February 2, 2018

CT Construction Digest Friday February 2, 2018

Schools, infrastructure priorities in Norwalk finance director’s recommended capital budget

NORWALK — Norwalk Director of Finance Robert Barron has prioritized schools and other infrastructure in his recommended five-year capital-spending plan released early Thursday evening
“Meeting the capital needs of the city is of paramount importance in developing a recommended capital spending plan,” wrote Barron in his recommendations. “While favorable debt ratios are important, investments in the city’s infrastructure, facilities, and projects that have a demonstrable economic payback are essential to maintaining the city’s long-term economic vitality.”
After considering the state and local economies, and the city’s ability to take on debt, Barron has recommended $189.4 million in capital spending through fiscal year 2022-23. Of that, $5 million is recommended for the Parking Authority, $20.9 million for the Water Pollution Control Authority, $76.9 million for city departments and $86.6 million for the Board of Education
“Due to the significant investment in the city’s schools, this recommended five year plan generates several years of debt ratios greater than the targets in the city’s debt policy,” Barron wrote. “However, the city returns to these targeted levels of debt ratios after a projected level of debt issuance of $22.2 million in years six through ten.”
Barron urged city policy makers to carefully consider the future operating budget impact as they make their capital budget appropriations.
Norwalk’s annual capital budget paves roads, repairs municipal buildings and undertakes long-lasting infrastructure improvements paid for largely through the issuance of municipal bonds.
For fiscal year 2018-19, which begins July 1, Barron has recommended $81.3 million in capital spending with $55.6 million of that to be bonded.
Of the $81.3 million, $59.4 million is recommended for the school board’s new school construction and infrastructure improvements. That includes $20.9 million to shape Columbus School at 46 Concord St. into an International Baccalaureate School, $24.2 million for Jefferson Elementary School and $12.8 million for other improvements in the board’s facilities master plan.
The Norwalk Planning Commission has begun its review of the various capital spending requests and has set a public hearing for Wednesday at City Hall, according to Barron’s department
The Common Council has until mid-April to adopt the city’s 2018-19 capital budget.

Stamford seeks alternative funding for some halted roadworks

STAMFORD — Connecticut’s third largest city is responding to Gov. Dannel Malloy’s suspension of $4.3 billion in state-funded transportation works by pushing forward with the projects that it can and seeking other financing to offset what won’t be coming from Hartford, the chief transportation planner said this week.
“We don’t stop but we continue to look at what other funding opportunities are out there and we will continue to move forward with those,” including grants and other sources, Stamford Transportation Bureau Chief Jim Travers said
The largest halted projects — widening Interstate 95 through Fairfield County and replacing the crumbling parking garage at the downtown train station — may have the biggest impact in terms of their effects on commuters and other travelers.
But the state’s decision has also forced Stamford to pause its planning on several road works important to easing local traffic including the realignment of the intersection at Strawberry Hill and Rock Spring Road, improvements at the Atlantic and Main street and Atlantic and Broad street junctions, corridor improvements between Tresser Boulevard and Broad Street, and the installation of roundabouts on Stillwater Avenue at Bridge Street and West Avenue.
“Without funding, we have limited ability to improve congestion and mobility throughout the city, as well as to keeping roadways in a state of good repair,” Travers said.
The governor has painted a grim picture of the state of transportation in Connecticut and the toll it is taking on jobs and economic development.
“You can’t get through Fairfield County to get to the rest of the state,” Malloy told lawmakers Jan. 10 as he implored them to allocate money to the state Special Transportation Fund, which is set aside for road and rail improvements.
“From Greenwich to Bridgeport it can at times take two hours,” Malloy said. “Hartford to Stamford takes two and half hours now. The problems in Fairfield and New Haven counties, and the problems that will play out in Hartford and Waterbury will cripple our economy. People are refusing to come to the state because they don’t believe the state will do what’s right for transportation.”
In the works
Projects already under way in Stamford will not be halted by the governor’s recent decision, Travers said, because they’ve already been funded via federal grants and previously allocated state funds.
Those include fiber-optic upgrades to the city’s 211 traffic signals to “connect them to the operation center at the Government Center,” Travers said, which will be followed by signal or timing optimization.
Work to replace six traffic light signals in the downtown area is also already in progress, and the Summer Street Local Accident Reduction Program, which is in its final design stages, “should go out to bid in the near future,” he said.
Intersection improvements at Greenwich Avenue and Pulaski Street and the installment of a roundabout where Greenwich Avenue, Pulaski and Davenport streets meet “will be in final design by the end of April and beginning construction this summer,” Travers said.
While all of these projects will keep the bureau busy over the next few years, Travers said it’s the planning of future projects that is uncertain.
“We have about 16 projects that are currently in the conceptual design stage that — without a commitment to move forward with funding — we’ve had to put on pause,” Travers said, adding the bureau typically manges projects that are in the works, while simultaneously planning future improvements. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE

