Old Capitols in the New Century.

Preserving the special histories of our temples of democracy while equipping them for modern uses becomes quite the challenge.

Every state has a capitol building, a symbol of state government, an object of pride. Every one of them is unique, designed to convey the character of the people they represent.

They vary in age, but most are old. Sixty percent of them were built in the 18th or 19th centuries. Many others are more than 80 years old.

Most capitols have been significantly expanded at least once, but few have been abandoned or razed. Their old-fashioned facades and interiors, rendered in architectural styles popular in Europe generations ago, give them special appeal as seats of state government.

In the century ahead, even if state legislatures undergo enormous changes, these timeless links to the past will remain in use. What will be their future over the next quarter century?

PRESERVATION, WITHIN REASON

Because of their enduring value, preservationists believe these old buildings must be kept in the best possible condition. The job is a big one: Legislatures must see to maintaining them continuously and not merely repairing when something goes wrong, and ensuring special care for features and spaces that are both old and symbolic. For instance, the gilt on domes needs replacing every few years-even if the use and expense of gold arouses public outcry, as happened in West Virginia.

More recent preservation efforts have been brought about by thoughtless remodeling in a number of capitols during the 1960s. Offices were "modernized" by lowering ceilings and covering decorative trim. As the demand for office space grew, rooms were divided up. In one egregious example, the Ohio State House's original 53 rooms eventually became 317. In some other capitols an even worse situation developed-temporary offices, called "shacktowns" or "plywood cities" were erected in corridors and atriums. And many legislative chambers were redecorated over the years without regard for the building's style or history.

The historical preservation movement of the 1970s began to influence the care of the capitols. Its overall aim was to strip away all non-historical remodeling, restore the spaces to their original state and set the stage for long-term preservation.

Two quite different methods have been used. One has been to proceed wing by wing or floor by floor, restoring the building over a period of years. Occupants move out on a "swing" basis, as is currently being done in the Maine and Wisconsin Capitol restorations. Iowa, Indiana and New York followed this approach, as did Michigan where the project involved 28 separate restoration contracts managed by one firm and an architectural coordinator.

The second plan involves gutting all or much of the building, as was done at the White House a half century ago. This drastic and costly step is sometimes necessary to correct deep-seated structural problems. Legislators and staff move to temporary quarters. The pioneer case is California, where the interior of the older west segment of the Capitol was entirely reconstructed from 1975 to 1981. Walls were rebuilt or reinforced, new or reconditioned floors were laid, a new copper dome was added, and the interior was restored to the 1900 to 1910 era. Alabama, Ohio and Texas also followed this model.

Although historical preservation and restoration will ensure a capitol's perpetual use, states face several issues. One is cost. Many taxpayers view the investment of hundreds of millions of dollars in capitol improvements as extravagant self-indulgence by politicians. Some states have tied costs to other purposes, such as asbestos removal (Hawaii), roof replacement (New Hampshire), fire safety (Texas) and earthquake damage (California and Oregon). Other states have consciously sought to build in advance a foundation of public support, as in Michigan's Friends of the Capitol committee, Pennsylvania's handsome videotape on rotunda restoration and Indiana's restored-paint demonstration along a busy Capitol corridor.

Successful restoration requires a reasonable approach and every attempt to keep costs under control. Preservationists are sometimes zealots with a "purist" attitude that money is no object. It makes sense to engage more than one independent consulting or architectural firm to obtain multiple recommendations.

One of the first items in restoration planning is for lawmakers to decide what era the historical restoration should target. Going back to the time of original construction may be shortsighted. It takes decades for a building to acquire character and accumulate history. Florida's Old Capitol (originally built in 1845, but enlarged later four times) was returned to its 1902 appearance to recreate the state's level of development at the turn of the century. California chose the same era.

Another issue is authenticity of materials and construction methods. Purists may want original woods and period hand tools used, for example, in redoing windows. A more reasonable approach is to recreate similar surface appearances using modern materials and techniques, which helps save cost and often prolongs life. Authentic-looking "wood" windows can be created with fiberglass or wood-clad aluminum, as was done in Nevada and Indiana.

There is also the question of whether the restored rooms should end up as display spaces or be put to practical use. Arizona, California, Florida and Maryland are using a museum concept where renovated spaces house antique furniture and, in some cases, dressed mannequins. Visitors view the rooms through a glass door or from behind a rail. By contrast, the restored Texas state treasury has become a handsome visitor center. The old hearing room of the Wisconsin transportation commission, a sentimental legacy of the Progressive era, is available for general meetings.

