Federal highway funding stalls; CT ‘not ready’ to pay its share anyway
By Ana Radelat, CTMirror.org
WASHINGTON — Prospects for a massive, new federal highway bill dimmed Wednesday as Democratic leaders and President Donald Trump failed to even sit down to discuss the plan, the result of increased enmity between Capitol Hill Democrats and the White House.
Connecticut may not be able to benefit from attempts in Washington D.C. to send more transportation money to states — even if Congress is able to do what now seems increasingly impossible, said Don Shubert, president of the Connecticut Construction Industries Association.
That’s because Connecticut would have to come up with about 20 percent of the cost of any road or bridge project that’s funded by the new federal highway bill.
Without a new source of revenue to fatten the Special Transportation Fund, the state could not afford to pay its share of a project, Shubert said.
Shubert and his organization support Gov. Ned Lamont’s plan to place tolls on three federal interstate highways, I-84, I-91 and I-95 and on a state road, the Merritt Parkway.
According to rough estimates, when fully implemented those tolls would bring in between $600 million and $800 million in new revenue to the state’s transportation fund. Federal law requires toll revenue to be spent on the highways that are tolled, which means it could be used to help the state come up with matches for federally funded projects on those highways.
The state’s Special Transportation Fund (STF) takes in about $1.4 billion a year from state fuel taxes, motor vehicle sales taxes and fees for licenses and registrations and other sources. Connecticut bonded $750 million this fiscal year to support its transportation capitol program, and also will receive more than $542 million for infrastructure work from the federal FAST Act this year.
But Lamont and the state Department of Transportation say more money is needed, especially since the STF is also used to cover the annual debt payments on the state’s transportation borrowing and to meet the needs of other state agencies.
“The Department of Transportation has hundreds of projects in the pipeline at all times, from simple maintenance to keep the system in good repair, to improved highways, new bridges, new trains and new buses,” said Judd Everhart, spokesman for the DOT. “These projects cost money, and lots of it. In order to plan and execute projects, the agency needs a steady, reliable and sustainable source of funding - on the state and federal level.”
Everhart, however, said the transportation department is “officially agnostic” on the question of tolls.
Opposition to Lamont’s toll plan has stalled it in the General Assembly, which won’t vote on the proposal before its regular session ends on June 5. The issue could be pursued, however, in a special session this summer.
Rep. John Larson, D-1st District, is pushing for a plan to build a system of highway tunnels under Hartford and East Hartford, burying parts of I-91 and I-84 underground. He plans to meet with Lamont and officials at DOT to promote his proposal, which has been criticized as too expensive and not the best solution to reduce downtown congestion.
Larson hopes a new federal infrastructure bill would include a provision that would cut Connecticut’s match for the tunnel project to 10 percent.
Yet the lawmaker also says some sort of toll plan is needed to meet the state’s transportation needs.
Estimates for Larson’s project have run from a low of about $10 billion to a high of $30 billion.
Both Democrats and Republicans are eager for a new infrastructure bill that would replace the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act or “FAST Act,” that expires next year.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N. Y., emerged from a meeting with Trump at the White House in late April saying they had agreed to pursue a $2 trillion infrastructure package, a big increase over the $305 billion the FAST Act will provide states over its five-year life.
Pelosi and Schumer were scheduled to meet with Trump on Wednesday for a second round of talks, where they expected the president to put forth his plan to pay for the proposal.
The Trump administration previously floated a proposal for the federal government to fund 20 percent of infrastructure investment and encourage the private sector to chip in the rest. Democrats, however, want most infrastructure funding to come from the government.
The discussion over how a new infrastructure bill would be funded, however, never took place.
Trump declared that bipartisan cooperation was impossible while House committees are investigating him, and refused to even sit down when he walked into the scheduled Cabinet Room meeting with Pelosi and Schumer.
Trump then told reporters at a hastily scheduled press conference in the Rose Garden that he told the Democratic leaders they must choose between pursuing infrastructure or their increasingly aggressive investigations of his finances, businesses and administration, and increasing Democratic calls for impeachment of the president.
“You probably can’t go down two tracks,” he said. “You can go down the investigation track, or you can go down the investment track.”
At a Democratic press conference, Schumer said “to watch what happens in the White House will make your jaw drop.”
