HARTFORD – Construction companies and unions representing construction workers support bringing back highway tolls, but the state’s trucking industry opposes the idea.
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy on Wednesday proposed electronic tolls as a reliable means to finance the Special Transportation Fund that is verging on insolvency.
“There are two choices at this point. We can continue barreling down a road to ruin in this state, or we can invest in a state that works for everyone,” said Don Shubert, president of the Connecticut Construction Industries Association.
Nate Brown, business representative for International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 478, agreed that tolls are necessary now.
Advocates of tolls are misleading people and businesses in Connecticut because federal law limits the state’s options to congestion-price tolling on existing interstate highways, said Joseph R. Sculley, president of the Motor Transport Association of Connecticut.
The way it works is toll charges are higher during the busiest drive times such as morning and evening rush hours, and motorists pay lower tolls or no tolls at other times.
Sculley said the Federal Highway Administration has not permitted a state to impose tolls on existing highways through its Value Pricing Pilot Program. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Trump infrastructure plan seeks to shift burden to states
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — When President Donald Trump called for a $1.5 trillion infrastructure investment in his State of the Union address, he didn't pledge that the federal government actually would provide that much money for roads, bridges, rail and waterways.
To the contrary, Trump's plan counts on state and local governments working with private investors to come up with much of the cash.Exactly how that would work remained unclear Wednesday, as state transportation officials noted that Trump's proposal could put more pressure on them to raise taxes, fees and tolls just to qualify for a share of his infrastructure program. Questions surrounding Trump's plan are likely to leave costly projects, such as plans for a new Hudson River tunnel connecting New York and New Jersey, in limbo.
"The Trump administration has issued a charge that sounds a lot like 'show me the money,'" said Missouri Department of Transportation Director Patrick McKenna, who is president of the Mid America Association of State Transportation Officials.
In his speech Tuesday night, Trump called upon Congress to pass a plan "that generates at least $1.5 trillion" for infrastructure. "We will build gleaming new roads, bridges, highways, railways and waterways all across our land," he said.
He did not provide a roadmap on how to achieve that or give specifics on how it would be funded. The Republican president said only that "every federal dollar should be leveraged by partnering with state and local governments and, where appropriate, tapping into private-sector investment." The federal government typically provides 80 percent of the funding for capital expenditures on highways, with state and local governments coming up with the rest. On transit projects, the federal share typically ranges from 50 percent to 80 percent, according to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
A six-page summary of Trump's plan, which was widely but unofficially distributed a week ahead of his speech, indicates that Trump is envisioning a significant shift of financial responsibility. Half his proposed federal money would go toward competitive grants for a wide range of infrastructure, including various transportation modes, hydropower, and drinking and wastewater facilities. But the federal grants would cover no more than 20 percent of project costs while requiring applicants to commit to "new, non-federal revenue."
To participate in Trump's plan, Missouri likely would have to ask voters to raise taxes for transportation, McKenna said. That's because the state transportation department already is spending at a deficit of roughly $80 million a year to meet its current federal highway match.
Neighboring Arkansas is in a similar predicament. Gov. Asa Hutchinson's budget proposal seeks to transfer $16 million from surplus general revenue to the transportation department in order to meet its current federal highway allotment. Qualifying for Trump's plan could require a new revenue source.
"We're shaking the couch cushions out to see where we can find the rest of it," said Republican state Rep. Dan Douglas, who has backed various unsuccessful transportation funding bills.
Over the past five years, about three-fourths of the states have taken some sort of step to boost transportation funding, including 26 states that have raised motor fuel taxes.
Trump has suggested a greater role for public-private partnerships, in which a private entity helps finance and construct a major public infrastructure project in exchange for collecting tolls or fees from the users for years to come. But some states don't allow such projects. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Malloy wants tolls, 7 cent hike in gas tax
HARTFORD — Motorists would navigate under dozens of overhead toll gantries along state highways throughout Connecticut under a funding plan for transportation that would also raise the state’s gasoline tax to 32 cents from 25 cents per gallon over the next few years.
While legislative Republicans balked after Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s Wednesday morning support for the new revenue generators, Democratic leaders including Speaker of the House Joe Aresimowicz conceded the issue will likely be a major debate for the upcoming legislative session.
For the first time since taking office in 2011, Malloy came out in support of high-speed electronic tolls that could raise up to $800 million a year for the cash-strapped state transportation fund.
“I wish we had it two years ago, because maybe we wouldn’t be in the predicament we are in today,” Malloy saud during a 45-minute news conference in the Capitol. Malloy also wants lawmakers to approve a multiyear addition to the 25-cents-per-gallon gas, to raise it to 32 cents, generating $105 million more per year by 2022. In 1997, the 39-cent gas tax was cut to a quarter. “The future is now,” Malloy told reporters, transportation advocates and unionized construction workers.
He said that if the General Assembly adopts the various options, which will be presented Feb. 7, it would assure that $4.3 billion in highway projects recently postponed — including the completion of the Interstate-95/Route 7 interchange in Norwalk -- would be back on schedule.
Malloy’s initiative was the result of weeks of meetings with advocates and industry experts in attempt to shore up the Special Transportation Fund, which is on track to become insolvent in 2020. Malloy said that if approved the tolls could be erected more quickly than the 2023 time frame some supporters have suggested.
The governor also proposed a $3-per-tire fee on the purchase of new tires, raising a projected $8 million a year. The plans will be presented to the General Assembly next week.