Another important decision is what art and artifacts belong in the statehouse. Purists will want to save historic flags and murals, portraits and statuary. But someone has to decide on the other objects that embody a state's popular culture. For example, the trays of state minerals in Georgia, stuffed bison and elk in Wyoming, the suit worn by Huey Long when he was shot in Louisiana, a salt-flats racing car in Utah, and citizen halls of fame in Colorado, Georgia, Nebraska and North Dakota. These displays attract thousands of capitol visitors each year, as well as help renew a sense of state pride for each generation.

SEARCHING FOR MORE SPACE

A continuing problem for historic statehouses is finding room for 21st century government in a building constructed for 18th or 19th century government. Partitions and plywood are not the answer.

The single most effective way many states have used is to decide who is intrinsic to the operation of the legislature, specifically determining which legislators (usually legislative leaders) and staff are required for the day-to-day operation of the chambers. These offices remain in the capitol, and all others are moved to buildings nearby.

Originally, capitol buildings were literally "state" houses. All components of government were there, including administrative agencies. The bureaucracy left early in the last century. Later, all but a few supreme courts moved. In conjunction with the legislative professionalization movement of the 1970s, separate buildings were often constructed to provide office space for legislators, committees and legislative staff. In another attempt to alleviate the crunch, ceremonial offices for constitutional officers (attorney general, secretary of state and treasurer) were left in the capitol while the functional offices were moved to new space. This left many capitols as essentially a temple for the core of representative government, the two legislative bodies and the governor.

This "temple" arrangement makes good sense for the new century. The capitol is now not a state house, but a house of democracy, and lawmakers are giving attention to the overall organization of space. The legislature has traditionally occupied the more prestigious upper floors of the capitol, marked by more elaborate decoration both inside and out. Usually the governor has been downstairs, in a subordinate spatial position and closer to the street. It seems a wise relationship, an idea traceable to the first formation of states after the break from England with its despised colonial governors. Keeping the two occupants on different floors is in keeping with the constitutional separation of powers.

But in some states, this does not necessarily solve the space crunch. All personnel associated with the House, Senate and governor still do not fit. Staff agencies associated with each branch, such as legislative services, the auditing body, the budget shop and the personnel appointments office are often relocated to separate office buildings.

Only those individuals intrinsic to the process are allowed to stay, such as the House and Senate clerks, the chamber and party leaders and their personal assistants, and the governor's immediate political aides. However, even the clerk may choose to move out of the capitol in order to keep staff together. The Wisconsin Senate clerk's office was moved during restoration and will remain in an adjacent building. When space is an issue, sometimes it is more important for an office to have unity to ensure smooth operation.

This more restricted democratic temple is also a home to the people. Citizens want to find its public gathering places in pristine condition, uncluttered, and yet appropriately ornamented. The rotunda, which represents the center of state government and perhaps the state itself, is the home's focal point. It also functions as an automatic social mixing bowl for politicians, lobbyists, reporters and employees, as well as citizens, tourists and schoolchildren. The rotunda is a natural place for rituals such as inaugurals, bicentennial celebrations and political rallies.

ADDING ON

States have found over the years that extensions of the historic fabric of their buildings are possible. The principal modification has been to add side wings for larger legislative chambers. Once the configuration of the front facade becomes impressed upon the public memory, however, it may be unwise to alter it further. North Dakota was the last capitol to be changed in this way when a judicial wing was added to its nonsymmetrical front in 1973.

Another option, followed by more than a dozen states, has been to expand out the back. Pennsylvania built an entire mirror capitol on the backside of the building. Alabama, Arizona, California, Maryland, Massachusetts and New Jersey added to the backs of their buildings many times. But this answer might not work for the new century because of the amount and type of new space required and the desire to preserve the original historic facade.

One way to get more space is to go underground, as Louisiana, Tennessee and Texas did. Out of respect for an edifice that in effect became Huey Long's memorial, substantial added room for the Legislature was created at the basement level in Baton Rouge. In Nashville, the crypt beneath William Strickland's Greek Revival masterpiece was enlarged and connected by tunnel to a major underground office complex across the street. In Austin, a massive excavation using mining equipment was made behind Elijah Myers' American Renaissance creation. A multilevel capitol extension was constructed, covered over and connected underneath to the old building. A variant on this idea is found in Connecticut, where Hartford's neo-Gothic landmark is linked by an underground moving sidewalk to a separate legislative office building.

