Bill Cummings
BRIDGEPORT — The city’s $3.5 million public facilities garage was beset by cost overruns and no bid work — and vulnerable to a potential conflict of interest, city records show.
The records also raise questions about the city’s oversight of a multimillion project, the largest undertaken by Mayor Joe Ganim’s administration.Former Deputy Public Facilities Director Joe Tiago, fired in February following a city scrap metal scandal now under investigation by the FBI, played an ongoing role in the job awarded to Vaz Quality Works of Bridgeport despite having a financial relationship with the owner of Vaz.
As the garage was developed and built, Tiago received price quotes directly from Vaz, including paving prices a month after the work was authorized, according to records obtained by Hearst Connecticut Media through a freedom of information request. This while Tiago held a $670,000 mortgage for Luis Vaz for property he sold in 2014, just two years before the garage project began.
The additional work by Vaz added a half million dollars to the price tag for paving the lot.
Although the final cost of the project has not yet been calculated by the city, records indicate it could reach as high as $3.5 million of taxpayer’s money — a 14 percent overrun.
Vaz was low bidder for the overall project with an original offer of $2.9 million to do the job.City officials defended the cost overruns and the process used to the build the garage, saying nothing was done improperly. They said unexpected issues came up that drove up costs and required change orders — a construction term for revised plans.
"Most change orders are of a substantive nature such that they are not anticipated, which is why there are ‘change orders,’" Rowena White, a spokesperson for Mayor Joe Ganim.
"This amount of change orders — 24 were submitted — is typical for this size project," White said.She said five of those orders were rejected and three are on hold for further discussion.
"All change orders, whether approved, revised, rejected, increasing or crediting the project, are accounted for in municipal construction projects," she said.
But the cost overruns and number of change orders seem unusual for the size of the project, said Chris Fryxell, president of the Connecticut chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors Inc., a national group that represents tradesmen.
“It does seem high to me,” Fryxell said. “The question is, should they have known, and what pre-planning did they do? Should these issues have been foreseen or did they cut corners?”
Officials previously said the garage project was reduced from a $5 million, and that cost increases were mostly caused by paving additional portions of the lot, including an area prone to flooding, and moving a vehicle washing station to an outside location.
A federal Grand Jury and the FBI in February subpoenaed documents involving $4.4 million in city work awarded to Vaz since 2015, the year Ganim took office. That total includes other work performed for the city by Vaz.
Tom Carson, a spokesman for U.S. Attorney John Durham, declined comment on whether the office is looking into possible illegality regarding the garage project.
No-bid paving
Paving the garage parking lot represented the largest cost overrun; the unexpected increase of nearly $500,000.
The paving work was first outlined through a bid from Vaz in 2016 for $185,822 — and swelled to $678,899 by 2018, records show.
A plan to expand the paving work was included in a Sept 12, 2018, letter from Public Facilities Director John Ricci to the city purchasing department.
In that letter, Ricci sought permission for a "qualified purchase" — a city term for a no-bid contract.The new work was estimated to cost $269,277 more than originally budgeted for paving.
Ricci said that selecting Vaz would "provide a lower cost than would result from competitive bidding since they are already on site and mobilized."
Ricci’s request for a no-bid contract prompted questions from the purchasing department.
Sharon Roberston, a purchasing department employee, noted in an email to the public facilities department that the "project overran bid amount before paving was ever started?"In response, Robertson was told her assessment was correct, and advised that the "the paving is for the existing contract for the municipal garage."
White said the city followed proper procedures in seeking a no-bid contract for the paving work.
"A qualified purchase was requested and approved by the city’s purchasing agent per ordinance due to timing, review of bid paving line items from the original project, VAZ’s agreement to hold their unit pricing from the 2016 bid package and Vaz being already familiar with the existing drainage on site," White said in a written statement"The priority paving work to create alternative employee parking areas due to site demolition was required to be performed prior to the approaching winter close of the paving season," she said.The day before Ricci’s request for a no-bid contract, Vaz submitted price quotes to Tiago for the $269,000 in work, city records show.That new work included paving an additional 39,450 square feet of lot.
Delayed quotes
The cost of paving the lot continued to rise as the scope of work expanded.
On Sept. 21, 2018, the city’s purchasing department issued a purchase order for paving that included a new charge of $223,800, bringing the cost of changes in the paving job to $493,077.
