Overview
Title
To require Federal agencies to impose in-person work requirements for employees of those agencies and to occupy a certain portion of the office space of those agencies, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The ROOMIE Act wants most federal workers to come to the office every day and use a lot of the office space, so big buildings aren't empty. If the government buildings aren't used enough, they might sell them or find new uses, which means moving people around and figuring out how to share spaces better.
Summary AI
The ROOMIE Act requires federal agencies to implement in-person work requirements, ensuring at least 80% of employees work on-site Monday through Friday, excluding public holidays. Agencies must also occupy at least 60% of their office space. If unable to do so, agencies must draft a plan demonstrating how they will achieve this occupancy through collaboration with other agencies. Non-compliance could lead to the sale or termination of leases for underutilized properties.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The bill titled "Reinforce Occupancy Obligations for Maximized Interagency Efficiency Act" or the "ROOMIE Act" aims to address the utilization of federal office spaces by mandating in-person work requirements for federal employees and ensuring a certain percentage of occupancy within federal agency buildings. Introduced by Senator Kennedy, this piece of legislation is currently under the consideration of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs in the U.S. Senate.
General Summary of the Bill
The ROOMIE Act mandates that federal agencies adjust their policies to require a minimum of 80% of their employees to work in-person from Monday through Friday, excluding public holidays. Additionally, the legislation requires that 60% of the usable office space within federal buildings be occupied by agency employees. Should an agency struggle to meet the occupancy requirement, it is obliged to submit a plan detailing how it will achieve this target. Furthermore, the legislation outlines consequences for noncompliance, such as selling or terminating leases for underutilized federal properties.
Significant Issues
A major issue concerning the bill is its potential misalignment with modern work practices. With a global shift toward remote and hybrid working models, mandating in-person work for 80% of federal employees could lead to dissatisfaction and inefficiencies. In addition, enforcement of a 60% occupancy rate in federal buildings might result in unnecessary spending, as it fails to account for possible downsizing or the adoption of flexible office solutions. Another concern arises from the financial and practical implications of terminating leases or selling buildings, which might not always be advisable, particularly for agencies that may still require these spaces.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
Broad Public Impact
If enacted, the ROOMIE Act could affect the general public by potentially increasing governmental efficiency and accountability regarding the use of taxpayer-funded resources. Ensuring that federal buildings are effectively utilized could save public funds in the long run by minimizing wasteful expenditure on underused properties. Conversely, forcing an in-person work model might reduce the appeal of federal employment for those who prefer or require flexible working arrangements, possibly leading to reduced efficiency and innovation in federal services.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Federal employees are directly impacted by the bill's requirement for in-person work, potentially disrupting work-life balance and current flexible working arrangements that have gained popularity. Federal agencies face operational challenges in meeting new occupancy requirements and may need to rearrange space utilization without clear benefits. Additionally, there is a potential financial burden involved in meeting compliance deadlines and the administrative requirements to submit occupancy plans.
The ROOMIE Act, therefore, presents a complex balance between addressing the inefficiencies of underutilized federal assets and adapting to contemporary work environment trends. The success of such legislation hinges on its ability to reconcile these objectives, while ensuring the health and satisfaction of the federal workforce are not compromised.
Financial Assessment
The bill titled "Reinforce Occupancy Obligations for Maximized Interagency Efficiency Act," or the "ROOMIE Act," contains several provisions with noteworthy financial implications. Primarily, it addresses the occupation and use of federal office spaces, with specific requirements that could lead to both direct and indirect financial consequences for federal agencies.
Financial Implications of Office Space Utilization
The bill mandates that federal agencies ensure a minimum office occupancy of 60% of their "usable square feet," with at least 80% of employees working in-person from Monday to Friday. These stipulations could significantly impact federal budgets regarding office maintenance and utilization. As noted in Section 3, there is an issue of wasteful spending on underutilized federal properties, despite the government incurring costs for ownership or leasing. The findings highlight that billions of dollars are being expended on buildings with low occupancy rates, such as those maintaining only 12% capacity on average in Washington, D.C.
Potential Costs and Burdens of Compliance
The consequences of noncompliance include selling or terminating leases for underutilized federal properties, as specified in Section 5. This provision raises concerns about financial burdens that may arise from selling government property or terminating leases prematurely. While this might be a strategy to cut down on unnecessary costs, it may not always be feasible or prudent, especially if the space is functionally relevant but doesn't meet the stringent occupancy requirements.
It also requires federal agencies to collaborate or strategize on how they will meet these occupancy levels, potentially involving employees from other agencies. This stipulation not only adds to the administrative workload but could also entail additional costs in the planning and execution phases, without explicit financial allocations to support this transition.
Additional Administrative Costs
The requirement for the Comptroller General to prepare reports about the implementation adds another layer of administrative expense. Agencies must spend resources potentially without clear indicators of benefit or success, contributing to what might be perceived as an unnecessary financial burden without guaranteed improvement in cost-effectiveness.