Underground solutions are attractive and probably will be examined by other states in the years ahead. Creative possibilities also lie above the ground. The most drastic is to move the entire legislative branch out and construct a new home that includes chambers. Arizona did this by placing separate new House and Senate buildings adjacent to the old territorial facade. The Alabama Legislature moved to a refurbished state highway department building during capitol restoration and has remained there. North Carolina and Nevada legislators built grand new legislative offices for themselves, leaving the governor behind in the historic capitol. A new high-rise Florida Capitol was constructed just behind the old one, which became a museum. In New Mexico, a new Capitol took the round shape of a kiva, with the old building relegated to office use.

In many states a "capitol campus" has been consciously created, featuring a relatively open, landscaped area with a variety of state office buildings and the capitol at the center. Good examples are found in Arkansas, Delaware, Minnesota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Virginia, Washington and West Virginia. This concept creates physical proximity within state government, in contrast to office buildings scattered all over the city or clustered in office parks at the edge of town.

EQUIPPING OUR CAPITOLS FOR THE FUTURE

How will our timeless capitols serve the 21st century's technical needs?

Several states have already acquired advanced computer equipment and software. An ideal is to put all calendar and bill information online. Legislators need to have ready access to the system, including at their desks in the chamber. Some states have taken the trouble to build computers into legislator desks, others find it easier to furnish them with laptops with jacks for a modem feed. In some cases, it is necessary to temporarily remove all furnishings from the chambers, as Virginia has done, to install the new equipment for jacks or revamping desks.

The future may also demand that interactive television be incorporated in the capitol. Alaska and Nevada lawmakers already hold committee hearings for audiences all across the state. Eventually all committee rooms will need to be equipped with automated cameras and large-screen monitors. As technology advances, interactive television and on-line political communication will become a standard component of state government.

Many legislative sessions around the country are now subject to gavel-to-gavel television coverage. This will probably become universal in the years ahead. Intrusive cameras are no longer necessary, making the prominent balcony cameraman obsolete. Broadcast feeds can go directly to office monitors throughout the capitol complex. External broadcasting, whether by public television, private stations or the Internet, requires a control room where footage is taped and edited for later release.

Increasingly, 21st century statehouse politicians will appear regularly on television. Accordingly, each capitol complex is likely to need an ample studio equipped for professionally directed programming. To accommodate high-volume periods, legislatures may need more than one stage set. A special studio may also be desirable for the governor near his or her office, equipped with appropriate backdrops, such as the state seal or a photograph of the dome.

KEEPING THE BUILDINGS SECURE

Television is also an essential tool for capitol security. The practice in most states is not to use, at least for the capitol building itself, overt security measures, such as uniformed guards or magnetometer gates. This helps maintain an atmosphere of free and open government. To compensate, however, the capitol of the future will probably require such security measures as round-the-clock television surveillance.

Television surveillance can also ensure security on the capitol grounds, including at night. Most grounds are unfenced. Boxed electricity jacks can be placed in the ground to power amplification equipment (and enable the cutting off of power, if necessary), for rallies and demonstrations.

Organized or random terrorism will probably be with us for the foreseeable future, so many states are rerouting driveways to cut the risk of truck bombings. Other areas of concern are garages under the capitol, porte-cocheres beneath steps and the capitol's dome. Some states are taking measurers to secure these. While lawmakers want to avoid obvious barriers or pylons in front of the capitol steps, a well-placed block of marble or granite is not out of place if it can be disguised in some way. Nevada did this for its renovated legislative building after a runaway car plowed into the front door without serious damage to the building.

PRESERVING FOR TOMORROW

To sum it all up, these old buildings are something like an antique car or beloved mate. They improve with age. Their familiarity grows. The memories they represent accumulate. The feelings they foster deepen.

We will need the nation's 50 state capitols far into the future. We must take good care of them. Adapting them to the needs of the new century will require thoughtful ingenuity.

Charles T. Goodsell, a professor in the Center for Public Administration and Policy at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, is author of The American Statehouse: Interpreting Democracy's Temples slated to come out this fall.

A NEW BOOK ON CAPITOLS, THE AMERICAN STATEHOUSE

Charles T. Goodsell, a professor in the Center for Public Administration and Policy at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, is the author of a new book on state capitols to come out this fall. Entitled The American Statehouse: Interpreting Democracy's Temples, it will be published by the University Press of Kansas.

Goodsell has been working on the book for 10 years. He visited all 49 capitols built for that purpose (Alaska's is the exception) and interviewed more than 300 legislators, officials, reporters, architects and building engineers.

Unlike other books on the subject, The American Statehouse examines the capitols not as 49 separate buildings but as a single building type with variations. Blending architectural study and political science, he interprets the statehouse as a unique American creation that expresses important political values of the past and still shapes the conduct of state political life.