Can’t do nothing
Republican leaders including House Minority Leader Themis Klarides, R-Derby, and Senate Republican President Len Fasano, R-North Haven, continued to voice opposition to the vehicular tax hikes, stressing that in 2015, they offered a way to pay for transit improvements without tolls or higher taxes. But State Sen. Carlo Leone, D-Stamford, co-chairman of the legislative Transportation Committee, said the projected insolvency of the fund for transportation is looming.
“In my mind, the one thing we can’t do is do nothing — and that’s what some voices in this building are saying,” Leone said after Malloy's announcement in a Capitol meeting room. “The governor is on his way out of office and he could have chosen to leave it for the next administration. It’s reckless not to do anything.” For the state to enter the bond market for highway and bridge improvements, the Special Transportation Fund (STF) must show a balance over five years. A steep slide in gasoline taxes, combined with years of raiding the STF by the General Assembly, which transferred tens of millions of dollars to the General Fund, has led to the crisis.
In recent years, so-called border tolls have been criticized because they could make the state ineligible for some federal highway funding. But toll supporters say federal cash would not be jeopardized by statewide tolls activated by transponders in vehicles.
“Within 20 years, half of the cars on the road will be electric,” Malloy said. “It is a dying funding source.” Democratic lawmakers earlier this week announced renewed support for a new statewide system of electronic tolls.
Charging electric cars
A longtime opponent of tolls, Rep. Bob Godfrey, D-Danbury, said Wednesday after the House session that the rising number of electric vehicles, many of which are luxury vehicles like Teslas, are being subsidized with free electricity from charging stations throughout the state. He said he would like to see those vehicles pay for the roads in the same way that gasoline-powered vehicles pay.
He noted the amendment to the state Constitution, establishing a so-called lockbox on the transportation fund that will be on the statewide ballot in November, will essentially be a referendum on whether the state wants tolls.
“This is controversial,” he said. “It’s new. It’s being pushed harder than I thought. My constituents are telling me they are very upset that when rich people buy those electric cars, they pay nothing into the Special Transportation Fund. I think it’s time we devote the sales tax on motor vehicles to the Special Transportation Fund. I certainly am leaning to raising and fixing the gasoline tax.” CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
SECOND LOOK: Interstate highway spurred Southington's growth
When Interstate 84 was completed through Southington’s western section 57 years ago, most folks figured it was just another mode of accommodating the new and faster automobiles that were being built.
As the 1950s came to a close, the period of post-war adjustment, there were few who imagined that this long stretch of concrete had been the brainchild of a young soldier in 1919.
When a caravan of Army vehicles experimented by embarking on a cross-country trip from Washington, D.C., to San Francisco, it became quite apparent that America couldn’t depend on its rural road system. It took 62 days to reach California, and one of those participating soldiers was Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Slightly less than 30 years later, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower was said to be impressed by the Autobahn highway in post-war Germany. This wide stretch of highway would become the design for a new America.
But it wasn’t planned to help Americans get from one place to another faster, but rather for military purposes. When Eisenhower became president, he wanted an Interstate Highway System that could be an evacuation route for citizens in the event of an enemy attack, and for the rapid movement of military equipment across the country.
Thus, in 1953, during the Cold War, the federal government designed a plan that would snake 42,000 miles of highway through the busiest parts of the nation. Three years later Congress approved the Federal Aid Highway Act and paid for 90 percent of the construction, with states paying the remaining funds.
The new Interstate Highway System was specifically designed to accommodate automobiles with limited speed. Officials figured 70 mph would be the top speed. Highway planners didn’t figure on trucks the size of houses and cars that would resemble rockets. That miscalculation could be excused when one recalls the engine strength of a 1956 Chevy compared to a 2018 Mustang.
Yet the biggest problem wasn’t the immediate durability of the road surface, but instead it was interchanges, those curving attachments that we use to get on and get off the Interstates. Only 16,000 were part of the original plan. Those interchanges were a big expense later on, as communities wanted those whizzing cars to stop and shop. Motorists also had to travel miles to get on those Interstates.
Were it not for Eisenhower and the 62-day across-the-country caravan, we might still be driving Route 10 for a trip to New Haven or Hartford. Can you imagine getting to Waterbury by way of Southington Mountain, or visiting Meriden via the old Meriden-Waterbury Turnpike?
The impact of the Interstate highway system energized America and allowed states like ours to literally connect their towns and cities. It allowed the tremendous growth of industry, employment, imaginative retail offerings and commercialization of just about everything. It also drastically changed the way we would live.
The Interstates suburbanized America and allowed for the sprawl of U.S. cities but along with that came congestion, smog and a dependency on the automobile. The use of mass transit declined. Family life would change for better or worse.
The Interstate 40 years ago made a slow but major impact in Southington. It sliced through old rural roads, splitting farmlands and dividing property lots that had stood against the passage of time for decades. And for Southington, it brought the first of many-to-come retail giants - G.E. Madison’s.
Interstate 84 gave Southington an identity. It provided Plantsville with traffic. It connected us with our neighbors.
Yes, Interstate 84 brought with it a curse of speed and death and suburban growth. The Interstates have literally pushed us to live life with a gas pedal. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Voters pass $15.7 million Plainville water pollution project
PLAINVILLE – Less than 250 voters showed up to the polls Tuesday to decide on a $15.7 million upgrade project to the town’s water pollution control facility in order to comply with the state-mandated removal of phosphorus.