The new work involved paving three additional yards of lot, removing existing pavement, laying new sub material and other activity.But city records show Vaz submitted the new price quote to Tiago on October 23, 2018 — more than a month after the city cut the September purchase order that essentially authorized the work.
When asked how a purchase order could be issued before price quotes were received, White said the new costs were added to the September purchase order after they were received in October.
“The date on the original order stays the same,” White said.
Ganim has said Tiago’s financial interest in Vaz Quality Works was not disclosed to the city when the garage was being built.
The mayor also said he was told Tiago recused himself from the public facilities garage project, the largest building venture undertaken by his administration.
Tiago and his criminal lawyer, John Gulash, have declined repeated requests for comment about his role in the garage project.
Change orders
As work progressed, the process of building the garage continued to undergo changes and alterationsThe garage was first put out to bid in the summer of 2016. In September, the city received five offers, ranging from a high of $3.7 million from G. Pic & Sons Construction to the low bid of $2.9 million from Vaz.The second lowest bid was $3.34 million from OWI Contractors in Stratford.
Fryxell, of the trade group, said change orders can be issued for a variety of reasons and acknowledged they are often used during large construction projects.
Reasons for the project’s change orders varied, including different HVAC systems, revisions to a main sanitary line and employee cost increases due to higher prevailing wages.
“But this seems high as an overall percentage of the project,” Fryxell said. “The concern is always over being a good steward of the taxpayer’s money.White, as of last week, said the final cost of the project — $3,077,569 — reflected change orders approved so far.
That $3.1 million figure comes from a 2017 purchase order and does not reflect additional costs due to the garage.
When those costs are included, the price of the overall project rises to $3,570,546, city records show.
White stressed the final price is still to be determined, pending the result of further change order reviews and accounting.
Ann Street closure in Norwalk to begin Monday
Tara O'Neill
NORWALK — Starting Monday, Ann Street will be closed to traffic for several days as the state Department of Transportation works on an ongoing project.
The DOT said the closure runs from Monday, April 29 through Saturday, May 4. The closure is part of an “ongoing superstructure replacement of the Ann Street Railroad Bridge as part of the Walk Bridge Program’s Danbury Branch Dockyard Project,” the DOT said.During the work, access to the Corset Factory’s rear parking lot from Ann Street will be closed. Tenants will be able to get to the lot from Pine Street. Access to the front lot will remain open throughout the work.Drivers and pedestrians are asked to take Washington Street or North Water Street instead of Ann Street while the work is going on.
The Walk Bridge Replacement Project is part of the overall Walk Bridge Program, made up of more than a half-dozen road, rail and utility infrastructure projects intended to enhance safety, reliability and service flexibility throughout the city of Norwalk.
The Danbury Branch Dockyard Project started construction in October 2017. It includes a series of rail improvements on the Danbury Branch of Metro-North.
Improvements include new track installation and the electrifications of the southern portion from Washington Street to Jennings Place, allowing trains ending routes at the South Norwalk station to change direction for the return trip to Grand Central Terminal.
Work recommences on Center Street bridge in Wallingford
Lauren Takores
WALLINGFORD — Work on the Center Street bridge replacement project restarted last week.
“This is the typical start-up timeframe for most projects that (were) on hold over the winter season,” said Kevin Nursick, state Department of Transportation spokesman, via email.
State officials announced in March that they pushed the expected completion date to 2022. Construction began in 2016.
“We’re pleased that the project is continuing,” Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. said. “It’s an important highway for travel east and west. It’s in the best interest of everyone that it’s finished sooner rather than later.”
Center Street is part of state Route 150.
“We’re pleased that the project is continuing,” Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. said. “It’s an important highway for travel east and west. It’s in the best interest of everyone that it’s finished sooner rather than later.”
Center Street is part of state Route 150.
Construction had stopped for more than a year as DOT engineers assessed the stability of the bridge and modified the existing plan.
The DOT, which is responsible for maintenance because Route 150 is a state road, previously rated the century-old bridge over Wharton Brook structurally deficient and recommended replacement.
The bridge replacement is being done in two phases to maintain traffic flow. Cars were pushed to the south side of the bridge, and the north side was demolished.
Construction delays began when the contractor, New Haven-based C.J. Fucci, raised concerns that demolition work on the abutments could destabilize the support structure.
DOT found the bridge was stable but the plan needed to be redesigned. Nursick has said the changes will add about $2 million over the original cost estimate of $3.9 million.
