[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



THE LOOKING AHEAD SERIES: THE ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL'S STRATEGIC PLAN 
                         FOR THE 118TH CONGRESS

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               before the

                           COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
                             ADMINISTRATION

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                            FEBRUARY 9, 2023

                               __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration




                  [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
               
               
               



                               ______
                                 

                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

52-991                    WASHINGTON : 2023

                           www.govinfo.gov
                          www.cha.house.gov










                   Committee on House Administration

                    BRYAN STEIL, WISCONSIN, Chairman

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia            JOSEPH MORELLE, New York,
H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia              Ranking Member
GREG MURPHY, North Carolina          TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama
STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma             DEREK KILMER, Washington
MIKE CAREY, Ohio                     NORMA TORRES, California
ANTHONY D'ESPOSITO, New York
LAUREL LEE, Florida








                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                           Opening Statements

The Honorable Bryan Steil, Wisconsin, Chairman...................     1
The Honorable Joseph Morelle, New York, Ranking Member...........     3

                           Prepared Statement

J. Brett Blanton, Architect of the Capitol.......................     4

                       Submission for the Record

Architect of the Capitol, Report To Congressional Committees.....    48








 
THE LOOKING AHEAD SERIES: THE ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL'S STRATEGIC PLAN 
                         FOR THE 118TH CONGRESS

                              ----------                              


                       THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2023

                 Committee on House Administration,
                                  House of Representatives,
                                                    Washington, DC.

    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:06 a.m., in 
room 1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Bryan Steil 
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Steil, Loudermilk, Murphy, Bice, 
Carey, D'Esposito, Lee, Morelle, Sewell, Kilmer, and Torres.
    Staff present: Tim Monahan, Staff Director; Caleb Hays, 
Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel, Acting 
Parliamentarian; Hillary Lassiter, Chief Clerk; Aubrey Wilson, 
Deputy Staff Director and Director of Oversight; Nick Crocker, 
Deputy Staff Director; Elliot Smith, Deputy Director of 
Oversight; Jamie Fleet, Minority Staff Director; Khalil Abboud, 
Minority Deputy Staff Director; Matthew Schlesinger, Minority 
Oversight Counsel; Enumale Agada, Minority Oversight Counsel; 
and Owen Reilly, Minority Professional Staff Member.

 OPENING STATEMEMT OF HON. BRYAN STEIL, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 
     WISCONSIN, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

    The Chairman. The Committee on House Administration will 
come to order.
    Welcome everyone to the first hearing of our ``Looking 
Ahead Series: The Architect of the Capitol's Strategic Plan for 
the 118th Congress.''
    I note that a quorum is present.
    Without objection, the Chair may declare a recess at any 
time.
    The Committee is meeting today to hear testimony from J. 
Brett Blanton, Architect of the Capitol.
    I now recognize myself for the purposes of making an 
opening statement.
    Thank you to our witness, Mr. Blanton, for coming to 
testify before our committee today.
    The Architect of the Capitol, or the AOC, is one of the 
largest legislative branch entities, with over 2,400 employees, 
and an annual operating budget of over $1 billion. Every day, 
employees from the AOC provide maintenance and work to preserve 
the United States Capitol campus, which is recognized around 
the world as a symbol for the American Government and the 
freedoms that we enjoy.
    I want to say thank you to all the employees of the AOC for 
the work they do behind the scenes to keep the campus both 
functional and beautiful.
    We're also wrapping up a congressional transition, where 
the AOC, along with support offices, coordinated the moves of 
nearly 300-member committee and leadership offices. This is no 
small feat, and I want to thank everyone who assisted in that 
transition.
    The AOC has also played an important role in the full 
reopening of campus after nearly 3 years of closures under the 
previous majority, and I'm excited that the Capitol's Visitor 
Center will start welcoming visitors for Saturday tours again, 
beginning March 4th. Changes to the House campus are occurring. 
Following the move of the Department of Health and Human 
Services, we have new opportunities in O'Neill.
    Last Congress, I did a walk-through of the third phase of 
the Cannon renewal project, which is now in its final phase. 
That construction project is the most expensive the AOC has 
ever managed, with cost overruns of over 23 percent. I look 
forward to learning how to best protect taxpayers in this 
regard moving forward.
    Additionally, the AOC plays a central role in campus 
security, with you serving as one of the three voting members 
the United States Capitol Police Board. In fact, just last 
week, the board voted to put up a fence for the State of the 
Union, which cost nearly $1 million. I have questions about 
this decision.
    Your organization serves both Chambers and interacts with 
Members, Committees, and their staff more than almost any other 
legislative branch entities. With the AOC playing such a role--
with the AOC playing such a role here on--on the Capitol 
campus, I'm disappointed that over the last few Congresses, 
there's hardly been any hearings focused on your organization's 
leadership and long-term planning.
    I acknowledge this was an error of previous Congresses. In 
fact, you were appointed 3 years ago, and this is the first 
time you've been invited to testify specifically to the 
strategic plan of the organization. This is the first time in 6 
years that the committee has held a hearing on this specific 
topic. I believe there's been a lack of oversight of your 
organization over the last several Congresses, which at times 
has resulted in lapses of accountability.
    As Chairman, I can assure you that accountability starts 
today. This Committee will bring more transparency and 
accountability into how Congress, including the AOC, functions. 
Where we can, we want to do so in a non-partisan way.
    Our goal for today's hearing is to get an update from you 
on numerous projects and initiatives under your organization's 
purview, some of which I briefly mentioned, and to learn more 
about the strategic plan for the organization.
    I'm also going to address the elephant in the room: We need 
to discuss your personal role as head of the AOC and 
allegations that have been brought to light by the AOC 
inspector general. I've read the inspector general report, and 
the allegations are highly concerning. I want to give you the 
opportunity to address the IG report head on, and I expect you 
to be truthful and transparent.
    This hearing today will be about more than just the IG 
report. It will also include discussions about how 
accountability needs to be reestablished throughout multiple 
functions of your organization. After 3 years of being 
architect, it is clear that there is still a lot of work ahead 
to get the AOC to the standard of performance and service that 
Congress expects from a $1 billion a year investment.
    I fully acknowledge that part of that requires an engaged 
Congress that works to get the AOC the resources and structure 
it needs to perform. From where I'm sitting, it seems to be 
that after 3 years under your leadership, the organization 
still faces significant challenges, and the allegations in the 
IG report need to be addressed before the AOC organization can 
move on.
    Clearly, we have a lot to talk about today, and I look 
forward to hearing from you.
    I now recognize the Ranking Member, Mr. Morelle, for 5 
minutes for the purpose of making an opening statement.

OPENING STATEMEMT OF HON. JOSEPH MORELLE, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 
  NEW YORK, RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

    Mr. Morelle. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Steil, and 
thank you for convening today's hearing.
    I'd also like to thank Architect Brett Blanton for his 
presence today. I know the Members are anxious for your 
testimony, sir.
    As the Chairman has said, the agency of the Architect of 
the Capitol plays a pivotal role in making the Capitol complex 
a place in which my colleagues and I are privileged to work, 
safe, welcoming, and functional. In addition to preserving the 
House and Senate Office Buildings and the Capitol Grounds, this 
agency is also responsible for maintaining the Capitol Visitors 
Center, the Botanic Garden, two entities that provide 
additional ways for American citizens to connect with their 
government.
    The Architect of the Capitol employees are ubiquitous here 
in the House. They are a necessary and invaluable component of 
the broader machinery that allows this institution to run 
smoothly. My staff has the opportunity to meet with 
representatives from each unit of the Architect of the Capitol 
every month to discuss the agency's major projects and day-to-
day operations. I want to thank you and your team for your 
continued efforts to ensure that those of us in Congress can 
fulfill our responsibilities.
    Notwithstanding the enormous dedication of the agency's 
employees, in October 2022, the report released by the 
inspector general, which is referenced by Chairman Steil, 
points to serious problems within the Architect of the Capitol.
    While some of these problems have relatively simple 
solutions, there are others that speak to more deep-rooted 
issues with the agency's leadership, such as a lack of 
transparency, inappropriate use of government resources and 
credentials, and insufficient or ineffective internal 
mechanisms to check questionable practices and behavior.
    I expect today's hearing to cover a wide range--excuse me--
of important topics, including what AOC leadership is doing to 
combat some systemic problems within the agency, and very much 
look forward to this discussion. With that, Mr. Chairman, I 
yield back.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
    Without objection, all other Members' opening statements 
will be made part of the hearing record if they are submitted 
to the committee clerk by 5 p.m. today.
    Pursuant to paragraph (b) of Committee rule 6, will the 
witness please stand and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly 
swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give is 
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help 
you God?
    Mr. Blanton. Yes.
    The Chairman. Let the record show that the witness answered 
in the affirmative.
    I'll now introduce our witness, Mr. Brett Blanton. Mr. 
Blanton, we appreciate you being here today and look forward to 
your testimony.
    As a reminder, we've read your written statement, and it 
will appear in the full record hearing. Under committee rule 9, 
you are to limit your oral presentation to a brief summary of 
your written statement, unless I, in consultation with the 
Ranking Member, extend that time period.
    Please remember to press the button on the microphone in 
front of you so that it is on and the Members can hear you. 
When you begin to speak, the light in front of you will turn 
green; after 4 minutes, the light will turn yellow; when the 
red light comes on, your 5 minutes has expired, and we will ask 
you to please wrap up.
    I now recognize Mr. Blanton for 5 minutes.