Town Manager Robert Lee said 193 people voted yes while 31 voted no on the project.
“It hasn’t generated a lot of controversy,” Lee said before the vote, adding the turnout was predicted to be quiet.
The town is required by the state to reduce the amount discharged into the Pequabuck River by 88 percent.
The sludge processing system at the facility will also be improved for better efficiency.
A state grant is expected to cover 41.2 percent of the total project. The town will be responsible for the remaining $9.2 million and plans to fund the share through a state loan with a two percent interest rate.
The Town Council recently agreed to a 4.8 percent sewer user fee increase in order to cover project expenses. The council said rates are expected to decrease by 2025.
The complete project design has already been approved by the state.
Bids for construction are expected to be received by March with a start date for the project as soon as May. The project is expected to take two years to complete
Waterford municipal complex project pushes forward
Waterford — A renovation project in the works for more than a decade has evolved into a fresh set of plans for a new $11.7 million municipal complex.
Unveiled Wednesday night and working its way through town committees over the coming months, the project entails site remediation, demolition of dilapidated structures at 1000 Hartford Turnpike and construction of a new 53,500-square-foot facility to house offices and the town garage.
Officials put previous renovation efforts on hold multiple times over the years as the town prioritized school construction projects. In late 2016, the project hit snags with a previous architect suffering financial challenges, and last year the town held off while awaiting word on the availability of state aid.
Initial renovation estimates were in the neighborhood of $12 million, but officials say they can erect a new facility for roughly the same price while fully remediating contamination and better protecting the Department of Public Works' dozens of vehicles.
"Right now we're at a point where we think we have some pretty good information and we're hoping this all can flow together," First Selectman Dan Steward said in an interview Wednesday. "The staff and committee have worked really hard to put this together. This has been a challenge for us. It's not something that's been easy by any means."
Last spring, Glastonbury-based Anchor Engineering took the reins on a new design, which was presented Wednesday at a special joint meeting of the Board of Selectmen, the Board of Finance and the Municipal Complex Improvements Building Committee.
Glenn Patterson of the building committee said the current structure is in poor condition and not fully utilized, with "inefficient, awkward layouts" creating limited space for vehicles, and "compliant, but not optimum" standards with regard to the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Patterson added that town staff and Anchor Engineering have worked to make the site compliant with state remediation requirements. But full environmental remediation — including the removal of 8,200 cubic yards of contaminated soil — would cost approximately $1.5 million.
Steward and Patterson noted officials identified problems with the now more-than-50-year-old facility in the early 2000s. Oil leaks, safety problems and other basic code violations have been resolved through minor repairs over the years, but officials say the site continues to deteriorate.
Board of Finance Chairman Ron Fedor questioned whether a new facility housing DPW vehicles was worth the investment, considering the vehicles "spend so much time outside in bad weather" already. When I look at this dollar figure, it's a lot of money," he said.
Steward said reducing salt damage would help vehicles last longer, which was "one of the benefits we'd have keeping them in a clean environment."
Fedor suggested the committee conduct further analysis of whether other towns who've built or renovated similar facilities have seen improved durability for their vehicles.
Prompted by questions from Board of Finance member Bill Sheehan, Patterson and Anchor Engineering project manager Marek Kement said the new design created adequate space for vehicles and office workers along with improved safety, security and storage accommodations.
Steward said there's a variety of funding sources available, including some capital improvement funds, bonding and unassigned fund balance that generally "we don't like to touch." CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Malloy seeks tolls, gas-tax hike to rebuild infrastructure
By KEITH M. PHANEUF, The Connecticut Mirror
When a caravan of Army vehicles experimented by embarking on a cross-country trip from Washington, D.C., to San Francisco, it became quite apparent that America couldn’t depend on its rural road system. It took 62 days to reach California, and one of those participating soldiers was Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Slightly less than 30 years later, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower was said to be impressed by the Autobahn highway in post-war Germany. This wide stretch of highway would become the design for a new America.
But it wasn’t planned to help Americans get from one place to another faster, but rather for military purposes. When Eisenhower became president, he wanted an Interstate Highway System that could be an evacuation route for citizens in the event of an enemy attack, and for the rapid movement of military equipment across the country.
Thus, in 1953, during the Cold War, the federal government designed a plan that would snake 42,000 miles of highway through the busiest parts of the nation. Three years later Congress approved the Federal Aid Highway Act and paid for 90 percent of the construction, with states paying the remaining funds.
The new Interstate Highway System was specifically designed to accommodate automobiles with limited speed. Officials figured 70 mph would be the top speed. Highway planners didn’t figure on trucks the size of houses and cars that would resemble rockets. That miscalculation could be excused when one recalls the engine strength of a 1956 Chevy compared to a 2018 Mustang.
Yet the biggest problem wasn’t the immediate durability of the road surface, but instead it was interchanges, those curving attachments that we use to get on and get off the Interstates. Only 16,000 were part of the original plan. Those interchanges were a big expense later on, as communities wanted those whizzing cars to stop and shop. Motorists also had to travel miles to get on those Interstates.
Were it not for Eisenhower and the 62-day across-the-country caravan, we might still be driving Route 10 for a trip to New Haven or Hartford. Can you imagine getting to Waterbury by way of Southington Mountain, or visiting Meriden via the old Meriden-Waterbury Turnpike?