After the announcement of the 2022 completion date last month, Vinny Ianuzzi, owner of Vinny’s Deli, ran a free sandwich promotion for customers who allowed employees to film them singing “Bridge Over Troubled Water.”
Ianuzzi, whose business is located next to the bridge, planned to post the videos online, part of a campaign to grab the attention of legislators.
“It’s ridiculous,” Ianuzzi said last month. “The Q Bridge was done in nine years, and this is going to take seven years?”
Tolls would take toll on tourism industry, some say
Brian Hallenbeck
Out-of-state drivers would fork over as much as 40 percent of the money Gov. Ned Lamont’s toll plan would generate, according to estimates.
How’s that likely to sit with tourists?
“I think tolls would throw a complete wet blanket on tourism in southeastern Connecticut,” said state Rep. Doug Dubitsky, a Chaplin Republican whose district includes a piece of Norwich. “We have some of the best attractions in the state and in New England. We’ve got the casinos, the New London area is trying to grow and Norwich is starting to come back with restaurants, cafes and breweries, all of which bring people in ..."
“If it’s going to cost people an extra $10 or $15 to get to the (Mystic) Seaport, the aquarium, the casinos, they’re just going to go elsewhere,” he said.
Tourism, Dubitsky said, generates far more revenue from people living outside the state than the state spends trying to attract their dollars — all the more reason it makes no sense to put off would-be visitors.
Nevertheless, the Chamber of Commerce of Eastern Connecticut supports an electronic tolling system as the best way for the state to raise the money it needs to maintain its transportation system. The argument for tolls “can be boiled down to two words: commerce and tourism,” Tony Sheridan, the chamber’s president and chief executive officer, wrote last week in a published opinion piece.
State Sen. Heather Somers, a Groton Republican, said she was surprised by the chamber’s position.
“I’m curious whether he’s talked to members,” she said, referring to Sheridan. “They’re not saying at all what he’s saying.”
Somers said the toll plan backed by Lamont and most Democrats, which now calls for no more than 50 toll gantries on Interstates 84, 91 and 95 and Route 15, amounts to a toll every six miles, “not a welcoming prospect for anyone coming to Connecticut.”
Most Republican lawmakers, including Dubitsky, Somers and more than a half dozen others representing multitown districts in southeastern Connecticut, favor the GOP’s plan to fund transportation improvements through a prioritized approach to bonding rather than tolls.
The problem with tolls, said Stephen Tagliatela, chairman of the Connecticut Tourism Coalition, is that they amount to another tax on the tourism industry. Already, he said, the industry is grappling with the highest-in-the-nation hotel room occupancy tax, which the governor’s budget has proposed hiking from 15 to 17 percent. A portion of the revenue generated by the tax is diverted to a state tourism fund.
“If you want to kill a business, you tax it,” said Tagliatela, co-owner of the Saybrook Point Inn, Marina & Spa in Old Saybrook.
There might have been a way to fund the project with tolls at or near the bridge, Tagliatela said, “but facing a gantlet every six miles makes no sense at all.”
Sheri Cote, who became president of the Shoreline Chamber of Commerce last year after more than 15 years with the Chamber of Commerce of Eastern Connecticut, agreed that tolls would harm tourism in the state. She said her organization, which represents Branford, Guilford and North Branford, has not officially adopted a position on the issue.
“(Last) Monday morning," she said, "I got an email from a man in western Massachusetts who’s been coming here on vacations for years to the hot spots: Mystic Aquarium, Mystic Seaport, the Steam Train (in Essex). He said, ‘If you put in tolls, that comes to a screeching halt.’ ... He’s not the only one.”
Cote said she understands that the states surrounding Connecticut have tolls, “but they’re spending more money on tourism.”
“If we do tolls, we need to up the ante,” she said.
Everything you need to know about tolls — and a plan against them — in Connecticut
Lindsay Boyle Discussing tolls in New London on Thursday, Gov. Ned Lamont said he couldn't "think of a more important priority to get this state going again."
Indeed, tolls have been a hot topic since a state-commissioned study called for 82 electronic toll gantries across 13 Connecticut highways last fall.
While those numbers have been refined — Lamont's latest plan would have 50 gantries spanning four highways — most neighboring states have tolls on just one highway, not several.
