"Federal Courthouse Design and Construction: Examining the Costs to the Taxpayer"

House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management

2025-05-20

Loading video...

Source: Congress.gov

Summary

This meeting addressed the costs associated with federal courthouse design, construction, and operation, focusing on historical overbuilding and the impact of updated design guides on taxpayer spending and efficiency.[ 01:22:40-01:23:09 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

Themes

Historical Overbuilding and Increased Costs

Historically, federal courthouses have been overbuilt and excessively costly.[ 01:25:07 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 A 2010 GAO review found 33 courthouses were overbuilt by 3.56 million square feet, costing taxpayers $835 million in construction and an additional $51 million annually in maintenance.[ 01:23:18-01:23:22 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 The subcommittee halted new courthouse authorizations until the courts updated their property list and asset management plan.[ 01:23:29-01:23:40 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 The 2021 design guide is projected to increase courthouse size by 6% and construction costs by 12%, potentially adding tens of millions of dollars to projects.[ 01:23:59-01:24:07 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 For instance, applying the 2021 guide to seven projects would have increased costs by an estimated $143 million.[ 01:31:05 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 Concerns were also raised about specific design guide elements, such as the unacceptability of polished cement floors, indicating a potential disconnect with fiscal realities.

Judiciary's Efforts and Justifications

The judiciary emphasized its commitment to being good stewards of taxpayer dollars while fulfilling its constitutional mission. They initiated a 3% space reduction program in 2013, which surpassed its goal by 2018, leading to over $100 million in cumulative cost avoidance. A "no net new" policy ensures that any space increase within a circuit is offset by an equal reduction elsewhere. The judiciary also implemented a capital security program to address deficiencies in existing courthouses, offering lower-cost alternatives to new construction. Courtroom sharing policies have been in place since 2011 for new construction and existing facilities, particularly for senior, magistrate, and bankruptcy judges. Security, especially the need for distinct circulation pathways for public, restricted, and secure areas, was cited as a primary driver for the 2021 design guide revisions. The judiciary stated that projected judgeships are no longer used in construction calculations, focusing instead on a 10-year window for existing judges.

Collaboration and Oversight Deficiencies

The GAO found that the judiciary did not fully collaborate with the General Services Administration (GSA) when updating the design guide, particularly regarding new circulation standards.[ 01:31:58-01:32:50 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 GSA expressed concerns that these revised standards were based on an outdated 2012 study of courthouses previously found to be oversized.[ 01:32:32-01:32:50 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 While the Federal Protective Service (FPS) was consulted, they indicated their role primarily concerned exterior property, not the design guide itself.[ 01:42:50-01:43:12 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 Congressional oversight through hearings and appropriations is crucial, as the judiciary largely sets its own requirements.[ 01:46:29-01:46:34 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 There is a recognized lack of comprehensive data on courtroom utilization, which GSA historically has not tracked, though the judiciary's CATCOM Committee studies this issue.[ 01:51:39-01:51:59 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

Fiscal Responsibility and Resource Allocation

The federal judiciary is requesting $863 million for new courthouse construction in fiscal year 2026. GSA faces significant deferred maintenance needs, totaling over $24 billion, with $8.3 billion specifically for courthouses. GSA is committed to shedding costly, underused space and focusing capital on core, mission-critical facilities, selling federal properties and terminating vacant leases to save money. The Inflation Reduction Act provided GSA with $3.4 billion for building renovations and improvements, including 42 federal courthouses, which are being utilized carefully for cost-effective solutions. The judiciary acknowledges the tough budget times, noting that rent is a significant expense, and prioritizes personnel over additional space.

Tone of the Meeting

The tone of the meeting was largely concerned and probing, driven by a bipartisan commitment to fiscal responsibility and accountability in federal courthouse construction.[ 01:24:55-01:24:59 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
[ 01:23:09-01:23:18 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 While there was appreciation for the witnesses' presence and efforts, direct questions challenged the judiciary's justifications for increased space and cost.[ 01:22:40 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 The judiciary, in turn, emphasized its commitment to being a good steward of taxpayer funds and highlighted the unique operational needs and security considerations for courthouses. The discussion underscored a serious effort to balance essential security requirements with the need to prevent wasteful spending and ensure efficient use of resources.[ 01:24:30-01:24:41 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