    STATEMENT OF J. BRETT BLANTON, ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

    Mr. Blanton. Thank you. Chairman Steil, Ranking Member 
Morelle, and Members of the Committee, thank you for the 
opportunity to testify before you. I welcome the opportunity to 
share more about the agency's work, our efforts to support 
Congress in the path ahead. I also appreciate the opportunity 
to address the allegations by the agency's inspector general 
since this is the first opportunity I've had to be able to do 
so.
    Roughly 2,400 Architect of the Capitol team employees 
support the daily operations of Congress, the Supreme Court, 
and the Library of Congress. Coming into this role, I quickly 
realized that this critical work requires attention 24 hours a 
day. The daily care of the Capitol complex is 18.4 million 
square feet of historic facilities, 570 acres of grounds, and 
thousands of work of art, is far beyond what our Founding 
Fathers could've imagined.
    I have spent my entire career in public service. I 
graduated the Naval Academy, and have served our country with 
distinction ever since. I was honored to have been selected by 
a bipartisan, bicameral commission, and to have been nominated 
into this position.
    I could never have imagined that I would be part of the 
response of an unprecedented worldwide pandemic within the 
first few weeks of my confirmation. I am proud of the work that 
the agency has done to procure supplies and services for the 
legislative and judicial branch.
    Since being sworn in, I have remained focused on safety of 
our employees, as well as everyone in the Capitol complex. As 
you all know well, we then faced another extraordinary and 
unprecedented challenge with the breach of the Capitol on 
January 6th. Once again, I was so proud and grateful of the 
unwavering and steadfast work of so many AOC employees in order 
to ensure the mission of Congress could resume as quickly as 
possible.
    Given the incredible challenges that the agency has 
overcome the last 2 years, I am frustrated by the current 
distraction created by the inspector general's report regarding 
the execution of my responsibilities in this position. I 
wholeheartedly reject any assertation that I have engaged in 
unethical behavior during my service to this country.
    While serving in this particular role, I have taken my 
commitment to transform the agency's culture to promote 
positive workplace for every AOC employee. Moreover, I have 
fully invested to ensure that I meet the responsibilities and 
the expectations of this role.
    Since I have only had the opportunity to review the 
inspector general's summary report, I can only speak to the 
language I have seen. I will say that the report is filled with 
errors, omissions, mischaracterizations, misstatements, and 
conclusory statements lacking evidence. For example, the agency 
stated publicly the purpose of the Architect's vehicle is for 
the direct support of the continuity of programs and to allow 
the Architect to remotely support agency operations and campus 
emergencies.
    In the legislative branch, information about these programs 
is shared on a need-to-know basis. It is inaccurate to 
characterize the State of the vehicle is only for home-to-work 
purposes. The agency is a 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week 
operation; as such, having the vehicle with the architect is 
vital for him or her ability to communicate and quickly and 
safely return to campus at any time.
    Shortly after 9/11, the vehicle was appropriated to 
directly support resiliency, security, and continuity of 
operation programs for Congress and the congressional 
community, including my service on the Capitol Police Board. I 
realize I don't live in a--I realize that we don't live in a 
world of absolutes. With that said, I caution against the use 
of yes-or-no questions as they don't provide the necessary 
context for any answer.
    With the emphasis on safety and security, I am working 
every day to coordinate with partners across campus to improve 
and preserve the Capitol campus for those visiting and working. 
As a member of the Capitol Police Board, I continue to work in 
a productive partnership with the U.S. Capitol Police, the 
House and Sergeant-at-Arms, and other security officials. 
Physical and cybersecurity are my top priorities. In addition, 
I remain focused on the implementation of measures to make 
ensure the AOC is doing everything possible to ensure we are 
safer and more prepared than we were 2 years ago.
    To conclude, we recognize the importance of an adequate, 
long-term, multi-year approach to facilities management 
focusing on maintaining, preserving the Capitol campus, while 
also modernizing facilities. With support of Congress and the 
incredible talent of the skillful team, I am proud of what we 
have accomplished and look forward to the success of future 
projects.
    On behalf of all the AOC staff, I look forward to your 
questions. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Blanton follows:]


[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    
    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Blanton.
    We will now question the witness under the 5-minute rule 
beginning with me, followed by the Ranking Member. We'll then 
alternate between sides.
    I now recognize myself for the purpose of questioning our 
witness.
    Mr. Blanton, the AOC inspector general has alleged that you 
misused your official vehicle in a variety of manners, misled 
investigators, impersonated a police officer, and violated 
ethics by hosting private tours of the Capitol when it was 
closed to the public. The report is very detailed, over 800 
pages, and I request unanimous consent that the 10-page 
executive summary of the IG report be entered into the official 
record.
    No objection, so ordered.
    [The information referred to follows:]


