1. A Policy towards Charging for Space A. Petrilli, May 23, 2012

2. Introduction  How to allocate and de-allocate space  Cooperative  Central fiat  Space rental

3. Cooperative - current  A representative body is needed (GTPE)  Allocation is fine  De-allocation is the problem  No incentive to de-allocate  Much effort and discussions  Unpredictable timing/results  Possibility of deadlock  Too many widely different activities, difficult/impossible to prioritize

4. Central fiat  A deciding person is named, the fiat  Then same as Cooperative  Deadlock solved by the fiat

5. Space rental  Create a market for space  Allows Departments to release space and to re- acquire it later on under known conditions  Once rental is unavailable, space will be requested for construction  Limit new constructions to a minimum  A GTPE-like committee might still be needed, but it would not be concerned any more with space searches and negotiations  Either enough space is available in the rental market or new buildings are required

6. Space rental  The goal is not: to increase expenses for any department to redistribute budgets to create a “space currency”  Assign a rental value per m2 in CHF based  on current, existing, average ordinary maintenance costs  e.g. the GS budget for building maintenance  on current, existing, average running costs  e.g. heating and electricity(?) costs

7. Space rental - 2  Use rental charges as a help to motivate Department and groups to critically look at their space usage  Releasing space involves a large human effort which must be compensated in some way  The compensation can be used to help rationalize space usage  The rental scheme should be structured to create a negative feedback which helps to  stabilize space requests  include space in the normal budget requests cycle

8. Space rental – Year Y  On year Y, startup 1.Extract the by Dept, by Group usage of space, e.g.: 1.The budget for building Maintenance and Operation for Y+1 is approved 2.The “rental” cost per m2 is calculated 3.The rental cost is distributed to each CERN group in Y+1 on top of their normal budget DepartmentGroupBuildingm2 PHCMD40127 PHCMD3213 PH………

9. Space rental – Year Y+1  On year Y+1 1.Extract the by Dept, by Group usage of space, e.g.: 1.Each CERN group is charged based on their Y+1 space occupation 2.The budget for building Maintenance and Operation for Y+2 is approved 3.The “rental” cost per m2 is calculated 4.The rental cost is distributed to each CERN group in Y+2 on top of their normal budget DepartmentGroupBuildingm2 PHCMD40120 PHCMD3212 PH………

10. Space rental – Year Y+2  On year Y+2 1.Repeat Y+1

11. Working details  The time gap between the first and the last step must be as large as possible  During this time interval Departments can release space and therefore pay less than the rental allocation they will receive  Suggested calendar 1.January 5, year X, data extraction 2.January 15, year X, recharging 3.June, year X, Finance Committee 4.July 1, year X, rental cost calculated using input from 1. and 3. 5.January 1, year X+1, budget distributed 6.January 5, year X+1, …

12. (Devil is in the) Working details - 1  When the recharging from the Dept/Groups to GS (step 2.) there are two options: a.Recharge at the CHF/m2 calculated the year before (step 4.) b.Recalculate the rental cost based on this year budget and the latest space allocation known (data extraction in step 1 and then recharge)  In case a. GS might receive a smaller budget than approved  In case b. GS receives the budget requested

13. (Devil is in the) Working details - 2  When space is released today with, GS is the ultimate owner  With space rental, space should be released to a special no-owner Department (it will be therefore excluded from the step 1. calculation until reassigned)  When space is released, the rental cost CHF/m2 will increase the year after!  This is normal as GS will still have to maintain the released space

14. (Devil is in the) Working details - 3  To request more space, the rental cost of the needed space will have to be integrated in the normal budget request  When space moves from no-owner to a Department, the rental cost will decrease  A request to rent non available space triggers a request for refurbishing existing buildings or building new buildings  An initial budget is already in the MTP at this point (albeit likely insufficient for a new building)  At a later stage one could imagine different prices between different areas (e.g. Meyrin site vs. Prevessin)

15. Special cases to be considered  Collaborations  MS vs. NMS Institutes  Space granted in MoU  Differential prices?  Assembly halls  Storage space  Workshops  Labs  These cases do not prevent a rapid implementation of space rental

16. Costs involved initially  Informatics support, data is existing  Automated extraction of data for step 1.  Simple web interface for Departments and groups to check at any moment their status  Automated generation of space budget allocation to Departments/groups  Automated generation of recharging

17. AoB