Demolition work for third tribal casino to begin this month

Mohegan — Demolition work will begin by the end of the month on the East Windsor site of the proposed third Connecticut casino, the Mohegan Tribe's chairman said Thursday during a quarterly conference call with investors and gaming-industry analysts.
Kevin Brown, who also chairs the management board of Mohegan Gaming & Entertainment, Mohegan Sun's parent company, said the Mohegan and Mashantucket Pequot tribes, partners in the third-casino project, are "on track" to proceed with the razing of an abandoned Showcase Cinemas building off Exit 45 of Interstate 91.
There, the tribes intend to build a $300 million "satellite" casino to protect their gaming palaces in southeastern Connecticut from the competitive impact of MGM Springfield, the nearly $1 billion resort casino under construction in Massachusetts.
Brown said "a bit of obfuscation" at the federal level has held things up.
He was referring to the U.S. Department of the Interior's failure to act on gaming amendments Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed with each of the tribes last summer. The state law that authorized the East Windsor casino requires that the amendments be approved by the federal government. The state and the tribes have sued in an effort to compel the Interior Department to act.
The intrigue was detailed Thursday in an article posted by Politico, the online and print news outlet. Headlined "Zinke's agency held up Indians' casino after MGM lobbying," the article says the Interior Department refused to endorse the state-tribe gaming amendments after Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and other Interior officials "held numerous meetings and phone calls with MGM lobbyists and the company's Republican supporters in Congress ..."
The reporting, which confirms much of what has appeared in Connecticut media, was based on "a Politico review of Zinke's schedule, lobbying registrations and other documents," the article says.
Mohegan Gaming & Entertainment, which in addition to Mohegan Sun owns and operates Mohegan Sun Pocono in Wilkes-Barre, Pa., and manages casinos in Atlantic City and Washington state, had a strong quarter in the three-month period that ended Dec. 31, MGE executives said during the conference call.
By a measure known as adjusted EBITDA — earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization — earnings for the company were up nearly 10 percent over the same quarter the previous year, Mario Kontomerkos, MGE's president and chief executive officer, said.
"Results were led by another strong quarter at our flagship operation, Mohegan Sun," he said.
At the Connecticut casino, adjusted EBITDA increased 12.8 percent, while net revenues totaled nearly $263 million, a 1.4 percent increase. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE

North Stonington residents air school project feelings ahead of referendum

North Stonington — After a town meeting Thursday night in which school building project advocates and revote petitioners presented their perspectives, the date finally is set for determining the fate of the controversial project.
Town officials have set the referendum for late next week, at which time residents will vote on whether or not to continue with the school building project, which was approved at a referendum two years ago. Contractors were readying to break ground later this month.
The polls will be open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. Feb. 8 at Town Hall.
Residents originally were expected to vote on the project at Thursday’s meeting, but the town was required to send the vote to referendum after receiving multiple petitions requesting an all-day vote instead.
“Honestly, this is the town we live in and it's OK that this happened,” First Selectman Mike Urgo said to a crowd of hundreds of residents. "I know nobody wants to hear that, but this is the government we have, we're all neighbors." "Get the facts, vote the way you feel, don't hold ill-will against anybody, let the process play out and hopefully the right decision will be reached," he said.
Intended to improve facilities and address serious maintenance issues in the school district’s aging buildings, the $38.5 million project — of which taxpayers will be responsible for about $21 million after reimbursement from the state — has been one of the most divisive issues in town going back to its original approval by just a three-vote margin.
Those in favor argue the project is necessary if the town wants to continue to educate kids in North Stonington, given the current maintenance issues with the schools. Advocates also argue the project prevents the town from being held at the whims of districts in other towns, and is an investment that will help further economic growth, attract new families and ultimately lighten the tax burden for residents in the future.
“Our students excel at life because of the practical and academic skills and knowledge they receive in North Stonington ... do not throw our students away,” said Burt Bartick, 73, adding he is a senior on a fixed income. "It is more than a building project, we are talking about the core and soul of our community." CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE

No, Connecticut can’t install border tolls — here’s why

When Nutmeggers think of highway tolls, they often think of border tolls, which would charge motorists entering and leaving the state of Connecticut. But that’s not what Gov. Dannel Malloy and state legislators are proposing when they call for tolls to be installed on Connecticut’s highways.
Instead, Connecticut would install congestion tolls — electronic tolling stations which would be placed along highways within the state and charge variable rates depending on the time of day and traffic congestion.
Critics have pointed out this means Connecticut residents will be paying 70 percent of the revenue collected from those tolls.
According to an I-95 congestion tolling study by the Department of Transportation, a full-length, one-way trip between New Haven and New York during peak hours would cost the commuter $6, while the same trip on the Merritt Parkway would be $5.
So why doesn’t Connecticut just install tolls along its border like it did on 1-95 decades ago?
When Connecticut removed its tolls along its border on I-95, it essentially gave those up for good. Interstate highways such as I-95 and I-84 are controlled and regulated by the Federal Highway Administration.
According to a 2009 report from the Office of Legislative Research, when Connecticut agreed to remove its tolls in 1983, it gave up its right to collect revenue from those crossing the border. On the plus side, it also meant Connecticut would receive more federal transportation dollars and the federal government would fund repairs to those interstates.
This agreement remains in effect.
“Historically, federally-aided highways have been required to be toll-free,” the OLR reports states.
The Obama administration attempted to lift this restriction in 2014 when President Obama proposed a new transportation bill, but the tolling language didn’t make it into the final law.
There are some exceptions to tolling interstates, however, congestion tolling — also known as value pricing tolls. Other exceptions include adding and tolling an HOV lane or constructing an entirely new highway, both of which would likely be cost prohibitive for Connecticut.
Congestion tolling takes place within the borders of a state and charges variable toll rates depending on congestion and time of day. During times of heavy traffic like rush hour, toll fees will be higher. This type of tolling is meant to reduce congestion by either incentivizing commuters to use highways at off-peak times or carpool.
In some cases those tolls can grow quite hefty. On January 24th the toll on Interstate 66 just outside Washington D.C. hit $46.75 for 12 minutes during the morning rush hour. That figure was just short of the I-66 record of $47.25 just six days earlier.
But, what about other states which have tolls on their highways, like the Massachusetts Turnpike?
Those highways were essentially grandfathered in when the U.S. Government created the Interstate Highway System, but the tolls meant that no federal funds would be provided for “construction, reconstruction, operation or improvement of these roads,” according to the OLR report.
Historically, states that wanted to install border tolls would be forced to pay back federal money it had received, although states rarely try since Congress established certain exceptions.
According to the OLR report, in 1984 Connecticut wanted to establish tolls on I-95 along the border with Rhode Island but was informed the federal government would require repayment of all the federal funds it had received since the previous agreement and would have to forfeit emergency funds related to the Mianus River Bridge collapse.
There have been exceptions to repayment of federal funds in the past, most notably for the New York Thruway, but it requires Congressional approval.
Unless Connecticut wants to gamble on approval by Congress and potentially have to repay large amounts of money to the federal government, its easiest option is to install congestion tolling, although it will still require some form of federal approval. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE