auction process. An outside3154broker retained on a property-by-property basis, with specific3155knowledge of the local market, and contacts with the right potential3156buyers is absolutely needed to maximize sales return. The broker fee3157should be substantially below the usual brokerage fee for a federal3158lease, and experts have suggested 1%.31593160    Question 2. If GSA is increasing building disposals and lease3161eliminations, who is going to do the labor-intensive work of disposing3162of leases and space and relocating agencies? Will GSA need to hire3163contractors to assist with the expanded workload?3164    Answer. The current transition and reduction in federal work force3165will require that GSA has competent warranted contracting officers to3166deal with the expedited sale of FASTA assets, and approval of leases.3167In addition, workplace experts are needed to reconfigure space for the3168relocation of federal employees moving to more cost-effective federal3169buildings or leased space.31703171    Question 3. GSA and the FBI have been working on a plan to replace3172the Hoover Building since 2011 because ``the Hoover Building does not3173fully support the FBI's long-term security, space, and building3174condition requirements; is not designed to meet the needs of today's3175FBI; is nearing its life-cycle age; and is exhibiting signs of complete3176deterioration.'' \1\3177---------------------------------------------------------------------------3178    \1\ https://www.gsa.gov/about-us/newsroom/congressional-testimony/3179written-statement-of-elliot-d-doomes-commissioner-of-the-public-3180buildings-service-of-the-us-general-services-administration-before-the-3181subcommittee-on-economic-development-public-buildings-and-emergency-3182management-of-the-committee-on-transportation-121220233183---------------------------------------------------------------------------3184    FBI Director Kash Patel recently told senior FBI officials of plans3185to relocate up to 1,000 employees from Washington, DC to field offices3186around the country and move an additional 500 to Huntsville,3187Alabama.\2\ What plans does the Trump Administration have for the FBI's3188current headquarters?3189---------------------------------------------------------------------------3190    \2\ https://federalnewsnetwork.com/workforce/2025/02/kash-patel-3191sworn-in-at-white-house-as-new-fbi-director-calls-it-the-greatest-3192honor/3193---------------------------------------------------------------------------3194    Answer. GSA needs to respond.31953196    Question 4. To meet Biden-era goals of achieving net-zero building3197emissions by 2050, GSA building owners to report building energy3198consumption, greenhouse gas emissions and water usage to the EPA. Is it3199true that GSA will no longer include the reporting requirements in new3200leases that are 25,000 square feet or greater or where the federal3201government occupies 75% or more of the total building? How will this3202policy shift impact building owners? Doesn't using less water and less3203energy save money for building owners and lower operations costs? How3204does this decision benefit taxpayers?3205    Answer. GSA needs to respond. However, the Real Estate Roundtable's3206Sustainability Committee has worked closely with EPA and DOE, over3207recent years, to ensure that federal LEED requirements are achievable,3208and reflect the current depressed state of commercial office buildings3209and their economics. More efficient HVAC, water and electrical/IT3210systems, with solar and green roof options, have become more achievable3211in recent years in major urban office markets, where ``green''3212buildings can be seen as a competitive advantage in attracting tenants.3213Also, more efficient federal buildings can indeed save money and3214benefit taxpayers.32153216    Question 5. Not all federal space is the same. In addition to3217general office space, agencies use science labs, warehouses, data3218centers, SCIFs, shooting ranges, and more. Should the federal3219government own specialty space and lease all-purpose office space?3220Should GSA dispose of leased space where tenant agencies have made3221significant investments in tenant improvements such as holding cells,3222an evidence room, or counterintelligence equipment?3223    Answer. Major investments from the Public Buildings Fund over the3224past decade have been into more secure federal courthouses, and the3225expansion of highly secure land ports of entry. These types of3226facilities, as well as law enforcement and intelligence/national3227security space, can be highly specialized, with unique security3228requirements, and therefore, have been seen as prime core federal real3229estate holdings. Generic office space, even incorporating SCIF3230facilities, has been seen as more cost-effective to lease, where there3231is great interest and competition from the private sector to provide3232such space and facilities. Where the taxpayer has made major3233investments in tenant build-outs and equipment in leased space, a3234careful cost analysis must be conducted to justify relocation.32353236    Question 6. As GSA eliminates space, should customer-serving3237operations such as Social Security field offices and VA health3238facilities be treated the same as general office space? How can GSA3239ensure that the taxpayers who pay for these federal services will still3240have access to them?3241    Answer. GSA needs to respond.32423243                                      [all]