HARRISBURG -- The price tag for the University of Pittsburgh's Petersen Events Center tripled from conception to completion in 2002, and now a state legislator is pushing for an inquiry to find out why.

State Rep. Joe Petrarca, D-Vandergrift, is introducing a House resolution asking the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee to study "extensive and outrageous" cost overruns.

The project was expected to cost $35 million but ultimately cost $119 million, including $66 million in public money.

Pitt denied that the project was significantly over-budget even as spending soared.

Mr. Petrarca said the university has not provided adequate answers about the project.

Yesterday, Pitt spokesman Robert Hill would say only that "the project was owned and managed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania."

Pitt relinquished control of the project to the Department of General Services, the state's construction agency, which dismissed Pitt's architects and hired its own.

Project documents examined by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette show that the state allowed Pitt to participate in the selection of the construction manager. Pitt also had a review and advisory role during the project, those documents indicate. But the construction manager was hired as the state's agent and was assigned to quality control.

Mr. Petrarca said Pitt should be more responsive. "It's disturbing that the University of Pittsburgh is so reluctant to talk about these outrageous cost overruns, but they're not shy about showing up in Harrisburg smiling and asking for increases in state funding," he said.

On Thursday Pitt officials requested a 10 percent increase that would bring its state allocation to $192.8 million.

Mr. Petrarca said that is an unconscionable request in light of taxpayer contributions to cost overruns on the Petersen basketball arena.

"When the taxpayers are left footing the bill or holding the bag, that is unacceptable, but none of this stops Pitt from asking for additional state funds," he said.

The study Mr. Petrarca proposes would investigate, among other things:

Whether the project's cost was deliberately underestimated in order to secure state financing.

Why costs increased so quickly.

Who decided to increase the facility's size from 230,000 square feet to 400,000 square feet.

Why there wasn't sufficient state oversight, and

Why lawmakers released the university from its promises to pay for all costs beyond the original state allocation of $13 million.

The legislative committee will report its findings to the House.

The state originally agreed to allocate the $13 million with the proviso that no other state funds would be made available.

"Obviously it's been totally mismanaged. Where all the fault lies, I don't know," Mr. Petrarca said.

"We need to shed some light on this matter to find out why taxpayers have ended up footing over half the bill."

It isn't yet clear how much the investigation would cost or when the House might take up the resolution.

A 2004 investigation by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette found that the extra expenditures were caused largely by the near doubling of the arena's size, poor administrative practices, excessive numbers of contractors, a site change and incomplete architectural drawings that led to inaccurate construction bids and work delays.

Expenses are still mounting because of unresolved lawsuits and a leaky roof that will cost $6.2 million to replace.

Pitt and the state have sued architects and other firms, claiming they were responsible for costly design and construction flaws.

The accused firms have placed the blame on Pitt, the state and the construction manager.