[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    
    Mr. Blanton, this report was released 3 months ago; and 
yet, you have made no public statements prior to today's 
opening statement denouncing these allegations or explaining 
these circumstances to the American people. This Committee has 
promised to give you the opportunity to further explain 
yourself on the record, and I'd like to begin with a series of 
questions.
    Are the facts set forward in this IG report true?
    Mr. Blanton. I would say, they are an interpretation, and 
they had a narrative that was, I would say, predetermined that 
they--in the 10-page summary report, where they picked facts to 
try to justify a narrative.
    The Chairman. Did you--so let me maybe then dive in. Did 
you--did you impersonate a police officer or misrepresent 
yourself as law enforcement, as noted in the 10-page executive 
summary?
    Mr. Blanton. No. It's actually very, very interesting, 
because when--I was subpoenaed to testify when a drunk driver 
hit my 17-year-old daughter's boyfriend's car. When I talked to 
the Commonwealth attorney, they asked me, are you MPD? 
Metropolitan Police Department, I'm sorry, just so everybody 
knows. I said, no. I said, I'm a member of the Capitol Police 
Board. I even looked over to my wife, and I go, I wonder why 
they would think I was MPD.
    Now, in that time, and in there, I sat in the lobby of the 
courthouse in Fairfax County for approximately 2 hours. The 
only thing I did was show the Nest Cam video of the vehicle 
striking my daughter's vehicle--my daughter's boyfriend's 
vehicle to the Commonwealth attorney. Our IG knew that, but 
they chose to characterize it that I was sitting in pretrial 
meetings as well as judicial proceedings, which I was in none 
of that. I was in the lobby the entire time of the Capitol--of 
the--of the courthouse in Fairfax County.
    The Chairman. Thank you for providing additional color on 
that point. Maybe I--maybe I can follow up with a--with an 
additional question here. You referenced in your opening 
statement regarding private use of the--of a government 
vehicle. Did you use the government vehicle for personal 
purposes?
    Mr. Blanton. I--I wouldn't call it private use or personal 
use. As I alluded to, the job is 24/7. Being able to respond to 
Congress and the Supreme Court requires me to be in a State 
that I could get back to Congress at any time. If--I'm going to 
say a hypothetical here. If I am somewhere which would require 
me to travel in a personal vehicle in an opposite direction of 
the Capitol to pick up my government vehicle that Congress 
appropriated so that I could respond back and use the equipment 
in the vehicle to communicate with my staff, to communicate 
with the Capitol Police, and to communicate with the Capitol 
Police Board, if I had to do that, and then go back to 
Congress, that just delays the reaction of my agency and my 
leadership to our agency to the entire Capitol campus, and 
frankly puts everybody at risk.
    The Chairman. During the period of time from August 8 to 
August 23 in 2020, while you were on leave from the AOC, I 
believe for a family vacation to either South Carolina or 
Florida, was that the purpose for using that vehicle at that 
time?
    Mr. Blanton. I used that vehicle, to be honest, because I 
was under the frank assumption that I had to use that vehicle, 
because one of the unique things about the vehicle is, 
regardless of where I am, I am in communications with the 
Capitol Police Board.
    While I was there, in Florida and in South Carolina, I was 
attending meetings, because at that time everybody was in a 
virtual world, so I was--I was working. It was more likely an 
alternate work site. Also, I took care, in when I planned my 
trip, to be in a location that had the opportunity for military 
airlift should an emergency happen for me to be able to get 
back to the Washington, DC. area.
    The Chairman. Thank you for that information. I would note 
that the policy defines HTW transport as, quote, ``the use of 
an AOC motor vehicle to transport employees between their homes 
and places of work. This includes the use of an AOC motor 
vehicle solely for the purpose of supplementing part or all of 
the employee's commute.''
    I'll ask just one final question on this point. I know we 
have a lot of Members that want to also be asking questions. On 
January 6th, a date obviously of significance here on Capitol 
Hill, did you utilize your government-issued vehicle to come to 
the Capitol?
    Mr. Blanton. I absolutely utilized my government vehicle, 
and I'm glad to be able to make this point to everybody. That 
vehicle was served as AOC's mobile command post during the 
events of January 6th. I was in that vehicle listening to 
police radio on my computer, and on my phone, directing AOC 
personnel in our support of Congress during that event.
    The Chairman. But did you drive the vehicle?
    Mr. Blanton. No, I did not drive the vehicle back. It 
would've been not prudent to drive the vehicle back, because 
there would've been next to no way to get onto this campus at 
that time with the number of people that were there. That 
actually serves the--that actually demonstrates the purpose of 
why the vehicles that AOC, the House and Senate Sergeant-at-
Arms have, is because they--because we are able to operate 
remotely and be able to be in command and control of all of our 
staff because of that vehicle. That is also why it is prudent 
that vehicle exists, and that the vehicle is with me, because, 
for example, hypothetically, if I'm at Home Depot and something 
happens, then I would have to--there would be a delayed 
response to this--to the Capitol complex.
    The Chairman. Well, cognizant of the time, I appreciate 
your willingness to provide additional details as it relates to 
the inspector general's report. I will note my frustration that 
it has taken you so long to come forward publicly to address 
this, because the concern here is that while you're engaging 
here with us today, we want to make sure that we're 
reestablishing the strength and integrity of the leadership of 
the Architect of the Capitol writ large.
    Cognizant of the time, I will now conclude my remarks, 
yield back. I now yield to the Ranking Member, Mr. Morelle.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you, sir, for being here. I want to go back over some 
testimony you just gave to the Chair. I know that you have 
described--I think this is the right term--that you need to be 
tethered--your vehicle needs to be tethered to the architect, 
meaning you, so that you could respond directly to get to the 
Capitol.
    I'm--I'll admit, given the chairman's question about 
whether or not you were here on January 6th, which seems to me 
probably the greatest emergency the Capitol has faced in 
probably two centuries, if you need to be tethered and if you 
needed the vehicle to be here, why did you make the decision 
not to come here, and could you not have--without the vehicle 
and all the emergency equipment that's attached to it, could 
you not have fulfilled the same function at home using a cell 
phone?
    Mr. Blanton. No, I could not have, because I wouldn't have 
the police radios.
    Mr. Morelle. You wouldn't have--excuse me?
    Mr. Blanton. The police, Capitol Police radios that were 
in--and the equipment that were in the vehicle that would allow 
me to spur live communication and then be able to react.
    Mr. Morelle. Would you not--do you not--in your home, do 
you not have that--since you work out of your house a fair 
amount, do you have emergency equipment in your home, an 
emergency radio?
    Mr. Blanton. No.
    Mr. Morelle. Would that not be more prudent than--I think 
the cost of the equipment looked to me like it was, according 
to the inspector general's report, about 40,000--a little shy 
of $40,000 to equip the vehicle. Would there not be--if you're 
going to work remotely and you're not going to use the vehicle 
in its mobile capacity and you're not going to come to the 
Capitol during an emergency, I'm sort of struck by--there seems 
to be better, less expensive ways to make sure that you 
maintain ongoing communication.
    Mr. Blanton. If we are only talking about responding to the 
Capitol, then, yes, you can make that statement. However, part 
of what we do is ensure that the continuity of operations for 
this entire body exists, and that involves other sites other 
than here.
    Mr. Morelle. The--I'm--Okay. Can you just share with me--
I'm just curious, a little deeper dive, and I don't have a ton 
of time here, so--why your presence wasn't required here on 
January 6th?
    Mr. Blanton. I wouldn't say it wasn't required. What I said 
in my--in my statement to the Chairman is that, because of the 
activities, getting to the Capitol on that particular time, 
when the breach occurred, would not have been practical because 
I would not be able to get on to the Capitol complex because of 
the security situation. Frankly----
    Mr. Morelle. Could you not--I'm sorry. Just given the fact 
that you're equipped and you have obviously credentials, would 
you not have been able to get through the security quickly?
    Mr. Blanton. It's not necessarily security. It was the 
thousands of people that were blocking the access to the 
Capitol.
    Mr. Morelle. Let me just go on. I--the notion that you need 
the car to be with you at all times, to be tethered to it, can 
you explain how there have been, at least in the inspector 
general's report, times when the vehicle's been used by members 
of your family where you were not in the car? How would you 
have responded to emergencies in those circumstances?
    Mr. Blanton. I'll have to say that you would have to 
address that with members of my family, because the times 
that--that--I knew when my wife drove the vehicle and my 
daughter drove the vehicle were the times that I was in the 
vehicle.
    Mr. Morelle. So your testimony is that your family members 
have never driven the vehicle without you being in the vehicle?
    Mr. Blanton. I'm saying that would be something that would 
have to be discussed with them. I will also say----
    Mr. Morelle. Well, you're not suggesting we bring members 
of your family in to testify before us, are you?
    Mr. Blanton. No. I'm just saying that when my daughter was 
interviewed, who was 17 at the time of these allegations, and 
18 during the time that she was interviewed, she told me 
afterwards that she felt like she was pressured to make 
statements that were not fully--fully providing the context and 
statements that she didn't actually feel like were actually 
accurate based off of what she remembered. So, they used those 
statements to try to make comments about me.
    Mr. Morelle. I apologize. I'll just----
    The Chairman [continuing]. have an additional 30 seconds.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, sir.
