A bill that could help clear the way for a new Alabama State House is the first one on the agenda for the House of Representatives when the legislative session resumes Tuesday.

There has been talk off and on for years about replacing the State House, a retrofitted building constructed in 1963 for the state Highway Department. The bill, SB222, directs the state Finance Department to transfer a possible site for a new State House to the Legislative Council, a panel of 20 lawmakers. The site is now a parking lot behind the current State House and is already owned by the state.

The bill would give the Legislative Council “the authority to contract with an appropriate party, including, but not limited to, the Retirement Systems of Alabama, to construct and maintain a building that, upon completion, would be designated as the Alabama State House.” The bill has passed the Senate and won approval in a House committee last week.

Coinciding with the legislation, the RSA is seeking proposals from architectural firms for site investigation and design of the project. The RSA, with a long track record of constructing office buildings, resort hotels, and golf courses, will accept proposals through May 19.

Sen. Sam Givhan, R-Huntsville, said many decisions remain before the project goes forward. Givhan and Rep. Chris Pringle, R-Mobile, are sponsors of the bill because they are co-chairs of the Legislative Council.

“Right now there is still a debate about are we going to do something,” Givhan said. “Where are we going to do it? And what’s it going to look like? So there’s a whole lot of things that are open questions. Of course, important among that are what do we think it’s going to cost. You and I both know that construction costs have gone up a lot over the last few years.”

The RSA asked for cost estimates in its request for design proposals. Givhan said if the project proceeds with the RSA financing and building it, the Legislature would make lease payments. The RSA already has eight office buildings in the state government complex of downtown Montgomery.

“They have more experience building buildings than we do,” Givhan said. “I think they would probably get better price concessions than if we were to put out an RFP and bid it out. The idea would be that the Legislature would then lease it back, at least for a period of time.”

The site behind the State House is bordered by Ripley Street, Pelham Street, Jackson Street, and Washington Avenue. Another possible site is the parking lot next to the State House on the north side. Givhan said he and some other lawmakers prefer that site on the north side because it would directly line up with the State Capitol. But there are drawbacks to that site.

“We would have to do a lot of drainage work because of the low level there,” Givhan said. “The building (the existing State House) has flooded several times, the lower floors. So that is a concern. Now that can be fixed, but it takes money to fix it. How much we’re talking there, I don’t know.”

The other problem with the site north of the State House is that it is narrow and could require a taller building that could interfere with the scenic view of the Capitol.

“Do we want a tall building overshadowing the back of the Capitol and ruining the landscape there to view it up Dexter?” Givhan said. “I don’t think we would want that either.”

The bill and the RSA’s request for proposals are the latest of several developments on a new State House in the last few years. Last September, the Legislative Council directed senior staff officials at the Legislature to explore the idea of a new State House and discuss it with the RSA. A facility assessment conducted by an engineering firm in March 2020 found that the State House, an eight-story, 315,000 square foot building, needed $51 million in repairs, renovations and replacements over 10 years.

Givhan said there is a strong case for replacing the State House. That includes the limited space for public access, poor accessibility for people with disabilities, and the flooding and mold problems.

“It’s reasonable for government to function well and to have a way to interact with the public,” Givhan said. “Look at all the government buildings we’ve got all over Montgomery. Were they mistakes? Is it unreasonable to ask that the legislative building be actually set up for being able to conduct government versus being in a makeshift building? To me, it’s not a hard decision. Now, I don’t know how many other people are going to go along with it. But we’ll see.”