The impact of the Interstate highway system energized America and allowed states like ours to literally connect their towns and cities. It allowed the tremendous growth of industry, employment, imaginative retail offerings and commercialization of just about everything. It also drastically changed the way we would live.
The Interstates suburbanized America and allowed for the sprawl of U.S. cities but along with that came congestion, smog and a dependency on the automobile. The use of mass transit declined. Family life would change for better or worse.
The Interstate 40 years ago made a slow but major impact in Southington. It sliced through old rural roads, splitting farmlands and dividing property lots that had stood against the passage of time for decades. And for Southington, it brought the first of many-to-come retail giants - G.E. Madison’s.
Interstate 84 gave Southington an identity. It provided Plantsville with traffic. It connected us with our neighbors.
Yes, Interstate 84 brought with it a curse of speed and death and suburban growth. The Interstates have literally pushed us to live life with a gas pedal. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Voters pass $15.7 million Plainville water pollution project
PLAINVILLE – Less than 250 voters showed up to the polls Tuesday to decide on a $15.7 million upgrade project to the town’s water pollution control facility in order to comply with the state-mandated removal of phosphorus.
Town Manager Robert Lee said 193 people voted yes while 31 voted no on the project.
“It hasn’t generated a lot of controversy,” Lee said before the vote, adding the turnout was predicted to be quiet.
The town is required by the state to reduce the amount discharged into the Pequabuck River by 88 percent.
The sludge processing system at the facility will also be improved for better efficiency.
A state grant is expected to cover 41.2 percent of the total project. The town will be responsible for the remaining $9.2 million and plans to fund the share through a state loan with a two percent interest rate.
The Town Council recently agreed to a 4.8 percent sewer user fee increase in order to cover project expenses. The council said rates are expected to decrease by 2025.
The complete project design has already been approved by the state.
Bids for construction are expected to be received by March with a start date for the project as soon as May. The project is expected to take two years to complete
Waterford municipal complex project pushes forward
Waterford — A renovation project in the works for more than a decade has evolved into a fresh set of plans for a new $11.7 million municipal complex.
Unveiled Wednesday night and working its way through town committees over the coming months, the project entails site remediation, demolition of dilapidated structures at 1000 Hartford Turnpike and construction of a new 53,500-square-foot facility to house offices and the town garage.
Officials put previous renovation efforts on hold multiple times over the years as the town prioritized school construction projects. In late 2016, the project hit snags with a previous architect suffering financial challenges, and last year the town held off while awaiting word on the availability of state aid.
Initial renovation estimates were in the neighborhood of $12 million, but officials say they can erect a new facility for roughly the same price while fully remediating contamination and better protecting the Department of Public Works' dozens of vehicles.
"Right now we're at a point where we think we have some pretty good information and we're hoping this all can flow together," First Selectman Dan Steward said in an interview Wednesday. "The staff and committee have worked really hard to put this together. This has been a challenge for us. It's not something that's been easy by any means."
Last spring, Glastonbury-based Anchor Engineering took the reins on a new design, which was presented Wednesday at a special joint meeting of the Board of Selectmen, the Board of Finance and the Municipal Complex Improvements Building Committee.
Glenn Patterson of the building committee said the current structure is in poor condition and not fully utilized, with "inefficient, awkward layouts" creating limited space for vehicles, and "compliant, but not optimum" standards with regard to the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Patterson added that town staff and Anchor Engineering have worked to make the site compliant with state remediation requirements. But full environmental remediation — including the removal of 8,200 cubic yards of contaminated soil — would cost approximately $1.5 million.
Steward and Patterson noted officials identified problems with the now more-than-50-year-old facility in the early 2000s. Oil leaks, safety problems and other basic code violations have been resolved through minor repairs over the years, but officials say the site continues to deteriorate.
Board of Finance Chairman Ron Fedor questioned whether a new facility housing DPW vehicles was worth the investment, considering the vehicles "spend so much time outside in bad weather" already. When I look at this dollar figure, it's a lot of money," he said.
Steward said reducing salt damage would help vehicles last longer, which was "one of the benefits we'd have keeping them in a clean environment."
Fedor suggested the committee conduct further analysis of whether other towns who've built or renovated similar facilities have seen improved durability for their vehicles.
Prompted by questions from Board of Finance member Bill Sheehan, Patterson and Anchor Engineering project manager Marek Kement said the new design created adequate space for vehicles and office workers along with improved safety, security and storage accommodations.
Steward said there's a variety of funding sources available, including some capital improvement funds, bonding and unassigned fund balance that generally "we don't like to touch." CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Malloy seeks tolls, gas-tax hike to rebuild infrastructure
By KEITH M. PHANEUF, The Connecticut Mirror
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy will ask legislators this year to establish electronic tolling on Connecticut highways by mid-2022 and to phase in a 7-cent gasoline tax hike to not only avert insolvency in the transportation program but also fund a major, 30-year rebuilding initiative.
Malloy, who announced his plans Wednesday, will propose the final budget adjustments of his administration next week to the General Assembly.
The governor, who declared last year he would not seek a third term, said these revenues would rescue not only an aging, clogged network but also an economy handicapped by an inadequate transportation infrastructure.
“We stand at a crossroads in Connecticut,” the governor said during a mid-morning announcement at the state Capitol. “We need to make a decision, and we need to make it soon.”
Connecticut roads, bridges and rail lines are falling into disrepair, the governor said. “And we have failed to build that world-class transportation system that has been built and is in the process of being built in the states around us.”