    Just to be clear, your testimony is that at no point are 
you aware of family members using the vehicle without you being 
a passenger in the vehicle?
    Mr. Blanton. My recollection is no.
    Mr. Morelle. Okay.
    Mr. Blanton. I will say, to be honest, I can't say 100 
percent definitively, because that may have occurred or it may 
not have occurred, but specifically to your statement----
    Mr. Morelle. Well, let me just observe that I think if you 
felt the need to go to South Carolina or Florida on vacation 
and have the car with you because it needs to be with you at 
all times, and yet, there are allegations, pretty serious ones, 
that members of your family used it without your presence in 
the vehicle, it seems to undercut the argument.
    With that, I'll yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    I now recognize Mr. Loudermilk for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Blanton, I'm going to move off to another subject, so 
you can take a breath here for a moment.
    Mr. Blanton. Thank you.
    Mr. Loudermilk. I want to talk about the security of the 
Capitol itself. You know, we brought up January 6th here, and a 
lot of changes have been made and a lot of money has been 
spent. I want to specifically start off with the Fiscal Year 
2021 security supplemental that was provided, value of $300 
million, to your office to address security issues. Was the 
entirety of that amount, $300 million, used in the area that 
was designated, that it was supposed to be?
    Mr. Blanton. So it's been--it's been obligated, and it was 
specifically for--$283 million for windows, $17 million--
windows and other security upgrades, which relate to the Senate 
projects, and then $17 million for security cameras. That is 
the only area that we will be expensing money from that 
security supplemental.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Okay. Just to make sure I got this right, 
$283 million for windows. Is that----
    Mr. Blanton. Yes, and that's across campus. That's not just 
on the House.
    Mr. Loudermilk. So that would be Senate, House--and we can 
get in----
    Mr. Blanton. Senate and House Office Buildings.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Okay. We can discuss details on that at 
another time. $17 million was--is for----
    Mr. Blanton. Security cameras.
    Mr. Loudermilk [continuing]. security cameras.
    Mr. Blanton. In the Senate and the House Office Buildings.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Are these additional cameras to what's 
there, upgrade to what we already have? A combination?
    Mr. Blanton. They're additional cameras. The scope of it 
was for the first and second floor to the House Office 
Buildings. I want to be very clear, it also did not include 
anything for the Capitol Building itself.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Okay so the money has not completely been 
used at this point?
    Mr. Blanton. It's been obligated but not expensed.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Has any of it been expensed?
    Mr. Blanton. Design work has been expensed.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Okay.
    Mr. Blanton. One of the--I'm sorry.
    Mr. Loudermilk. No, go ahead.
    Mr. Blanton. One of the challenges that we have with the 
storm windows is when you have buildings such as the Rayburn 
Building, where they have a facade as opposed to being solid 
stone, it was--we found during inspections, prior to--routine 
inspections, prior to the supplemental that the windows 
themselves appear to be causing cracks to the stone facade.
    Now, the Russell has had a challenge with its stone facade 
for years, and that's been part of our maintenance program and 
trying to come of it. It appears that the windows are--the 
tall, narrow windows that you have in the Russell are 
exacerbating the cracks. We had to go back and completely 
redesign, with our external support agency, the window systems 
so that they don't damage the buildings themselves.
    Mr. Loudermilk. That redesign is part of the money 
allocated in the $300 billion?
    Mr. Blanton. We actually did the redesign from internal AOC 
resources.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Okay.
    Mr. Blanton. Because the money did not have anything for 
planning or design to it we had to--we had to absorb that in 
order to fix the problems.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Okay. Is the Capitol in its state right now 
less secure or more secure than it has been for previous State 
of the Unions?
    Mr. Blanton. I think in general, the Capitol is--the 
Capitol complex is more secure.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Okay.
    Mr. Blanton. Part of that is physical security upgrades, 
but part of that, and the most important piece of it, is the 
communication that we have had with the executive branch when 
it comes to sharing intelligence and sharing security 
information, as well as with the intel community and the 
neighboring police forces around--around us. We have much 
better cooperative partnering agreements. We have a more robust 
ability for the Chief of Police to be able to declare an 
emergency without having to come back to the--to a bureaucratic 
board and ask permission. That gives us the ability, as the 
Capitol complex, to be able to respond more.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Okay. Well, with that question, can you 
answer very quickly, succinctly, why--why did you--with--from 
what I understand, there was no actionable intelligence with 
specific threats for this State of the Union, no--the House 
Sergeant-at-Arms disagreed with putting up the security 
barrier. You and the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms agreed. Why did 
you believe that we needed additional security, the security 
fencing?
    Mr. Blanton. To me, it came down to a fiscal issue, and 
this might sound ironic to you that--that spending $872,000 
could end up being a--you could have a cheaper option. However, 
in discussions with the Secret Service and the Capitol Police, 
they wanted to have, if we didn't have a fence, three layers of 
bike racks, and then would require additional staff and 
additional support from--that would be--that could be 
reimbursable from jurisdictions around us. The math in my head 
was, Well, it's going to be cheaper to put the fence up and 
have less people out there.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Alright. Well, thank you for that. I do 
have additional questions, but I can submit them for the record 
or if we do a second round. Thank you.
    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
    I would request of our witness, if you could pull your 
microphone closer, it might assist some folks here being able 
to hear your remarks.
    I now recognize Ms. Sewell for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Blanton, as the Chair said in his opening remarks, this 
is really about accountability, both professional 
accountability with respect to the strategic plans and 
framework for moving this--the Capitol complex forward, as well 
as personal accountability. While the strategic plans are 
critically important, I have to tell you, as a new Member of 
this Committee, it is particularly troubling that only until 
today have you been willing to address the 800-page IG report.
    The findings of the IG were particularly startling. You 
know, I think that we are all here because we are entrusted by 
the public to do and to represent this government, this Nation, 
in a personally responsible and ethical way. My question is, 
has anyone ever used the vehicle that has been assigned to you 
other than yourself? Simple yes or no.
    Ms. Sewell. You--did your wife ever drive the car with you 
in it or not with you in it?
    Mr. Blanton. With me in it, absolutely she has, and so has 
my daughter, as I stated earlier.
    Ms. Sewell. Why were they even driving the car that was 
there for personal--for the use of you going back and forth to 
work? I'm trying to understand that.
    Mr. Blanton. Well, yes, so the vehicle itself is not a 
home-to-work vehicle, which is--which is very specifically and 
very narrowly tailored to----
    Ms. Sewell. Actually, that's, you know, something that the 
chairman just read suggests--I mean, it's black and white. It 
is for use to go to work and back to work. Frankly, sir, the 
fact that you would drive it to Florida, and yet on the day of 
the attack of this Capitol, which arguably was the most 
important day to have your presence there--why were you not 
here? I mean, the actual attack on the Capitol didn't take 
place until early afternoon, 12, 1.
    Mr. Blanton. Why was I not here?
    Ms. Sewell. Yes. I mean, do you not work from here?
    Mr. Blanton. Yes, I work from here.
    Ms. Sewell. Okay. I know that most of us were here at 9 
a.m. that morning. I guess I'm trying to understand why you 
were physically not here on a pretty important day, especially 
given the fact that you had access to information being on the 
Capitol Police Board about potential, you know, problems that 
may happen on the campus of this Capitol.
    Mr. Blanton. Well, as would have been litigated through the 
Senate and the House Committees who looked at this, and has 
been discussed by----
    Ms. Sewell. With all due respect, sir, the IG said that the 
amount of mileage that exceeded the normal mileage from your 
home to work was something like 19,000 miles. My question is, 
have you reimbursed the Federal Government for nearly $14,000 
in excess benefits that you have received due to improper use 
of the vehicle?
    Mr. Blanton. Thank you. I appreciate this question, and I 
appreciate the opportunity----
    Ms. Sewell. I'd appreciate an answer, sir.
    Mr. Blanton. No, I will give you a very succinct answer.
    Ms. Sewell. I only have a minute.
    Mr. Blanton. I will be as succinct as possible. Those 
mileage calculations are absolutely incorrect. At the time that 
we----
    Ms. Sewell. Did you or did you not drive the vehicle to 
Florida?
    Mr. Blanton. That's not what you asked. You asked a 
question about reimbursement.
    Ms. Sewell. Yes. I mean, if you drove it to Florida and it 
was improper use, that mileage would count toward the mileage 
that you should be reimbursing the Federal Government.
    Mr. Blanton. However, in the IG report, as you alluded, 
that mileage--those mileage calculations are absolutely 
incorrect.
    Ms. Sewell. You're saying that 800 pages of findings by the 
IG, you said in your testimony that you thought that they were 
framed narratives. So are you suggesting that the IG is not an 
independent arbiter of the facts, but rather, has some sort of 
malice against you to actually frame it, a narrative that's not 
correct?