Unaddressed Financial Concerns
One key concern is the potential lack of consideration for downsizing or adopting modern office management solutions, which might offer more financially sensible alternatives to rigid occupancy mandates. The sweeping nature of these proposed requirements could lead to overspending on office space maintenance rather than exploring cost-saving innovations like shared workspaces or remote work technologies.
In summary, while the bill aims to reinforce efficient use of federal office spaces, it introduces significant financial considerations. The push to meet occupancy levels might inadvertently result in increased expenditures or financial losses, either through property sales or through the increased administrative activity necessary to achieve and manage compliance.
Issues
The in-person work requirements could be at odds with evolving work environment trends towards remote or hybrid models, potentially resulting in inefficiencies or dissatisfaction among federal employees. This issue appears in Section 4.
Mandating a minimum occupancy of 60% in office spaces may lead to unnecessary spending on office maintenance without considering possibilities for downsizing or modern office management solutions like flexible workspaces, as discussed in Section 4.
The bill could impose significant financial burdens through the provision outlined in Section 5, requiring the sale or termination of leases for noncompliant federal buildings, which may not always be feasible or advisable, especially in cases where space is still functionally needed.
There are concerns about wasteful spending on underutilized federal buildings, as highlighted in Section 3, which cites excessive unused space despite ownership or leasing costs.
The lack of clear exceptions or flexibility in compliance requirements in Sections 4 and 5 could disproportionately impact agencies with special circumstances, such as those with specialized operations or geographic challenges.
The definition of 'usable square feet' left to the discretion of the Administrator, as mentioned in Section 2, introduces potential ambiguity around how compliance with occupancy requirements is measured across different agencies.
Section 3 raises significant health risks associated with maintaining underutilized federal buildings, such as the presence of Legionella bacteria, without providing clear mechanisms for addressing these health vulnerabilities.
The bill imposes an additional administrative burden by requiring agencies to create occupancy plans and the Comptroller General to prepare reports, as outlined in Sections 4(a)(2) and 4(b), without clear indicators of benefit or metrics for success.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides the short title of a legislative act, stating that it may be referred to as the “Reinforce Occupancy Obligations for Maximized Interagency Efficiency Act” or the “ROOMIE Act”.
2. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides definitions for key terms used in the Act, including "Administrator," which refers to the Administrator of General Services, and "Federal agency," which is as defined by section 621 of title 40, U.S. Code. It also explains "Federal civilian real property" based on the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 2016 and specifies that "usable square feet" is defined by the Administrator.
3. Findings Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress found that many Federal agencies are not fully using their office spaces, with some agencies operating below 25% capacity. This issue leads to wasted spending on underused buildings, with health risks from bacteria like Legionella emerging due to prolonged underutilization.
Money References
- Congress finds that— (1) according to a 2023 review of Federal agencies by the Government Accountability Office— (A) 17 Federal agencies “used on average an estimated 25 percent or less of the capacity of their headquarters buildings”; and (B) 1 Federal agency headquarters examined would only occupy 67 percent of the office space of the Federal agency if 100 percent of the employees of the Federal agency worked in-person; (2) according to a 2024 report by the Public Buildings Reform Board established by section 4(a) of the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 2016 (40 U.S.C. 1303 note; Public Law 114–287)— (A) in the National Capital Region, the Federal Government owns or leases almost 90,000,000 square feet of property; (B) a sample of Federal properties in Washington, D.C., maintained only 12 percent capacity on average; (C) “billions of dollars are being expended on buildings that should be disposed of given the new normal of low occupancy”; and (D) some Federal agencies have developed cultural expectations that they should retain a “flagship” property despite significant under usage of that property; and (3) according to a 2023 report by the Office of Audits of the Office of Inspector General of the General Services Administration— (A) Federal Government buildings can pose significant health risks if they remain underutilized; and (B) since July 2023, “elevated levels of Legionella”, which is a bacterium that can cause serious infection and death, “were found in six GSA-controlled buildings, all of which are open to the public”. ---
4. In-person work requirements Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill section requires each Federal agency to ensure that at least 80% of their employees work in person from Monday to Friday, excluding legal public holidays, and that at least 60% of their office space is occupied. If an agency doesn't have enough employees to fill 60% of the space, they must create and submit a plan to reach this occupancy within a year, utilizing employees from any Federal agency. Additionally, within a year and 120 days after the Act’s enactment, a report on implementing these requirements must be submitted to Congress.
5. Noncompliance Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
If a federal agency does not meet certain deadlines, it must either sell, terminate, or avoid renewing leases for federal civilian properties. If the agency owns the property, they must sell it; if they lease the property, they should terminate the lease early if possible or ensure it is not renewed.