What is at stake, he added, is not just a viable transportation system and healthy community, but also a vibrant economy. “It is about growing our economy today, tomorrow and far into the future,” he said.
The governor’s plan would boost the state’s retail gasoline tax, currently at 25 cents, by 7 cents in four stages, starting with a 2-cent hike in July. Connecticut would add another penny in July 2019, 2 cents more in mid-2020, and the final 2 cents in July 2021.
Details of toll system still to be resolved
The administration estimates electronic tolling could be implemented by the 2022-23 fiscal year.
The governor’s proposal would authorize the state Department of Transportation to craft the details of a new tolling system, including the fees and locations of electronic toll readers. But Malloy said Connecticut’s system certainly would be different from those of some other states, including neighbor Massachusetts.
That’s because Connecticut’s highways have more entrance and exit ramps than the systems in many other states.
Both Malloy and DOT Commissioner James Redeker said very preliminary estimates are that a tolling system, once fully implemented, would raise $600 million to $800 million per year, and that roughly 30 percent of those receipts would come from out-of-state motorists.
Other components of the governor’s plan include establishing a $3-per-tire fee on all tire purchases and accelerating the previously approved transfer of certain sales tax receipts from the General Fund to the Special Transportation Fund.
Transportation fund in fiscal crisis
On paper, the state’s transportation program, while not flourishing, is stable.
According to projections released in late October by the legislature’s nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis, the transportation fund will run in the black annually at least through 2022.
But that forecast doesn’t assume any major expansion in capital projects, and officials from both parties acknowledge Connecticut has underinvested in transportation infrastructure for decades.
The state has roughly $3.7 billion in transportation borrowing approved by the legislature and the State Bond Commission that still hasn’t been executed yet. The chief reasons for Connecticut’s transportation bonding backlogs are a lack of staffing in the DOT and inadequate resources within the Special Transportation Fund to cover more debt service.
The alternative to all of these cutbacks, according to the administration, is a series of annual deficits in the transportation program starting with the fiscal year that begins July 1. The transportation fund would reach insolvency by mid-2020.
On Jan. 10 the governor and Redeker outlined nearly 400 capital projects worth $4.3 billion that would be suspended over the next five years because of inadequate funding.
Will election politics sink transportation debate?
Traditionally, legislatures are reluctant to consider tax hikes and other revenue-raisers, such as tolls, during a state election year like 2018.
But Malloy and others said there will be strong pressure to ignore election concerns.
The governor made his announcement Wednesday surrounded by representatives of construction companies, labor trades, regional councils of government, a handful of legislators and other transportation advocates.
“I think there’s a more complete coalition” pressing for a transportation investment than in past years, the governor said.
And as more people become aware that Connecticut’s clogged transportation system is hindering job growth, particularly in the high-paying financial services sector in Fairfield County, support should only grow, the governor and others said.
“I think it's pretty obvious that just keeping the Special Transportation Fund solvent from year to year simply doesn’t work,” said Don Shubert, president of the Connecticut Construction Industry Association. “Connecticut’s transportation programs have been severely compromised. ... We can continue to barrel down the road to ruin in this state or we can invest.”
Rep. Tony Guerrera, D-Rocky Hill, one of the legislature’s most vocal advocates for electronic tolling and greater transportation investment, conceded that forcing a debate in the 2018 General Assembly session, which begins next Wednesday, won’t be easy. But House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz told Guerrera afterward that there would be a House vote on tolls in the 2018 session.
Democratic gubernatorial contender Ned Lamont of Greenwich offered support for tolls.
But two GOP gubernatorial contenders, Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton and Trumbull First Selectman Tim Herbst, quickly came down in opposition.
Malloy made big transportation pitch in 2015
Malloy tried to make transportation the centerpiece of his second term in office.
In February 2015, three months after winning re-election, the governor proposed a 30-year, $100 billion program to rebuild Connecticut’s transportation system.
But efforts to secure long-term funding bogged down. That’s because of both political opposition to tolls and fuel tax hikes as well as Malloy’s insistence that lawmakers first endorse a constitutional “lockbox” provision to ensure revenues dedicated for transportation are used solely for that purpose.
That lockbox proposal has been endorsed by the legislature and will be considered by voters on the state ballot this November.
Lawmakers agreed in the spring of 2015 to dedicate a portion of sales tax receipts to transportation. This was deemed the key to funding the first five years of the governor’s 30-year program, through 2020. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Customers vent against Eversource Energy at regulatory hearing in Branford
BRANFORD — A settlement reached in January between Connecticut’s Office of Consumer Counsel and Eversource Energy regarding an increase in distribution rates isn’t sitting well with some of the utility’s customers, if a regulatory hearing held Wednesday night is any indication.
More than two-dozen people turned out at the town’s fire station for a public comment session held by the state’s Public Utilities Regulatory Authority. There was overwhelming opposition among those who spoke to giving the Hartford-based utility any kind of rate increase.
“The people who put in this request cannot be trusted,” Ben Martin of Wallingford said, referring to Eversource. “Every thing they tell us is the interest of serving their own corporate greed.”
The settlement agreement, which was announced Jan. 12, reduces the amount of additional revenue the company was seeking over a three-year period by $182.4 million. It also includes a 60 percent reduction in what the utility had been seeking in the first year of that three-year-period.
David Manning of Oxford said even with the settlement agreement, Eversource’s rates are “still way too high.”
