FR 2021-02695

The document from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), published in the Federal Register, outlines the procedures and recommendations for managing federal real estate properties. These recommendations primarily involve identifying properties for disposal, consolidation, or relocation. The Public Buildings Reform Board (PBRB) is tasked with deciding the exact actions for each property, aided by data from the General Services Administration (GSA). The document gives insights into the criteria used for evaluating properties, particularly emphasizing financial returns and marketability.

Summary

Evaluation Process:
The OMB's evaluation process focuses on various criteria, including financial returns, property marketability, and the impact on the agency's mission. Properties are ranked high, medium, or low priority based on these factors. The primary objective is to ensure that the federal government's real property is utilized optimally and efficiently.

Office vs. Non-Office Utilization:
For office buildings, the document introduces a standard utilization rate calculation—dividing the total administrative office space by headcount. However, it suggests that creating a similar standard for non-office buildings is currently impractical due to their diverse purposes. Thus, these are evaluated on a case-by-case basis by real estate experts.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Lack of Specificity and Transparency:
One issue is the absence of a detailed list of specific properties under consideration for disposal or consolidation. This lack of transparency could hinder public accountability and raise questions about the selection process.

Criteria Details:
The document does not provide an in-depth explanation of how different evaluation criteria are weighted, which leaves room for ambiguity in understanding what elevates a project to high or medium priority.

Utilization Rate Standards:
While the document introduces a formula for office spaces, the lack of standardized evaluation criteria for non-office buildings might be seen as a gap in providing a comprehensive understanding of property efficiency.

Complex Language:
The technical language used may be challenging for the general public to understand, potentially limiting meaningful public engagement with the process.

Public Impact

Broadly, the notice reflects an effort to optimize federal property management, which could potentially lead to better use of public resources. By focusing on properties that don't serve current needs efficiently, the OMB aims to reduce costs and improve space utilization. This initiative could result in financial savings and more strategic use of federal properties, benefiting taxpayers.

Impact on Stakeholders

Government Agencies:
Agencies may face operational changes, such as moving to new locations or adapting to shared spaces, which could disrupt their usual workflows. However, these changes may also result in improved facilities or efficiencies.

Public Buildings Reform Board:
PBRB has a substantial role, having to vet properties and make decisions that align with public and governmental interests. This responsibility carries challenges in balancing transparency, efficiency, and effectiveness.

General Public:
While indirect, the process could lead to enhanced public services by reallocating resources more effectively. However, without clear communication, the public may remain skeptical about the benefits derived from such property decisions.

In sum, while the document showcases efforts toward improving federal property management, it brings to attention several areas where further clarification and transparency could improve trust and understanding among stakeholders.