Its topics include the history of the statehouse idea, how and when the present capitols were built, the cultural objects displayed within them, how interior space is organized and furnished, and ways in which the building performs as political stage.

While some architectural critics see monumental public buildings as masked attempts to intimidate the masses, Goodsell regards them as sources of state pride and the embodiment of democratic principles.

The book contains 119 photographs taken by the author. It can be ordered for $35 from the University Press of Kansas, 2501 W. 15th St., Lawrence, Kan. 66049-3905; phone, [phone], fax [phone].

REMOLDEING THE TEXAS CAPITOL

Elijah E. Myers designed the Texas Capitol as well as the Colorado and Michigan capitols.

The Texas statehouse was built between 1882 and 1888. The state sold most of 10 panhandle counties (at 50 cents an acre) to a ranching syndicate to finance the project. A large structure, its House chamber is probably the nation's biggest legislative space.

A major capitol extension was constructed below ground, in conjunction with a large-scale restoration of the interior of the old build-between 1990 and 1995. Located immediately adjacent to the back or north side of the Capitol and connected to it below ground, it more than doubles the available space, but does not detract visually from the old edifice.

Quarry saws were brought in to cut a hole in the limestone approximately 400 feet by 425 feet and down 60 feet. Seismic sensors were used to monitor potential vibration damage to the Capitol. Some 40,000 truckloads of rock were removed from the hole, equivalent to more than two Washington Cathedrals.

The new structure was fitted precisely into this hole. Four levels of space were created. The upper floor, just below the covering plaza and skylights, contains offices for senators and some representatives. The second floor accommodates committee staff and the remaining representatives. Two parking decks are further below. A round, open-air central court attempts a symbolic connection to the historic capitol by conceptually repeating the inside of the drum of its dome.

THE PIONEER CALIFORNIA RESTORATION

The oldest part of the California State Capitol in Sacramento, designed by Miner Butler and Reuben Clark, was constructed between 1860 and 1869. It was the first example at the state level of the American Renaissance style that later became a standard around the country, in part because of the influence of the U.S. Capitol that it resembles.

The original west or front half of the building was completely gutted between 1975 and 1981, and its interior restored to its appearance between 1900 and 1910. The project was unprecedented in scope for a state government building and touted as the most extensive restoration undertaken in the hemisphere up to that time. Its cost, a subject of contemporary controversy, was never published.

The roof of the structure, dating from 1906, was entirely removed, although the dome remained in place. After bracing the facade externally, the contents were removed, one floor at a time. To strengthen the walls, a foot of original brick was removed from the inside face and replaced by a layer of steel-reinforced concrete. The foundation floor was strengthened also by a mat of reinforced concrete three feet deep. New steel trusses were added at the roof level of the wings, and the dome was reinforced and covered with new copper shingles that duplicated the original. Roofline statuary, much of which had been removed because of deterioration, was reproduced and replaced.

Following paint analysis and detective work to uncover original stair designs, the interior of a century ago was recreated. The governor's office suite and those of other constitutional officers were restored to the way they appeared at the time of the San Francisco earthquake.

WHICH CAPITOLS ARE THE OLDEST?

Maryland's State House in Annapolis holds the record as the oldest capitol. Its construction began in 1771, five years before the American Revolution, as a seat of colonial government. Construction resumed after the Revolutionary War, and the building was first occupied in 1779. It was eventually completed in 1797. Although the original part of the structure is now a tourist attraction, it is attached to a large rear addition that serves the two legislative bodies and governor.

New Jersey's State House in Trenton can lay claim to being the second oldest, with earliest construction commencing in 1792. Only a deeply buried fragment of the old building is still in place, though.

Two other capitols date to the 18th century, that of Massachusetts, designed by Charles Bulfinch and built between 1795 and 1798, and Virginia, planned by Thomas Jefferson and constructed from 1785 to 1800. By way of comparison, George Washington laid the cornerstone of the U.S. Capitol in 1793, and it was first occupied in 1800.

The earliest 19th century capitols are New Hampshire (1816-19), Maine (1829-32), Alabama (1850-51), Vermont (1857-59) and Ohio (1839-61). As for the remaining statehouses, 27 were constructed in two waves following the Civil War, one lasting from 1866 to 1886 and the other from 1895 to 1924 (measured by year of initial construction).

The newest legislative homes are those of Arizona (1960), North Carolina (1963), New Mexico (1964-66), Hawaii (1965-69), Florida (1973-77), Alabama (1985) and Nevada (1970 and 1997).