Participants

Transcript

?
Unknown
Thank you.
?
Unknown
Amen.
The Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management will come to order.  Chair asks unanimous consent that I be authorized to declare a recess at any time during today's hearing without objection.  So ordered.  Chair also asks unanimous consent that members not on the subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at today's hearing and ask questions without objection.  So ordered.  As a reminder, if members wish   To insert a document into the record, please also email it to DocumentsTI at mail.house.gov.  The chair now recognizes himself for the purposes of an opening statement for five minutes.  Let me just begin with an apology to those who have traveled far and waited long and dealt with Washington, D.C.  for our tardiness here.  Sometimes things are out of our control.  It's really not an excuse, but I just want to acknowledge that your time is valuable and we appreciate it.   I want to thank our witnesses for being here today to discuss the costs associated with designing, constructing, and operating federal courthouses.  In 2021, the United States courts updated their official design guide for designing and constructing new federal courthouses.  Following the publication of the new design guide, this subcommittee requested that the Government Accountability Office examine the changes that were made and   the extent to which these changes would have an impact on the size and cost of courthouses.  We made this request because there has been a long history of taxpayer dollars wasted on overbuilt federal courthouses, and we just don't see that as needing to continue.   In 2010, GAO reviewed 33 courthouses built between 2000 and 2010 and found they were overbuilt by 3.56 million square feet, costing the taxpayers $835 million plus $51 million annually in additional operation and maintenance costs.  That's real money.   Following those findings, this committee agreed on a bipartisan basis to stop authorizing new courthouses until the courts updated their process for setting their courthouse priorities.
Only after the courts updated their asset management plan or the AMP process and used it to adjust their property list for new courthouses did this committee restart authorizing courthouse projects.  In 2021,   the courts issued a revised design guide for new courthouses.  Since no courthouses have been constructed using the 2021 design guide to conduct the 2024 report, GAO looked at six recently constructed courthouses that had been built using the previous 2007 design guide.   gao found that if the new design guide had been used for these six courthouses it would have increased the size by almost six percent and the construction cost by almost 12 just to reiterate in 2010 gao found that courthouses were overbuilt by more than three million square feet the new design guide now will now well result the new design guide now will result in six percent more space   This is at least questionable, if not unacceptable.  On top of this, despite the results of its own research arm, the Federal Judicial Center, indicating that courtrooms sit dark most days, district court judges have continued to argue that each of them is entitled to a dedicated courtroom, even though state and local courts across the country, many of which handle far more cases, routinely share courtrooms without issue.   To accommodate this perceived entitlement, the federal judiciary often includes vacant or unfilled judgeships when calculated the number of courtrooms required in a new courthouse.  This results in overbuilt facilities with unused courtrooms and significantly increased construction and maintenance costs.  The chair expects that we will either hear that a major driver of the design change is safety and security, particularly the size of circulation spaces.
And while the chair agrees that security is important and legitimate consideration, it is our duty to question these things so that we get the most value, including with the efficacy that goes with that.  However, the court's own methodology for prioritizing courthouse projects assigns security just 10% of the weighted score, while courtroom and chamber needs make up 50%.  It seems lopsided, but here we're not here to judge, at least prematurely, we wanna get the answers.   What is even more concerning is that the expansion of the circulation pattern is based in part on an outdated 2012 review of then existing courthouses, some of which were the subject of GAO's 2010 review that they found were overbuilt.  It seemed the changes in the design guide had little to do with addressing security issues,   So I'm surprised by how much of the design guide focuses on things like millwork and floor and wall finishes and includes notes like polished cement is unacceptable.  Frankly, it's hard to believe that at a time when Congress and the president are focused on downsizing the federal government and balancing the budget, the judiciary remains so tone deaf to the fiscal realities.  I mean, I walk on polished, probably unpolished concrete around here every single day and I'm perfectly happy with it.  The United States courts,   A courthouse project priority for fiscal year 2026 includes a request for $863 million for new courthouse construction.  The United States courts are asking Congress and more importantly, our bosses, the American taxpayers, to spend hundreds of millions of dollars of new courthouse construction   despite decades of oversight that has found the design guides have enabled the construction of courthouses that are too large and too costly.  Going forward, Congress must take a hard look at the construction priorities of the United States courts, especially the 2021 design guide to ensure the taxpayer dollars are not being wasted.  We need to ensure that proposals for new courthouses that this committee must authorize make sense, reduce costs to the taxpayer, and not overbill.
With that, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses.  And just prior to recognizing the ranking member, I want to enter into the record this letter from the associated builders and contractors regarding project labor agreements and the increased costs associated with those.  And without objection, so ordered.  The chair now recognizes the ranking member, Friedman, for five minutes for her opening statement.

Sign up for free to see the full transcript

Accounts help us prevent bots from abusing our site. Accounts are free and will allow you to access the full transcript.

Sign up