    Mr. Blanton. As I alluded to in my opening statement, I've 
only seen the 10-page summary report, and so I don't know what 
else is in there. I will say, though, that the IG assumed that 
because we went to half-on, half-off during the initial COVID 
that I wasn't coming into the office almost every day. If we 
were still following this schedule that we did at the beginning 
of COVID----
    Ms. Sewell. I only have 3 seconds, and I just want to say 
this----
    Mr. Blanton [continuing]. they would be a telework here, 
and I wouldn't be here.
    Ms. Sewell. With all due respect, I'm reclaiming my time.
    Mr. Chairman, I think it's really important that we get 
beyond what we--we actually get to the bottom of what really 
happened in terms of the ethical charges against the Architect. 
I agree with you that the framework of--the strategic framework 
of us going forward is critically important. Personally, if we 
cannot, you know--if we don't feel comfortable with the 
integrity of the person who's in over it, I don't know how we 
can move forward. Thank you, sir.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    I now recognize Mr. Murphy for 5 minutes for the purpose of 
asking questions.
    Mr. Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Just--I'll try to make this very succinct and quick. Mr. 
Blanton, did you offer, or conduct Capitol dome tours in your 
official capacity when it was closed to the public during the 
pandemic?
    Mr. Blanton. Yes, absolutely. I conducted tours with 
Members of both the House of Representatives and Members of the 
Senate, their families, and associated personnel with them.
    Mr. Murphy. The swim team that's mentioned in the 
investigation?
    Mr. Blanton. The swim team tour was an exterior tour, from 
my understanding, because the pictures that were posted from 
Facebook were posted on the exterior steps.
    Mr. Murphy. You didn't offer that or you didn't conduct 
that?
    Mr. Blanton. No, I--I conducted it, but the exterior of the 
Capitol was not closed at that time.
    Mr. Murphy. Did you take them inside?
    Mr. Blanton. I don't remember specifically the swim team 
tour itself. It was a surprise to me. But I do know my wife on 
her Facebook had pictures of her and the swim team on the 
Senate side of the Capitol steps on the east plaza.
    Mr. Murphy. Okay. Alright. Well, Okay. We can only infer.
    Just let me--let me do two other lines of questioning. Has 
the Architect of the Capitol fully returned to work in person? 
Have you been fully returned to work in person?
    Mr. Blanton. We still have a telework policy. I am here 
effectively every day of the week. There may be days where, for 
example, we also have our COVID protocols and our health 
checklists that if you are--have any of the symptoms that OAP 
says are COVID-related symptoms that I main--I may call in and 
say, I'm feeling this, I'm not going to show up. However, I'm 
still working at that time.
    Mr. Murphy. I just would think--I'm--you know, I've been a 
physician for 30 years. The public health emergency honestly 
should have ended a year ago. We're into an absolute endemic 
phase with this, and why people are not back to work in 
Washington, DC. blows me away. It just absolutely blows me 
away, and you, as Architect of the Capitol, Architect of the 
Capitol, why you are not here every day, physically all day, 
I'll just go on about that. Does your executive team come here 
and work fully every day?
    Mr. Blanton. In the original pandemic, I cut my executive 
team in half so that we wouldn't--because at that time, we 
didn't----
    Mr. Murphy. No, I'm talking about today.
    Mr. Blanton. Today?
    Mr. Murphy. Let's talk about today.
    Mr. Blanton. My--there is--part of my executive team or me 
here--I mean, this--this--it's a rare week that I'm not here 
every day.
    Mr. Murphy. It should be--my opinion, your executive team 
and you should be here every day. You're the Architect of the 
Capitol. You're in charge of this building. There's no reason 
for you to be doing stuff otherwise.
    Let me ask a few other things. I'm a physician and very 
well-known--or very well-versed with PPE and everything. You 
were given over--close to $12.5 million for the PPE. Have you 
done any type of fraud review to see where all that stuff is? 
Was it spent correctly, and what its disposition is? Have you 
done any type of accounting oversight with that $12.5 million?
    Mr. Blanton. I'm very confident with the money that we 
received for PPE. It was disbursed to the House, Senate, 
Library of Congress, our Botanic Garden, and Supreme Court for 
support.
    Mr. Murphy. What gives you that confidence?
    Mr. Blanton. The fact that I have had numerous meetings 
with my staff, and discussing the distribution and the purchase 
of the PPE. I will also say that at the time that we were 
buying it, there were great fluctuations in the cost.
    Mr. Murphy. Absolutely. Understand it completely. What's--
how much did you spend? Do you have any left?
    Mr. Blanton. No. That--our COVID supplemental money is 
expired. We do not--we have some minor inventory of PPE left, 
such as things home COVID tests and things like that, but we 
don't have--we don't have any money to procure PPE for the 
entire campus anymore.
    Mr. Murphy. Okay. Mr. Chairman, that's all my questions. 
I'll yield back.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. Kilmer for 5 minutes for the 
purpose of asking questions.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thanks for being with us.
    Last Congress, the Select Committee on the Modernization of 
Congress was able to look at a lot of the role of the Architect 
of the Capitol, including looking at issues related to the 
continuity of Congress, if, God forbid, there was a crisis, 
some of the role that your office would play.
    By statute, the Deputy Architect of the Capitol serves as 
acting Architect of the Capitol in the event that there's a 
vacancy, but that deputy position has been open since 2019. I 
know that was one of the things flagged in the IG report. I 
think this leaves some question as to who would serve as acting 
Architect if you no longer held this position.
    I guess a couple questions: Why haven't you filled the 
deputy position, and if you can at least give us some sense of 
what efforts have been undertaken to hire a deputy architect?
    Mr. Blanton. Alright. Well, thank you for that question, 
and I think it's a very insightful one. What I have--we have 
had legislative proposals since my first budget that I 
submitted that unlinks the deputy's salary to mine. I have no 
problem with the fact that my senior executives make more than 
me, and that's fine. I'm--I'm here to serve the country, and 
I'm not here to get rich.
    However, if you want to attract and retain top talent, 
there needs to be a commensurate pay scale. The fact that the 
Deputy--the fact that I'm one of the lowest paid executives in 
AOC, and the Deputy would be paid lower than me, I've been 
trying to de--decouple that for a couple--for several 
positions, including the CEO of the Visitor Center from my 
salary so we can actually get the top talent we need in the 
agency. That's--that's the reason why. It's hard to--at the 
salary that the Deputy would get, it's hard to get somebody at 
that level that we need to be--to want to be attracted to the 
job.
    Mr. Kilmer. Has there been any effort to hire a deputy?
    Mr. Blanton. No. We have been--we're trying to get the Leg 
Props through. We are hiring the CHOPS, though.
    Mr. Kilmer. Who would serve as acting Architect of the 
Capitol if there is a vacancy?
    Mr. Blanton. Currently, it would be the chief of 
operations.
    Mr. Kilmer. Chief of operations, Okay.
    I have a couple minutes left. I actually wanted to ask 
something not related to the IG report. The Select Committee on 
the Modernization of Congress actually made a number of 
recommendations that are kind of in the purview of the AOC, 
primarily about space, how space is used within the 
institution.
    There are three open recommendations that sort of fall 
under your jurisdiction; one of them is about actually creating 
some bipartisan Members-only space within the Capitol so that 
there can be some space for collaboration that's not 
necessarily--actually, during the pandemic, there was 
opportunity off the House floor in the Speaker's Lobby because 
it was closed to the media. That's no longer the case.
    One of the recommendations was to actually provide some 
space for Members to actually engage one another outside of 
the--outside of the C-SPAN cameras. There's a similar 
recommendation focused on providing space for staff, bipartisan 
staff collaboration. Then a third, trying to ensure that 
there's space within the Capitol for hearings that might use a 
different kind of format. The select committee looked at 
roundtable types of hearings. I'm just eager to hear about any 
progress that's been made on these recommendations. If 
there's--if the answer is too long, I'm happy to just follow up 
offline.
    Mr. Blanton. Real quick answer. I appreciate everything 
that the Modernization Committee did, and I support those 
recommendations. In our 2024 budget, we have a--we have money 
to study this. As you know very well, space is a combination of 
the House Office Building Commission, AOC, and CAO and what we 
want to be able to do is produce good recommendations.
    The assignment of the space, as you know very well, is the 
House Office Building Commissions. However, one of the things 
we're doing in our current space in the Ford Building is doing 
a demonstration of what the future office should look like or 
could look like, so people can come in and see, Oh, I see this 
is wonderful. We would like this in this un--underutilized 
space.
    Mr. Kilmer. Gotcha.
    Thank you, Chairman. I yield back.
    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes Mrs. Bice for 5 minutes for the 
purpose of asking questions.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Chairman.
    Thank you, Mr. Blanton, for being with us.
    I am very concerned about the things that I've heard from 
my colleagues this morning. What is the current telework policy 
for the AOC?
    Mr. Blanton. We have a--you know, and it's very 
interesting, because if you would've talked to me 3 years ago, 
my answer on telework would've been the same answer that you 
would have gotten from just any other government agency.
    Mrs. Bice. Today. I want to know what the telework policy 
is today.
    Mr. Blanton. We--until the pandemic ends, we are still----
    Mrs. Bice. The pandemic has ended. The President even said 
so.
    Mr. Blanton. Well, it officially ends May 11th, and that's 
when--that's when our policies are going back to where there 
were prior to the pandemic.
    Mrs. Bice. Which is----
    Mr. Blanton. That people can telework should their 