“Our rates need to come down, not go up,” Manning said. Lon Seidman, an Essex businessman who serves on that town’s Board of Education, said an online petition drive he launched in opposition to any rate increase has more than 4,100 signatures.“This regional conglomerate brought in $1 billion in profit last year,” Seidman said. “They shouldn’t get a dime more in a rate increase until they fix what’s wrong. It’s time they do better.”
Seidman has been critical of Eversource’s reliability in the Lower Connecticut River Valley for much of this decade. He said problems with the company’s service have only increased since the 2012 merger between Hartford-based Northeast Utilities and NSTAR.
State Rep. Lonnie Reed, D-Branford, co-chairwoman of the General Assembly’s Energy & Technology Committee, said “few things create more consumer anger and anxiety than utility rate hike requests.” Reed told the story of one of her constituents, whom she called “Mrs. Marvel,” and how the elderly woman struggles to keep up with her electric bill. “(She’s) well into her 80s and living alone in a mobile home with Social Security as her only income,” Reed said. “Mrs. Marvel barely turns on her lights ever. She is meticulous with her bills, but Mrs. Marvel has had to go on a structured payment plan that is available to customers who do not qualify for the hardship program, but still have trouble paying their bills.”
Mitch Gross, an Eversource spokesman, said the public comments are an important part of the rate-making process. A final public comment session is scheduled for Tuesday in New London, he said. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Torrington speaks out on sewer line
TORRINGTON – City resident Donna Georgescu said too often Torrington has become the “dumping ground” for neighboring communities.
She said no monetary incentives are worth the environmental risk to Torrington residents during a packed hearing Wednesday night at City Hall on the proposed 6.2-mile sewer line from Woodridge Lake in Goshen to the city’s treatment plant.
“We elected you to work for Torrington, not for Goshen,” Georgescu told City Council members, who act as the city’s Water Pollution Control Authority.
The three-hour hearing, which drew about 230 residents into City Hall auditorium, will continue on Feb. 12 at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall.
The sewer district application to the city is the “last piece of the permitting steps required” as Woodridge Lake seeks to connect with Torrington’s treatment plant at the intersection of Route 4 (Goshen Road) and Lovers Lane.
Wednesday’s hearing featured testimony by representatives from Woodridge Lake Sewer District and Torrington Water Co. The proposed sewer line would cut through about a mile of the water company’s Allen Dam Reservoir watershed.
TORRINGTON – City resident Donna Georgescu said too often Torrington has become the “dumping ground” for neighboring communities.
She said no monetary incentives are worth the environmental risk to Torrington residents during a packed hearing Wednesday night at City Hall on the proposed 6.2-mile sewer line from Woodridge Lake in Goshen to the city’s treatment plant.
“We elected you to work for Torrington, not for Goshen,” Georgescu told City Council members, who act as the city’s Water Pollution Control Authority.
The three-hour hearing, which drew about 230 residents into City Hall auditorium, will continue on Feb. 12 at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall.
The sewer district application to the city is the “last piece of the permitting steps required” as Woodridge Lake seeks to connect with Torrington’s treatment plant at the intersection of Route 4 (Goshen Road) and Lovers Lane.
Wednesday’s hearing featured testimony by representatives from Woodridge Lake Sewer District and Torrington Water Co. The proposed sewer line would cut through about a mile of the water company’s Allen Dam Reservoir watershed. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
I-84 westbound to close for three nights starting Tuesday
WATERBURY – Traffic on Interstate 84 will come to a halt at Exit 23 westbound at 11 p.m. Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, with the highway reopening at 5 a.m. each day.
The overnight closures will allow workers to install structural steel for the Hamilton Avenue Bridge, which is being reconstructed as part of the I-84 widening project.
The steel girders will support the deck on the east side of the bridge, which has been torn down and is currently being rebuilt.
Rather than close the entire Hamilton Avenue Bridge to traffic while it was reconstructed, crews built a new section on the west side of the bridge to carry traffic while the other side was demolished and rebuilt.
Now, as the old section is being rebuilt, crews will use a crane to swing steel girders, weighing between 16,800 and 38,000 pounds, into place. Some of the beams have already been installed, but the ones closest to the highway need to be installed when there is no traffic underneath.
“These spans are directly over westbound traffic and we can’t have traffic under them when we’re swinging them into place,” said Project Engineer Christopher Zukowski, of the state Department of Transportation.
The work is expected to be finished by 5 a.m. Thursday. In case of inclement weather, the schedule may be extended.
To prepare for the nighttime closures, police and DOT crews will begin closing lanes at 9:30 p.m. each night. In the morning, there will be lane closures from 5 a.m. until the highway fully reopens at 6 a.m.
During the overnight closures, traffic will follow a detour route at Exit 23 westbound Traffic will go down the off-ramp, then turn right onto Hamilton Avenue. Drivers will continue straight onto Union Street, stay in their lanes and continue onto the entrance ramp to I-84 westbound towards Danbury.
The work is part of the DOT’s reconstruction and widening of a 2.7-mile stretch of I-84 between Washington Street and Pierpont Road. The contractor for the project is I-84 Constructors, is a joint venture between North Haven-based Empire Paving and Yonkers Contracting of New York. The project cost is $320 million.
Malloy, who announced his plans Wednesday, will propose the final budget adjustments of his administration next week to the General Assembly.
The governor, who declared last year he would not seek a third term, said these revenues would rescue not only an aging, clogged network but also an economy handicapped by an inadequate transportation infrastructure.