“We are interested in doing infrastructure,” Schumer said. “It’s clear the president isn’t. He is looking for every excuse.”
A sign hung on the president’s lectern in the Rose Garden featured the words “No Obstruction, No Collusion.”
Schumer said the sign indicates Trump’s move was planned and that the president stormed out of the meeting because the White House failed to find a way to fund an infrastructure bill.
Pelosi declined to comment on the president’s behavior other than to say “I pray for the president of the United States and I pray for the United States of America.”
A new carbon tax?
Like Connecticut, the federal government would need new sources of revenue to increase the amount of transportation dollars it sends to the states. Most federal transportation money comes from a federal gas tax of 18.4 cents per gallon and a 24.4 cents per gallon tax on diesel fuel and other fees and levies.
But Republicans are sure to resist any tax hikes as a way to pay for an infrastructure package and also oppose increasing the deficit, making it difficult to establish funding for even a fraction of the $2 trillion goal.Larson is a sponsor of the “America Wins Act,” which would invest $1 trillion in the nation’s infrastructure -including the congressman’s proposed tunnel project — over 10 years.
The bill would be funded by a new carbon tax, an idea that is opposed by most Republicans and some Democrats.
On Wednesday, House Republican Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., introduced a resolution to condemn a carbon tax.
“A carbon tax would be a costly, job-killing burden on American families and small businesses and would reverse the progress made toward achieving American energy dominance,” Scalise said.
Meriden wastewater plant needs additional $2.23 million for upgrades
Matthew Zabierek
MERIDEN — The city needs to bond an additional $2.23 million for a state-mandated project to lower phosphorus discharge levels at the city's wastewater plant on Evansville Avenue.
Officials say the additional money is needed to cover loan interest, project contingency and any possible legal dispute.
The state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, which is overseeing the project, recommended the city include funds for those possible expenses with the bonding, Public Utilities Director Dennis Waz said. Some of the money may never be spent, Waz said, but “it’s insurance so I don’t have to go back to council looking for extra money.”
The new bonding, which requires City Council approval, would bring the total amount bonded for the project up to $50 million from the $47.76 million approved by the council last year. The City Council's Finance Committee will hold a public hearing on the request on May 28 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 142 E. Main St.
Meriden is one of several local municipalities completing upgrades to meet stricter phosphorus discharge limits enacted by DEEP. Phosphorus is considered an environmental hazard because it causes algae blooms, which deplete oxygen in water bodies and pose a threat to wildlife, according to DEEP.
The project in Meriden includes improvements to some of the city’s remote pump stations located away from the treatment plant.
Meriden expects a state grant to cover 38 percent of the project’s costs. The city will receive a 20-year, low-interest loan for the remaining costs.
Waz said the city will cover its portion of the costs through sewer rate increases The city’s sewer rates have gone up each of the last two years, Waz said, but will not increase this upcoming billing year beginning June 1. The city will continue to review rates on an annual basis going forward to determine whether they need to be raised to cover the project’s costs, Waz said.
The city recently submitted its application to DEEP for the grant funding and low-interest loan. Once the application is approved, Waz said the city will proceed with awarding a construction contract. Barring an unforeseen development, the contract will be awarded to the “lowest apparent bidder” — C.H. Nickerson & Co., Inc., a Torrington-based contractor that has completed wastewater treatment plant upgrades for several Connecticut municipalities.
The contractor submitted a construction bid of $38.4 million. City Manager Tim Coon said the construction price came in around or a little bit under what the city anticipated.
Construction is expected to begin this summer and will take around 30 months, Russo said.
Russo said the plant currently discharges about 0.7 milligrams per liter of phosphorus, which will get lowered to under 0.1 milligram per liter with the new upgrades.
‘We can’t cut them fast enough’: State to spend millions to cut down 60,000 potentially dangerous trees along Connecticut highways
Gregory B. Hladky
Connecticut’s
Department of Transportation has some serious tree concerns. Oddly enough,
they’re not related to lots of complaints about the clear-cutting along
interstate medians and shoulders, like the section of I-91 south of Hartford.
A
far bigger tree worry for the DOT, one that’s expected to cost tens of millions
of dollars and take years to resolve, are the estimated 60,000 dead or dying
trees along state highways and routes all across Connecticut. “And that’s a very conservative estimate,” said Kevin Nursick, spokesman for the state DOT.
“We can’t cut them fast enough,” Nursick said of the huge numbers roadside trees that have the potential to fall and block state highways or cause vehicle accidents.
Forestry experts say those dead or dying trees, and millions of others around Connecticut, are victims of invasive insects like Gypsy moths and the Emerald ash borer, damage from severe storms or drought, pollution or simply old age.But many motorists complaining about the DOT’s tree management program appear to be far more upset by the clear-cutting along sections of major highways like I-91 in Rocky Hill and Cromwell. Public concern about all this DOT tree chopping resulted in legislation to require the transportation agency to create guidelines for managing and removing trees and vegetation along state highways with the help of a licensed arborist. The bill passed the state House of Representatives on n May 14 and is now awaiting action in the Senate. DOT officials opposed the measure, arguing they created a new set of tree management guidelines in 2018.DOT officials say the public’s tree-related questions and complaints stem from the fact that many people have forgotten those areas along the Interstates and the Merritt and Wilbur Cross Parkways aren’t supposed to be overgrown with trees. The department is supposed to keep 30-foot-wide “clear zones” along major highway medians and shoulders for safety reasons, but hasn’t been able to for decades.
“The reason we have so many trees there is that the DOT has been historically under-funded and under-staffed for tree work,” Nursick said. In the last few years, the DOT has responded to storm-related tree falls along highways by dramatically stepping up its clearing efforts along medians and shoulders.
Those 30-foot-wide clear zones are for both sides of an interstate. In sections such as I-91 south of Hartford, the median between the north- and south-bound lanes is actually less than 60 feet wide, according to Nursick, which means all trees in the median are being taken down. The rationale for having those clear zones is to give vehicles that leave the road surface space to slow down before hitting any obstacles.
“We haven’t been doing this for decades, and the public had gotten used to [having medians and shoulders crowded with trees],” Nursick said.
The transportation agency began to step up efforts to clear away trees close to the interstates and other major state roads after many trees and limbs fell onto travel lanes after massive storms in 2011 and 2012.
Hurricane Irene and the major October “Halloween” snowstorm in 2011 brought down thousands of trees across the state and “Superstorm” Sandy in 2012 felled thousands more across roads and power lines.
State records show that, since 2014, the DOT has spent approximately $36.3 million cutting trees down and clearing medians and shoulder areas along Connecticut interstates and highways. In 2018-19 alone, the DOT’s tree management program is expected to spend nearly $9.1 million.
Nursick said the cost of taking down trees in the clear zones along I-91 in Rocky Hill and Cromwell is estimated at $384,000. The project covered about 5.5 miles along the heavily-traveled interstate.
The vast numbers of dead roadside trees in danger of falling is a big worry not only for the DOT but also for municipalities, utilities, homeowners and businesses all over Connecticut.
Tom Worthley, a forestry expert and associate professor with the UConn Extension System, said a survey in the eastern part of the state found the number of dead or dying trees along some roads can be as high as 30-40 per mile.
One result of the widespread and increasing concern about taking down potentially dangerous dead trees is that licensed arborists and tree-cutting contractors are now in very short supply.
In addition to DOT state crews, the transportation agency routinely hires contractors to help remove trees. But Nursick explained that “it’s getting harder to find contractors.”
Connecticut utilities and others looking to take down dead trees are employing large numbers of tree-cutting operations in an effort to protect power lines and poles from falling trees. “Everybody is hiring them,” Nursick said.
Officials at Connecticut’s largest utility, Eversource, estimate they spent $65 million to repair power lines and poles knocked down by trees felled by fierce winds and tornadoes during a single major storm in May 2018.
The DOT has a different standard for taking down trees along state routes than it does for clearing safety zones along the interstates. Many state roads run through neighborhoods where tree-cutting crews must deal with the concerns of homeowners, utility lines and local traffic.
“It takes a lot more time,” Nursick said.
On top of all the other problems plaguing Connecticut’s trees, those growing close to state routes and other roads are often troubled by pollution and cramped conditions for their root systems.
“Trees along roadways tend to be compromised,” Nursick said, making those trees even more vulnerable to pests, diseases and storm damage. “All of these things are adding up,” he said of the state’s growing problem of dealing with tens of thousands of dead trees.