But other transportation funding proposals are on the table, including a House bill, a Senate bill and the Republicans' Prioritize Progress plan, which doesn't include tolls.
Read on for an analysis of each option and excerpts from the more than 50 readers who responded to our CuriousCT poll — on www.theday.com, by email, on social media and even by snail mail.
Of the toll plans, most widely discussed so far is the one Gov. Ned Lamont outlined in his proposed budget, which House Bill No. 7202 suggests should be implemented.
The malleable plan calls for no more than 50 electronic toll gantries — or the structures equipped with cameras that read drivers' plates — to be spread across Interstates 84, 91 and 95 and the Merritt Parkway.
Construction on the tolls would begin no earlier than 2022 and would cost $213 million. Once operational, Lamont estimated the tolls would generate about $800 million annually to help the Department of Transportation address Connecticut's crumbling infrastructure.
Per Lamont's budget, 47 percent of state-maintained roadways are in less-than-good condition, while 334 bridges are in poor condition.
"It would be negligent for Connecticut to wait for a major bridge to fail before acting," the budget reads.
Where the gantries will be placed isn't yet clear, though some politicians, including state Sen. Heather Somers, R-Groton, seem certain they'll end up on key bridges such as the Gold Star Memorial.
Drivers without Connecticut E-ZPasses would spend about 7.9 cents per mile during peak travel times and see a 6.3-cent rate when it's less busy.
Connecticut E-ZPass users would get at least a 30 percent discount, while medium-sized trucks, buses and tractor-trailers would pay higher rates. Discounts for frequent users and/or low-income drivers still are on the table.
Need to commute from New London to New Haven? That could cost anywhere from $3.78 to $7.39 per round-trip, depending on who you are, when you travel and which exits you use.
A commute from Old Lyme to Stonington could cost anywhere from $1.58 to $3.92 per round trip.
"Republicans and Democrats agree transportation is a mess in this state, that it's a quality-of-life and economic issue," said Colleen Johnson, senior adviser for the Lamont administration. "The issue is, how do we pay to fix it?"
Johnson said a major benefit of Lamont's plan is that about 40 percent of the revenue would come from out-of-state drivers.
"We would love to have Republicans at the table, but they have said tolls are a no-go," she said. "They're saying, 'Our preference is for Connecticut residents to pick up 100 percent of the costs of wear and tear on our highways.'"
Under the Republican plan (see Chapter 2), the state would use part of its annual $2 billion bonding cap to fulfill DOT's needs in each of the next 30 years.
Tim Sperry, a 63-year-old Guilford resident who commutes daily to Storrs, said Connecticut should have introduced tolls a long time ago.
Sperry, an organic and specialty food consultant, used to commute from the Boston area to Connecticut. Paying tolls in Massachusetts but driving "scot-free" here always struck him as odd, he said.
Sperry had some caveats — he said the state should improve public transportation, offer a discount for low-income residents and stagger fees so they're higher near cities — but called tolls a reasonable solution to waning gas tax revenue.
"Let's wake up and face the realities that our roads and bridges need repairs and we're not going to get (the funding) from the gas tax," he said.
Michael Dreimiller, a digital media specialist at Connecticut College, said he supports the idea of tolls because those who use the highways generate the funds to repair them.
Dreimiller, who commutes daily from Gales Ferry, said he wouldn't adjust his commute to avoid the Gold Star bridge, should a gantry be placed there.
"I think any new tax is going to have opposition — and from both sides," the 59-year-old said. "But I think at some point you have to look at the level of services you want your state to be providing, and there's a point where you just can't cut it anymore."
Asked whether he has concerns about politicians diverting the funds for other uses, Dreimiller, a near lifelong resident of Connecticut, said, "Of course I do."
"They've taken money out of the fund in the past," he said. "I understand why they did it, but that just shifted the problem from one point to another. If we really do have an infrastructure problem, we can't afford to do that anymore."
Somers, the Groton senator, said she has been against tolls "from the beginning."
Once gantries are installed, she said, it'll be easy for the state to raise the rates and hard for residents to get the gantries removed.
She also said most residents, because they can't change the hours they drive, will be stuck traveling during "peak" hours and paying the highest rates.
About 250 people came to a forum she hosted in Groton on April 8, she said, demonstrating how "concerned and upset" residents are by the prospect of tolls.
Residents also protested in Groton and New London during an April 6 event arranged by No Tolls CT, a grassroots group that has been hosting rallies and forums statewide since February.