“We stand at a crossroads in Connecticut,” the governor said during a mid-morning announcement at the state Capitol. “We need to make a decision, and we need to make it soon.”
Connecticut roads, bridges and rail lines are falling into disrepair, the governor said. “And we have failed to build that world-class transportation system that has been built and is in the process of being built in the states around us.”
What is at stake, he added, is not just a viable transportation system and healthy community, but also a vibrant economy. “It is about growing our economy today, tomorrow and far into the future,” he said.
The governor’s plan would boost the state’s retail gasoline tax, currently at 25 cents, by 7 cents in four stages, starting with a 2-cent hike in July. Connecticut would add another penny in July 2019, 2 cents more in mid-2020, and the final 2 cents in July 2021.
Details of toll system still to be resolved
The administration estimates electronic tolling could be implemented by the 2022-23 fiscal year.
The governor’s proposal would authorize the state Department of Transportation to craft the details of a new tolling system, including the fees and locations of electronic toll readers. But Malloy said Connecticut’s system certainly would be different from those of some other states, including neighbor Massachusetts.
That’s because Connecticut’s highways have more entrance and exit ramps than the systems in many other states.
Both Malloy and DOT Commissioner James Redeker said very preliminary estimates are that a tolling system, once fully implemented, would raise $600 million to $800 million per year, and that roughly 30 percent of those receipts would come from out-of-state motorists.
Other components of the governor’s plan include establishing a $3-per-tire fee on all tire purchases and accelerating the previously approved transfer of certain sales tax receipts from the General Fund to the Special Transportation Fund.
Transportation fund in fiscal crisis
On paper, the state’s transportation program, while not flourishing, is stable.
According to projections released in late October by the legislature’s nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis, the transportation fund will run in the black annually at least through 2022.
But that forecast doesn’t assume any major expansion in capital projects, and officials from both parties acknowledge Connecticut has underinvested in transportation infrastructure for decades.
The state has roughly $3.7 billion in transportation borrowing approved by the legislature and the State Bond Commission that still hasn’t been executed yet. The chief reasons for Connecticut’s transportation bonding backlogs are a lack of staffing in the DOT and inadequate resources within the Special Transportation Fund to cover more debt service.
The alternative to all of these cutbacks, according to the administration, is a series of annual deficits in the transportation program starting with the fiscal year that begins July 1. The transportation fund would reach insolvency by mid-2020.
On Jan. 10 the governor and Redeker outlined nearly 400 capital projects worth $4.3 billion that would be suspended over the next five years because of inadequate funding.
Will election politics sink transportation debate?
But Malloy and others said there will be strong pressure to ignore election concerns.
The governor made his announcement Wednesday surrounded by representatives of construction companies, labor trades, regional councils of government, a handful of legislators and other transportation advocates.
“I think there’s a more complete coalition” pressing for a transportation investment than in past years, the governor said.
And as more people become aware that Connecticut’s clogged transportation system is hindering job growth, particularly in the high-paying financial services sector in Fairfield County, support should only grow, the governor and others said.
“I think it's pretty obvious that just keeping the Special Transportation Fund solvent from year to year simply doesn’t work,” said Don Shubert, president of the Connecticut Construction Industry Association. “Connecticut’s transportation programs have been severely compromised. ... We can continue to barrel down the road to ruin in this state or we can invest.”
Rep. Tony Guerrera, D-Rocky Hill, one of the legislature’s most vocal advocates for electronic tolling and greater transportation investment, conceded that forcing a debate in the 2018 General Assembly session, which begins next Wednesday, won’t be easy. But House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz told Guerrera afterward that there would be a House vote on tolls in the 2018 session.
Democratic gubernatorial contender Ned Lamont of Greenwich offered support for tolls.
But two GOP gubernatorial contenders, Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton and Trumbull First Selectman Tim Herbst, quickly came down in opposition.
Malloy made big transportation pitch in 2015
Malloy tried to make transportation the centerpiece of his second term in office.
In February 2015, three months after winning re-election, the governor proposed a 30-year, $100 billion program to rebuild Connecticut’s transportation system.
But efforts to secure long-term funding bogged down. That’s because of both political opposition to tolls and fuel tax hikes as well as Malloy’s insistence that lawmakers first endorse a constitutional “lockbox” provision to ensure revenues dedicated for transportation are used solely for that purpose.
That lockbox proposal has been endorsed by the legislature and will be considered by voters on the state ballot this November.
Lawmakers agreed in the spring of 2015 to dedicate a portion of sales tax receipts to transportation. This was deemed the key to funding the first five years of the governor’s 30-year program, through 2020. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Customers vent against Eversource Energy at regulatory hearing in Branford
BRANFORD — A settlement reached in January between Connecticut’s Office of Consumer Counsel and Eversource Energy regarding an increase in distribution rates isn’t sitting well with some of the utility’s customers, if a regulatory hearing held Wednesday night is any indication.
More than two-dozen people turned out at the town’s fire station for a public comment session held by the state’s Public Utilities Regulatory Authority. There was overwhelming opposition among those who spoke to giving the Hartford-based utility any kind of rate increase.
“The people who put in this request cannot be trusted,” Ben Martin of Wallingford said, referring to Eversource. “Every thing they tell us is the interest of serving their own corporate greed.”
The settlement agreement, which was announced Jan. 12, reduces the amount of additional revenue the company was seeking over a three-year period by $182.4 million. It also includes a 60 percent reduction in what the utility had been seeking in the first year of that three-year-period.