supervisors allow them to telework. However, if you look at my 
staff, the largest majority of my staff are people who can't 
telework because they have to be here to do work here. There's 
very, very few people who are actually teleworking in AOC. 
However, the flexibility in the policy I think should remain, 
because it allows us to attract and retain the top workforces.
    Mrs. Bice. You said, replying to Ms. Sewell, that you were 
not in this building or on this campus on January 6th. I find 
it mind-blowing that the head of the AOC, the leader, knowing 
what you knew, probably a lot more than we did that day, would 
not have been in this building ensuring the safety and 
security, not only of the building, but of the employees that 
you lead. Why? Why were you not here that morning?
    Mr. Blanton. I--I will say to your--to address the first 
part of what you said is, as has been testified to the House 
and the Senate, there was no actionable intelligence that there 
was going to be anything here that was presented to the Capitol 
Police Board.
    Mrs. Bice. I was--I was day three on the job, and I knew, 
not having any intelligence information from anyone, that it 
was going to be a busy day because there were so many people 
here. You knew that people were going to be on campus, 
regardless of whether or not they were going to breach the 
Capitol. Why were you, as the leader of this organization, not 
on this campus on that day?
    Mr. Blanton. Well, I can say, this is a great example of 
why Congress appropriated the vehicle because it acts as a 
mobile command center.
    Mrs. Bice. But you didn't come, because you said you 
couldn't get in--couldn't get on the campus, which I find 
offensive, sir, the fact that you would say that I wasn't going 
to be able to get in. I can't--I cannot fathom that. It doesn't 
make any sense.
    Mr. Blanton. I respectfully disagree with you, and I 
apologize.
    Mrs. Bice. Let's talk about morale. You mentioned earlier 
in your opening statement that you were here to improve the 
morale within your agency. What are you doing to improve 
morale?
    Mr. Blanton. Oh, we have some wonderful initiatives. One of 
the first ones is we have--we've developed a human capital 
strategy, which--and in partnership with that, AOC University, 
which allows people to further their careers so that they can 
go from, let's say somebody is a nighttime recycler, and they 
want to end up being an electrician, we are going to be able to 
give them the training to be able to change what their career 
field is.
    I will--I will tell you this, when I first got here, one of 
the things that AOC was known as is the last plantation, and 
that pained me when I heard that phrase when I was researching 
this job. Right now, Forbes has indicated to us that they are 
going to put us on their list of the top workplaces in America.
    Mrs. Bice. What's the turnover rate for your organization?
    Mr. Blanton. It actually--it depends on where it is. I 
mean, for example, at the State of the Union, I gave--I gave my 
ticket, my plus-one ticket to somebody who worked here 50 
years, and so it really depends, because you have generational 
people here, where my grandfather worked for the agency, my 
father worked for the agency.
    Mrs. Bice. Do you have data though on the turnover of your 
staff?
    Mr. Blanton. I will--I will have to get that specifically 
for you, and I will respond back for--to the question for the 
record.
    Mrs. Bice. What about turnover for leadership? Do you have 
the--any information on the turnover for the leadership staff?
    Mr. Blanton. We have had post-pandemic turnover, just like 
most agencies have. Many of this is people who are wanting to 
retire after many years of service. I--I tell you, I view this 
as an opportunity for us as an agency to grow and gets the 
right people in the right jobs.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    The Chairman. The gentlewoman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes Mrs. Torres for 5 minutes for the 
purpose of asking questions.
    Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to you and 
to the Ranking Member Morelle for bringing us together for this 
discussion today. I look forward to working with both of you 
and everyone on this Committee to improve the quality of life 
for all employees and visitors here on this campus.
    Mr. Blanton, thank you for being here with us today. I am 
the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Oversight, just for 
your information.
    There has been a lot of talk around security and the 
January 6th insurrection. I just--I want to tell you that, for 
every employee that works in this campus, whether they are 
maintenance people or Members of Congress, that was a very 
difficult day, a very, very difficult day, a deadly day.
    For some of us who were stranded on the balcony for 45 
minutes, face down, crawling from one area all the way clear 
across the area. I am outraged to hear that you were in a 
comfortable place, sitting, whether in your car or in your 
home, while we were screaming at the one police officer that 
was near Gallery 3, asking him to lock the door above us that 
was wide open after the emergency had been called and after 
every single one of our colleagues that was down on the floor 
had already been evacuated. I am outraged that you would be in 
a comfortable place, sir, while the rest of us were thinking 
about dying that day and how we were going to come out alive 
that day. Outrageous that you were not here.
    Do you know, sir, that police officer could not close or 
lock that door because he did not have the keys to that door? 
Do you know that?
    Mr. Blanton. That is news to me.
    Mrs. Torres. Oh, my God. Here we are 2 years later, this is 
all news to you. I'm trying to calm myself down, because you 
bring a lot of anxiety to me. Your inability to do your job 
brings a lot of anxiety to me.
    When you were appointed to this position, did you sign--I 
know you took an oath of office, right?
    Mr. Blanton. Yes.
    Mrs. Torres. Okay. That oath says that you commit to defend 
against enemies foreign and domestic, correct?
    Mr. Blanton. Correct.
    Mrs. Torres. Okay. Did you also sign an ethics statement, 
sir?
    Mr. Blanton. I'm--I'm assuming I did.
    Mrs. Torres. Okay. I would like to see that document. It 
should be in your personnel record, and I would like somebody 
to produce it to my office.
    Members of Congress and our spouses are subject to ethics 
and ethic violations. I'm shocked that you consider yourself 
exempt from that, shocked by that, as a public servant that you 
are, like the rest of us.
    Do you know that, as a Member of Congress--this is my fifth 
year in Congress--I have never taken a tour of the dome because 
I have been told that there is a long waiting list and that I 
have to put my name on that waiting list.
    Do you not think I'm patriot enough to take a tour of the 
dome? Do I not meet that patriot requirement?
    Mr. Blanton. I think----
    Mrs. Torres. I'll let you think about that, and maybe you 
can come to my office, and you and I can have a longer 
conversation around that.
    Mr. Blanton. I welcome that discussion, ma'am.
    Mrs. Torres. Throughout the investigation, the OIG obtained 
multiple social media posts created by Michelle Blanton. Who is 
that?
    Mr. Blanton. That's my wife.
    Mrs. Torres. That is your wife. Those statements included 
photographs of congressional license plates, the license plates 
that we use as security to come onto campus, correct?
    Mr. Blanton. That is the license plate that allows access 
to the campus, yes.
    Mrs. Torres. That is part of our security. You allowed your 
wife to breach security for Members of Congress and every 
single employee that works here on this campus.
    Mr. Blanton. I wouldn't characterize it that way.
    Mrs. Torres. Well, I would characterize it that. Remember, 
I was the one face down, not you, sir.
    Your wife also posted pictures at the dome saying: This is 
happening here. All patriots welcome.
    I assume I'm not a patriot to you or to your wife. Maybe I 
don't meet that qualification. Who is a patriot, in your eyes?
    Mr. Blanton. In general, a patriot is somebody that loves 
our country. It has got nothing to do with political parties. 
It's somebody who loves the Capitol. I mean, every day I----
    Mrs. Torres. If you loved the Capitol, sir, you would not 
have put us in this--in danger either on January 6th by failing 
to do your job and being here. I flew across the country to be 
here.
    My time has expired. I yield back.
    The Chairman. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Mr. Carey is now recognized for 5 minutes for the purpose 
of asking questions.
    Mr. Carey. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to 
address the witness.
    You know, what's tragic is--and I think, as this Committee 
will find--I'm a huge history buff. Love historic preservation. 
Love the Capitol. My plan was to be here today and ask you--and 
I will eventually--ask you about the historic preservation work 
that you are doing, asking about some of the things that we 
could do better with historic preservation in terms of the 
Capitol.
    As I'm listening to my colleagues across the aisle and even 
on our side asking you questions about things that, really, I 
wasn't planning on asking you, but I'm going to ask you now.
    Does the AOC, do any of your other team members have any 
other--have vehicles like you do, sir?
    Mr. Blanton. No. It was. In fact, I want to make it clear 
too. I don't have the vehicle anymore.
    Mr. Carey. You said the vehicle was essential. Why do you 
not have it now?
    Mr. Blanton. Because Congress in the last appropriations 
bill chose to defund the vehicle.
    Mr. Carey. If it's a mobile operational center, as you 
alluded to earlier, where is that communication now? Is that in 
your home?
    Mr. Blanton. No. My opinion is it would have been better if 
they continued to appropriate it, but they----
    Mr. Carey. Where is it now? No, where's the communication 
that you have to have since you have to be on 24/7, as you said 
earlier in your testimony?
    Mr. Blanton. Now it's going to occur via cell phone.
    Mr. Carey. Okay. The other question was, in listening to--
because I do want to get to the historic preservation stuff 
because that's really stuff I care about, but these are 
questions that just came up as I'm listening to my colleagues 
across the aisle.
    If somebody else is driving the vehicle and you're in the 
vehicle but they are driving it and it's provided for by the 
government, if that person is in an accident, who's liable for 
that?
    Mr. Blanton. I'd have to get back with you on that. I'm not 
a lawyer.
    Mr. Carey. Neither am I. That's why I'm asking a simple 