Somers said Connecticut can and should fix its infrastructure without new revenue, as outlined in the Republicans' Prioritize Progress plan.
Each year, the state is allowed to bond, or borrow, up to $2 billion for various projects. Prioritize Progress allots a set amount for transportation each year, starting with $703.7 million in 2020.
Naysayers, including Lamont, have said the plan would divert bonding money from school construction and affordable housing, but Somers said the plan funds "core services" including school construction, clean water and town aid.
"That was important to us," she said.
"I think some people also are under the misconception that if we add tolls, we won't bond" the full $2 billion, Somers said. "But if they think politicians in this state are not going to use all of the money, they're not thinking straight."
Politicians and residents discussed the Republican plan during a public hearing of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee on Friday. Almost 100 people submitted testimony, with some pleading for the state to reject tolls but others calling bonding an expensive, burdensome option.
Sitting at a table in Muddy Waters last week, Michael Hugyo, 70, said tolls might force those who are on a fixed income to leave.
Hugyo, a Waterford resident who often visits his daughter in Rhode Island, said he's fortunate to have a good pension on top of the Social Security he collects. But he already left Fairfield County to cut costs about 18 years ago and he's not sure where else he can save.
Hugyo said businesses small and large likely will pass the cost of tolls and other proposed new taxes on to consumers.
"And the people on fixed income are consumers, so there again they get hit," he said.
Hugyo, a lifelong Connecticut resident, said he believes the installation of tolls is "a foregone conclusion." He plans to leave within "a year or two" because of the tolls.
Scott Matson, 50, said he has become "increasingly dissatisfied" with the way Connecticut outspends its earnings and breaks promises to residents.
"If I lost my job tomorrow — my wife and I both work — we could live, but we're going to have to start cutting some stuff out," said Matson, a physician who lives and works in Glastonbury.
Matson isn't sure if tolls are a good idea, but he doesn't think they'll "transform Connecticut into a place that can afford itself" and he doesn't believe politicians will use the money for infrastructure alone.
Matson said Connecticut should stop adding revenue streams and evaluate its spending instead.
"I'd like to see us tighten our belt and position ourselves between New York- and New Jersey-type taxes," he said. "I think we could maintain a high level of services and spending ... and yet attract people rather than have them leave."
In addition to the bill that backs Lamont's plan, the Transportation Committee also endorsed two other toll proposals: Senate Bill No. 423 and House Bill No. 7280.
Prepared by Democrats, each proposal also limits tolling to the Merritt Parkway and interstates 84, 91 and 95.
Neither outlines the number of gantries or the proposed cost per mile.
The House bill calls for a transportation authority to oversee the tolls and requires public hearings on the final plan.
The Senate bill leaves legislators responsible for setting toll prices, bars price increases for 10 years and, in addition to hearings, requires a second vote from the full General Assembly on the final plan.
Legislators still are finalizing the version they'll put forward later this session.
Our readers are nurses, retired correction officers, small-business owners, social workers and research scientists.
Some live where they work. Some travel from Groton to New London, or Norwich to East Lyme. Others go as far as Middletown, East Hartford, Worcester, Mass., or Kingston, R.I.
Many have thought-provoking reasons as to why they accept or reject the idea of tolls in Connecticut.
Take Sandy Cross, a 60-year-old nurse who has worked at the ACES Center for Autism Spectrum and Developmental Disorders in Northford for four years.
"I love where I work," said Cross, who commutes daily from Pawcatuck. "The people there are like family to me."
She said Lamont's plan would cost her at least $1,200 a year and force her to find a job closer to home.
"I'm not going to get that in a raise," she said. "I'm already paying gas and dealing with wear on my car. This would just tip that scale, I think."
Through CuriousCT — a project intended to make it easier for readers to direct some of our news coverage — more than 40 readers reacted to Lamont’s toll plan.
Of the respondents, almost seven in 10 were against the plan. Some said they drive throughout the state daily. Others reported minimal commutes. Many — even those in favor of tolls — said they don’t trust politicians to use the money for infrastructure. One vowed to use only back roads should tolls be installed.
Several people said secondary roads could suffer as drivers avoid the tolls. They questioned whether the state would provide aid in response.
Cathy Weaver, a Lyme resident and radiologic technologist, said she likes the idea of tolls if senior citizens and students drive free, residents receive “greatly” reduced rates and the money is used only for infrastructure improvements.