David Manning of Oxford said even with the settlement agreement, Eversource’s rates are “still way too high.”
“Our rates need to come down, not go up,” Manning said. Lon Seidman, an Essex businessman who serves on that town’s Board of Education, said an online petition drive he launched in opposition to any rate increase has more than 4,100 signatures.“This regional conglomerate brought in $1 billion in profit last year,” Seidman said. “They shouldn’t get a dime more in a rate increase until they fix what’s wrong. It’s time they do better.”
Seidman has been critical of Eversource’s reliability in the Lower Connecticut River Valley for much of this decade. He said problems with the company’s service have only increased since the 2012 merger between Hartford-based Northeast Utilities and NSTAR.
State Rep. Lonnie Reed, D-Branford, co-chairwoman of the General Assembly’s Energy & Technology Committee, said “few things create more consumer anger and anxiety than utility rate hike requests.” Reed told the story of one of her constituents, whom she called “Mrs. Marvel,” and how the elderly woman struggles to keep up with her electric bill. “(She’s) well into her 80s and living alone in a mobile home with Social Security as her only income,” Reed said. “Mrs. Marvel barely turns on her lights ever. She is meticulous with her bills, but Mrs. Marvel has had to go on a structured payment plan that is available to customers who do not qualify for the hardship program, but still have trouble paying their bills.”
Mitch Gross, an Eversource spokesman, said the public comments are an important part of the rate-making process. A final public comment session is scheduled for Tuesday in New London, he said. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Torrington speaks out on sewer line
TORRINGTON – City resident Donna Georgescu said too often Torrington has become the “dumping ground” for neighboring communities.
She said no monetary incentives are worth the environmental risk to Torrington residents during a packed hearing Wednesday night at City Hall on the proposed 6.2-mile sewer line from Woodridge Lake in Goshen to the city’s treatment plant.
“We elected you to work for Torrington, not for Goshen,” Georgescu told City Council members, who act as the city’s Water Pollution Control Authority.
The three-hour hearing, which drew about 230 residents into City Hall auditorium, will continue on Feb. 12 at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall.
The sewer district application to the city is the “last piece of the permitting steps required” as Woodridge Lake seeks to connect with Torrington’s treatment plant at the intersection of Route 4 (Goshen Road) and Lovers Lane.
Wednesday’s hearing featured testimony by representatives from Woodridge Lake Sewer District and Torrington Water Co. The proposed sewer line would cut through about a mile of the water company’s Allen Dam Reservoir watershed.
TORRINGTON – City resident Donna Georgescu said too often Torrington has become the “dumping ground” for neighboring communities.
She said no monetary incentives are worth the environmental risk to Torrington residents during a packed hearing Wednesday night at City Hall on the proposed 6.2-mile sewer line from Woodridge Lake in Goshen to the city’s treatment plant.
“We elected you to work for Torrington, not for Goshen,” Georgescu told City Council members, who act as the city’s Water Pollution Control Authority.
The three-hour hearing, which drew about 230 residents into City Hall auditorium, will continue on Feb. 12 at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall.
The sewer district application to the city is the “last piece of the permitting steps required” as Woodridge Lake seeks to connect with Torrington’s treatment plant at the intersection of Route 4 (Goshen Road) and Lovers Lane.
Wednesday’s hearing featured testimony by representatives from Woodridge Lake Sewer District and Torrington Water Co. The proposed sewer line would cut through about a mile of the water company’s Allen Dam Reservoir watershed. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
I-84 westbound to close for three nights starting Tuesday
WATERBURY – Traffic on Interstate 84 will come to a halt at Exit 23 westbound at 11 p.m. Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, with the highway reopening at 5 a.m. each day.
The overnight closures will allow workers to install structural steel for the Hamilton Avenue Bridge, which is being reconstructed as part of the I-84 widening project.
The steel girders will support the deck on the east side of the bridge, which has been torn down and is currently being rebuilt.
Rather than close the entire Hamilton Avenue Bridge to traffic while it was reconstructed, crews built a new section on the west side of the bridge to carry traffic while the other side was demolished and rebuilt.
Now, as the old section is being rebuilt, crews will use a crane to swing steel girders, weighing between 16,800 and 38,000 pounds, into place. Some of the beams have already been installed, but the ones closest to the highway need to be installed when there is no traffic underneath.
“These spans are directly over westbound traffic and we can’t have traffic under them when we’re swinging them into place,” said Project Engineer Christopher Zukowski, of the state Department of Transportation.
The work is expected to be finished by 5 a.m. Thursday. In case of inclement weather, the schedule may be extended.
To prepare for the nighttime closures, police and DOT crews will begin closing lanes at 9:30 p.m. each night. In the morning, there will be lane closures from 5 a.m. until the highway fully reopens at 6 a.m.
During the overnight closures, traffic will follow a detour route at Exit 23 westbound Traffic will go down the off-ramp, then turn right onto Hamilton Avenue. Drivers will continue straight onto Union Street, stay in their lanes and continue onto the entrance ramp to I-84 westbound towards Danbury.
The work is part of the DOT’s reconstruction and widening of a 2.7-mile stretch of I-84 between Washington Street and Pierpont Road. The contractor for the project is I-84 Constructors, is a joint venture between North Haven-based Empire Paving and Yonkers Contracting of New York. The project cost is $320 million.