question. What is it? Do you have any idea? I mean, you don't 
know?
    Mr. Blanton. I don't know, but if I'm working in the 
vehicle then I'm doing work, which has occurred many times.
    Mr. Carey. Okay, but no other person in your executive team 
has a vehicle that was driven back and forth to the Capitol?
    Mr. Blanton. That is correct. We have a home-to-work 
policy. That vehicle does not----
    Mr. Carey. I got that earlier. Let me ask you real quick to 
Mrs. Torres' question, I mean. I know you weren't here--and 
neither was I because I just came here in November 2021--but 
were any of your executive--any other of your executives on 
your team here on January 6th?
    Mr. Blanton. I believe--and I'll have to get back to you on 
all the number of executives. I believe the House Office 
Building was there because I was in constant contact with--the 
Capitol Building superintendent was there because I was in 
constant contact with him about how to change the flow of air 
to get all the pepper spray and stuff like that out of the 
Capitol and secure elevators and stuff like that.
    Mr. Carey. I appreciate that. I would like to just kind of 
have an idea of how many of your executives actually were here 
during January 6th. I mean, obviously, I was not since I was 
not even thinking that I would ever be serving in this 
position.
    Okay. Let me ask you just a couple questions. You alluded 
to the AOC University. Can you give me some information on the 
program--and quickly do it because I only have a minute and 9 
seconds--and how it actually is going to help staff development 
and how you think it's going to help your staff moving forward.
    Mr. Blanton. Yes. Thank you. AOC University is mirrored 
closer to what you would see in your normal corporate 
university, whether you're a large construction firm or you're 
an IT-type firm. It's really meant to offer the courses and 
training so that staff can either cross-train into something 
else where we have shortages or further their careers.
    We have--we've partnered with Percipio, which is an online 
training center, and are able to give staff classes where it's 
going to be free to them but allow them if they want to go from 
an electrician to an electronics major, for example.
    Mr. Carey. Okay, so I have 23 seconds. How does historic--
this is the stuff I really wanted to talk about. How does 
historic preservation work factor into your strategic plan for 
the AOC? I have 10 seconds.
    Mr. Blanton. Yes. That's actually one of our core missions, 
is to serve, preserve, and then inspire are our three core 
missions. So historic conservation is obviously exceptionally 
important, but there's a tension between modernization and 
historical prevention
    [sic]. I would love to have a continued conversation with 
you on this.
    Mr. Carey. Let's do that, because we're now 11 seconds 
over.
    Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your indulgence, and I yield 
back.
    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. D'Esposito for 5 minutes for 
the purpose of asking questions.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Good afternoon, sir. Just in a brief 10 seconds, can you 
just tell us a little bit about your career path prior to 
becoming the Architect of the Capitol.
    Mr. Blanton. I--I graduated Naval Academy. I retired--I 
spent a time as a Civil Engineer Corps officer in the Navy. I 
briefly worked for a private consulting firm doing 
infrastructure. Then I worked at the Airport Authority as 
deputy vice president and then was--during the bicameral, 
bipartisan process was recommended and then--and then 
nominated.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Great. Thank you. At no point did you--
well, first, thank you for your service to the country. At no 
point did you graduate from any law enforcement agency's police 
academy?
    Mr. Blanton. No.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Okay, so there is--part of the report dates 
back to 2020, when apparently there was an issue with a motor 
vehicle accident. In the report, it states that you used your 
official vehicle to pursue said vehicle and then detain the 
driver.
    First, did that happen? It's a yes-or-no question, sir.
    Mr. Blanton. It is actually--if you don't mind, sir, it is 
a nuanced question because I followed the skid--the vehicle 
that hit my daughter's boyfriend's car wheel broke, and I 
followed the skid mark around my neighborhood. I never detained 
because, when I stopped and called 911 at the person's house, 
he went inside and then went out his back door.
    Mr. D'Esposito. I would hope you didn't kick the door in 
and go get the guy.
    Mr. Blanton. The Capitol--sorry. The Fairfax County Police 
caught him walking through the neighborhood.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Okay.
    Mr. Blanton. There was no detention whatsoever.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Looking back at it now, do you believe that 
was appropriate use of your government vehicle?
    Mr. Blanton. I think it was appropriate use of any citizen 
in the United States would follow a drunk driver who did a hit 
and run.
    Mr. D'Esposito. How did you know at that point that he was 
drunk?
    Mr. Blanton. What--I did know it was a hit and run, and 
that's why I followed him.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Okay. Now, when that report was filed, from 
what was listed in the report from the OIG, I guess the--was it 
the Fairfax Police Department that handled the job?
    Mr. Blanton. Yes.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Okay. I guess, at some point during your 
interaction with the Fairfax Police Department--I just want to 
preface this with I spent my career in the New York City Police 
Department. I'm a proud NYPD detective, and I take this stuff 
very seriously.
    One of the things that's most important to me and one of 
the things I'm most proud of to be able to work on both sides 
of the aisle here is to enhance everything that we can possibly 
do for the Capitol Police Department.
    My question is I'm not sure if it was because of the way 
that you followed the vehicle, followed the skid marks to the 
home, or if it was something that you presented, but the 
officers who filed the report from the--from Fairfax County 
identified you as a member of service, a member of law 
enforcement.
    Mr. Blanton. They identified me as MPD.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Did you identify yourself as a member of 
the Capitol Police Department? Sir, it's a yes-or-no question.
    Mr. Blanton. All I know is I can tell you I did not 
identify myself as MPD. I--I would have said--and I don't know 
the specifics right at this time, I just can't remember--that I 
was on the Capitol Police Board. If someone misconstrued that 
as an officer, but I clearly would have never done an MPD.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Preparing for today's testimony, don't you 
think that's something that you should have probably tried to 
remember? I think it's a big part of the report that the OIG 
did.
    You're saying that you never claimed to be a member of law 
enforcement, but you did say that you were a member of the 
Capitol Police Board.
    Mr. Blanton. Yes.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Okay. When they referred to you in the 
reports or when they referred to you on the scene as a member 
of service, at any point did you disagree with them and say, 
you know, ``Sir, ma'am, I am not a member of law enforcement, 
in fact, I am an appointed member of government and I sit on 
the Capitol Police Board as part of my service as the Architect 
to the Capitol''?
    The Architect to the Capitol and being a member of law 
enforcement and having arrest powers are two very different 
things.
    Mr. Blanton. I completely understand that. That ---- that 
deference occurred when I was subpoenaed to testify and sat in 
the lobby of Fairfax County Courthouse, and the Commonwealth 
attorney asked me: Are you MPD?
    I said: No.
    Mr. D'Esposito. How long after the incident was that?
    Mr. Blanton. Oh, maybe a month or so. I---- Mr. D'Esposito. 
So, in that month, you didn't read anything, any reports from 
the Day? You didn't read anything from the Fairfax County 
Police Department that identified you as a member of service?
    Mr. Blanton. No. I found out during--during the 
investigation that--two things that were a problem, at least--
and I said from the beginning I have only seen the 10-page 
report. They identified my wife was actually my 17-year-old 
daughter at the time. Second, they identified me as MPD. Those 
are both errors. I--when I was sitting in the lobby, the 
waiting room of Fairfax County Courthouse, I told that to the 
Commonwealth attorney.
    All I did was show the Nest Cam video of the person hitting 
my daughter's boyfriend's vehicle and then driving away. That's 
the extent that my interaction was with anybody.
    Mr. D'Esposito. I think my time expired. Thank you, 
Chairman.
    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes Ms. Lee for 5 minutes for the 
purpose of asking questions.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Blanton, I'd like to begin by returning your attention 
to the temporary security measures that were implemented around 
the Capitol complex in association with the State of the Union. 
Now, you, the Sergeant-at-Arms of the House and of the Senate 
convened to discuss and vote on the temporary security measures 
to be implemented, correct?
    Mr. Blanton. That is correct.
    Ms. Lee. One of the measures that you opted to discuss and 
vote upon was the construction of the perimeter fence around 
the Capitol complex. Is that right?
    Mr. Blanton. That is correct.
    Ms. Lee. You in particular voted in support of the addition 
of that fence around the complex for the State of the Union, 
correct?
    Mr. Blanton. That is correct.
    Ms. Lee. Isn't it also true, sir, that there was no 
specific threat information related to the accumulation of 
crowds or the need to control crowds around the State of the 
Union?
    Mr. Blanton. That is correct. Also, on January 6th, there 
was no specific threat as well.
    Ms. Lee. Just to be clear, in the absence of any specific 
threat information about the need for such fencing and at a 
cost of over $1 million to taxpayers, you voted in support of 
construction of the perimeter fence for the State of the Union 
this week?
    Mr. Blanton. The fence itself cost $872,000. It was 
reimbursed by the Secret Service to--to AOC. Based off of the 
security measures that the Capitol Police and the Secret 
Service said that they would need if the fence was not 
constructed, it actually worked out that--in my calculations, 
that the fence would be the cheaper solution.