Bob Coggeshall, who “disagrees with Ned Lamont on almost every other issue,” said as long as the money is used as promised, he can’t “understand why local people are against this proposal.”
Coggeshall, an operating engineer who commutes from Uncasville to New London at least four times a week, said tolls could make the state’s major highways less crowded and be a boon for businesses on secondary roads.
Recalling when Connecticut had tolls in 1985 and earlier, Groton resident Stephanie Belser said the cost per mile figure is less important than where the state installs gantries.
“Assuming that the state is evil enough to put a gantry across the Gold Star Bridge,” she wrote, “everyone passing over the bridge will be charged that, regardless of where they got on or off the highway in New London and Groton.”
Belser also wondered if the state could begin issuing speeding tickets based on the elapsed time between gantries.
Anne McCloskey, an 83-year-old Niantic resident who sent a letter by mail, said her family began driving to Niantic from Washington, D.C., in the 1930s — a 13-hour trip at the time.
“I remember my parents being so excited to arrive at the wonderful new Merritt Parkway,” she wrote. “Then, as the years went on, we saw the building of the Delaware Memorial Bridge, the New Jersey Turnpike, I-95 in Maryland and Delaware, the Tappan Zee Bridge, the Connecticut Turnpike — all to be used for a small toll fee. It cut the drive to about seven hours, then less when electronic tolls came along — a real blessing!”
McCloskey said she uses I-95 frequently and is dismayed by how long it takes compared to other states’ highways.
“Connecticut is a real laggard when it comes to road updates,” she wrote. “This may be the Land of Steady Habits, but maybe it is time to rattle some cages and change some habits!”
Grotonelementary schools referendum to be held May 6
Kimberly Drelich
Groton — With the town recently breaking ground on the new consolidated middle school, officials are now focusing on plans to build two new elementary schools on the sites of the existing middle schools as the final pieces of the Groton 2020 plan, the superintendent said.
Architects are continuing to work on design plans for the elementary schools, and the Board of Education recently approved initial site work projects, slated for this summer, to get the properties ready for later construction of the elementary school buildings, said Superintendent Michael Graner.
But the town still needs approval from voters to move forward with the project for two new elementary school buildings, he said.
A special referendum will be held on Monday, May 6 for voters to approve revising the Groton 2020 plan, approved by voters in 2016, so the town can build two new elementary schools on the existing middle school sites, rather than renovate the middle school buildings into "like new" elementary schools.
The referendum is a repeat of the vote held in December, where voters approved the change in a 1,092-239 vote, according to Election Day results. Another vote is needed since the legal notice for the December referendum was not published 30 days prior to the referendum as required under state law.
Groton 2020
In 2016, voters at a referendum supported the $184.5 million Groton 2020 plan, with $100 million expected in state reimbursement, to build a consolidated middle school adjacent to Robert E. Fitch Senior High School. The plan then would have converted the current middle schools into elementary schools and close Pleasant Valley, S.B. Butler and Claude Chester schools, three of the older, more costly elementary schools, Graner said. Pleasant Valley Elementary School has already closed in 2017 amid budgetary issues.
The state Board of Education accepted the plan as Groton's response to ensuring there will be racially balanced, diversified schools throughout the community, Graner said.
But during the planning process, school officials and architects realized that for the same price as converting the existing middle school buildings into elementary buildings they could construct two new elementary buildings that would be better, more cost-efficient structures, Graner said. Converting middle schools to elementary schools requires expensive alterations. New buildings also would be more cost-efficient and have a life expectancy of 40 to 50 years, rather than the 20 years expected with renovated buildings, Graner said.
The state agreed and approved the plan to build new structures, Graner said. But, to proceed, the town also needed voters to approve the change to the project to construct new buildings.
The May 6 referendum is the same day as the election in the City of Groton for mayor and City Council, which will result in some cost savings, Town Manager John Burt has said.
Burt said he is eager to move on with the elementary school projects.
The construction manager anticipates initial site work would be done this summer, Graner said. At its meeting last Monday, the Board of Education approved removing a fuel tank from the West Side site and relocating the sewer line at the Cutler site, projects that are part of the site preparation, Graner said. The real construction work will begin once the new consolidated middle school is completed in 2020.
The plan is for the two new elementary schools to open in the fall of 2021, he said.