    Ms. Lee. If I understood your earlier testimony correctly, 
you also pointed out that today the Capitol complex is more 
secure than it has been for prior State of the Union addresses. 
Is that right?
    Mr. Blanton. Yes.
    Ms. Lee. Okay. Let's turn our attention to the use of the 
government vehicle. You've testified for us here today that it 
was your assessment that appropriate use of your official 
government vehicle was not simply going to and from work but 
that it should also appropriately include use for personal 
errands and other things so that, in the event of an emergency, 
you could return expeditiously to the complex. Is that right?
    Mr. Blanton. With the exception I would take to personal 
because it's part of my job to be ready and respond regardless 
of where I am when something happens.
    Ms. Lee. So you would not characterize it as personal use, 
but if you were using your official government vehicle to go to 
an event or occasion that was not related to your official 
business, your position is nonetheless that it was important 
that you be able to do so that you can get back here in the 
event of an emergency, correct?
    Mr. Blanton. Yes, and I will say, for example, one of the 
things I said in the--in the IG report is that I went to----
    Ms. Lee. Here's my question for you, sir: I would like to 
know, during your tenure as Architect of the Capitol, how many 
times were you in your official vehicle at an occasion or an 
event that was not official business that you actually returned 
to the campus in a State of emergency?
    Mr. Blanton. Well, I can tell you one of the things they 
alluded to in the IG----
    Ms. Lee. Is there a number?
    Mr. Blanton. I have to preface it with this.
    Ms. Lee. Did it ever happen?
    Mr. Blanton. There is--yes, there is, but what I want to 
preface it with is, much like from my military career, you 
train for a state of readiness. Whether--and you hope you never 
have to do it, but you then--if you have to do it you have to 
be ready to do it. That's--that's the purpose.
    Ms. Lee. Alright. So there was not an occasion during your 
tenure when it was actually necessary to leave and return on an 
emergency basis, but your testimony today is that you 
maintained that position for a State of readiness?
    Mr. Blanton. Yes.
    Ms. Lee. Alright. Now, going back to the use of others of 
the official vehicle, if I understand your testimony today, it 
is that you are unsure--and tell me if I've got this wrong, but 
your testimony seemed to be that you were unsure if your wife 
or daughter might have ever driven an official vehicle without 
you in the vehicle.
    Mr. Blanton. That is correct. I can't--what I said is I 
can't tell you if they did or not because it's something that I 
don't know specifically.
    Ms. Lee. Just to be clear, you do not have personal 
knowledge of your wife or daughter ever using an official 
vehicle without you in the vehicle. Is that correct?
    Mr. Blanton. That's what I'm saying is I'm--I--what I'm 
telling you is I can't answer that question because I don't 
know is the answer.
    Ms. Lee. So you do not know, which is where I started. You 
are not sure, you do not know if your wife or daughter ever 
drove an official vehicle without you inside the vehicle?
    Mr. Blanton. Yes. I'll say, if you have an instance that is 
in the full report that I don't know of----
    Ms. Lee. I'm just asking you. From your personal knowledge, 
is there a time where you were aware that either your wife, 
daughter, or any other person drove an official government 
vehicle assigned to you without you inside the vehicle?
    Mr. Blanton. I can't think of one right now.
    Ms. Lee. Okay.
    Mr. Blanton. Again, I'm not denying that it may or may not 
have happened. I'm just saying I can't think of it.
    Ms. Lee. Alright. Mr. Chairman, I believe my time has 
expired.
    The Chairman. Thank you very much.
    In conversation with the Ranking Member, we're going to do 
one additional question on each side and then small conclusion 
remarks, and we will then wrap up today's hearing.
    The Chair now recognizes the Ranking Member, Mr. Morelle.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I want to go back to the inspector general's report as it 
relates to phase 1 and phase 2 of the Cannon Project. The IG 
identifies $54,246 in unallowable costs; questioned $234,000 in 
legal fees for allowability and reasonableness; and $286,000, 
almost $287,000, with no or insufficient supporting 
documentation. That totals $575,562, nearly $600,000.
    I have not seen any response to that. I wondered if you 
could give me the--your rationale for those costs.
    Mr. Blanton. Yes. Real quickly, and I think some of the 
numbers that you added up that aren't necessarily cumulative; 
they're just inclusive. So there was $286,933 of insufficiently 
supported cost. Of that, after--after the IG recommended we 
investigate, $198,763 were supported. There's $16,500 still 
under scrutiny.
    In the second IG report, which referenced $55,235, of that 
$29,735 in the costs are neither legally or administratively 
able to be recovered. So, in a billion dollar program, although 
they may have identified--what they identified was questionable 
costs, not costs that were done out of impropriety or anything 
like that. Everything that was--that was determined to be 
recoverable we have recovered.
    Mr. Morelle. May I ask, Mr. Chair, if we could just ask the 
witness if you could supply us with some detail on those in 
written following up, but I'd like some accounting for this, if 
you could. Thank you.
    Mr. Blanton. Absolutely, and I welcome it. Thank you.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, sir.
    The Chairman. Thank you very much. The Chair now recognizes 
himself for the purpose of asking an additional question.
    My colleague Mr. Loudermilk was engaged with you regarding 
in particular the security of the campus, and I want to make 
sure--my understanding is that many of these indepth findings 
from the comprehensive Capitol security assessment and the 
details on supplemental spending have been classified, and the 
update on projects with physical security implications document 
indicates as such.
    Who classified this if, in prior testimony before this 
Committee, you stated that no entity in the legislative branch 
has classification authority?
    Mr. Blanton. We work with an external support agency, and 
they have classifying authority. I will be more than willing to 
have a discussion with you about this in a setting that's more 
appropriate.
    The Chairman. I appreciate that. I look forward to that. 
This Committee does. I know last night your office released an 
update on projects with physical security implications labeling 
it controlled and classified information, law enforcement 
sensitive. That briefing came out, of course, hours before this 
hearing.
    I think that actually states to the importance of the 
oversight that this Committee does. This Committee is going to 
continue working on oversight over important legislative branch 
entities. We're going to continue to do it in the nonpartisan 
manner we did here. I appreciate the work of the Ranking Member 
because this is about accountability for the American people.
    I have a few closing remarks, but I want to yield to the 
Ranking Member if he has closing remarks first.
    Mr. Morelle. Well, first, let me thank my colleague and the 
Chairman of this Committee for organizing this hearing. I 
appreciate my colleagues and their, I thought, very, very 
important questions and want to thank them all for their input 
this morning.
    I will just say that I think, from our perspective--and I 
think you're hearing this loud and clear--I think we still need 
to understand many of the questions that have been raised in 
the inspector general's report.
    I think we need greater clarity on personal conduct that 
involved the use of vehicles, and we need more clarity on how 
that was done.
    I think, in addition, this raises questions of succession 
planning and the need to have a deputy in place in case of a 
vacancy, as Mr. Kilmer pointed out, like more documentation on 
what happened relative to some of the costs in the IG report.
    I think there's a lot that we learned here this morning. I 
think there's a lot more for us to learn, and I think we're 
going to continue to pursue it to make sure that the American 
public gets their share of--or gets the value that they put 
into this job and the importance of this job, that we are 
making sure that those dollars are well-spent and can be 
accounted for. Again, I want to thank you and Mr. Chairman for 
organizing this hearing.
    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
    I agree with the Ranking Member. I think we made some 
progress today. It had been 3 months since the inspector 
general's report was released. To the best of my knowledge, 
today is the first day that you've spoken on that topic on the 
record. I think it's important that additional information is 
ultimately provided, such that the AOC's office can operate at 
the highest level of function.
    I'd like to comment that there's many individuals that work 
under your leadership. I want to speak directly to them and 
just say: Thank you for the work that you do, that these 
employees do every day to make this Capitol operate.
    We've had a discussion on the leadership side, but the men 
and women who are working in the Office of the Architect of the 
Capitol day in and day out do yeoman's work, and I just want to 
recognize those individuals who are not here with us today.
    We're going to continue a robust oversight agenda on this 
Committee, as I noted earlier. I want to reference back to one 
thing you noted. You noted as your role on the Capitol Police 
Board, which we discussed, that there was no actionable intel 
provided to the Capitol Police Board prior to January 6th.
    We will be reviewing the oversight. We'll be reviewing the 
structure of the Capitol Police Board going forward. I will 
leave that there as a nugget that we will ultimately come back 
to in this Committee. I'd like to thank you, Mr. Blanton, for 
your testimony and for appearing before us today. It has been 
helpful.
    Members of the Committee may have some additional questions 
for you, and we ask that you'd respond to these questions in 
writing.
    Without objection, each Member will have 5 legislative days 
to insert additional materials into the record or to revise and 
extend their remarks.
    If there's no further business, I thank the Members for 
their participation.
    Without objection, the Committee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 10:29 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]


[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
  

                              [all]