Neil Vigdor
And
you thought the Mueller report was dense reading.
The
group No Tolls CT is preparing to deliver five stacks of petitions -- each
larger than a phone book -- containing 100,000 signatures to the office of Gov.
Ned Lamont Thursday.“No Tolls CT has invited the governor to meet with them to deliver the petition, but his office has yet to respond,” the group said Wednesday.
Lamont spokeswoman Maribel La Luz disputed the group’s claim that the governor’s office hasn’t been responsive, saying that Lamont’s chief of staff, Ryan Drajewicz, reached out to the group’s founder, Patrick Sasser, on Tuesday night, again Wednesday morning and offered to meet with Sasser Thursday at the Capitol.
“We know that the No Tolls group feels passionately about this issue. So does Gov. Lamont. But people who signed these petitions aren’t saying ‘no’ to tolls -- what they’re actually saying yes to taking out a $30 billion loan, as proposed by the Republicans, recklessly adding to the state’s deficits and requiring Connecticut taxpayers to foot 100 percent of the bill-plus interest,” La Luz said. “In contrast, the governor’s plan ensures 40 percent of the bill will be paid by out-of-state drivers. That’s why the governor’s proposal is supported by a broad coalition of local, business, labor and legislative leaders and provides a reliable, sustainable path forward for Connecticut.”
Toll foes are girding up for the final four weeks of the legislative session to try to block a contentious plan and signature policy initiative of Lamont to install tolls on Interstates 91, 84, 95 and Route 15.
The governor says it’s the most pragmatic and equitable solution to raising revenue for Connecticut’s crumbling and gridlocked transportation infrastructure. His administration has estimated that tolls on all vehicles -- a reversal of his campaign pledge to toll just out-of-state trucks -- will raise $800 million a year.
Toll proponents say that 40 percent of the money collected will come from out-of-state drivers, something that no competing alternative can offer, including a Republican proposal known as Prioritize Progress. The GOP plan relies exclusively on borrowing money by reallocating money from other construction projects, such as schools.
Opponents of tolls will hold a protest outside the Capitol May 18.
Lamont backs tribal casino in Bridgeport, sources say
Emilie Munson and Kaitlyn Krasselt
HARTFORD — As gambling negotiations with the Connecticut tribes enter their fifth month, Gov. Ned Lamont is privately inclined to back efforts to bring a tribal casino to Bridgeport, instead of a deal for an MGM resort in the city, multiple sources said.
Lamont does not want to risk losing state revenue by jeopardizing a longstanding gambling compact with the tribes. But he wants to bring jobs and economic development to Bridgeport.
The governor spoke of his support for the tribes in unequivocal terms at the Connecticut Conference on Tourism on Wednesday, which was sponsored by both Foxwoods Resort and Mohegan Sun, owned by the tribes.
“Together we’ve had a very strong bond and contract going back well over a generation,” Lamont said. “I’m going to do everything I can to make sure that contract stays in tact. We are working together going forward.
Lamont also said, “I want to do something in Bridgeport, that’s for sure.” He publicly added he’d love to make a deal that involves both tribes as well as MGM, that honors the compact and includes internet and sports betting. He doesn’t think that kind of deal will be done before the legislature adjourns in June, however.
Rodney Butler, chairman of the Mashantucket Pequots, joined Lamont to speak to reporters at the conference. He said his tribe is open to establishing a facility in Bridgeport, which they have previously stated, even as they move ahead on construction of an East Windsor casino with the Mohegans.“We looked at Bridgeport 20 years ago back in 1996, we actually won that bid,” Butler said. “So if it makes financial sense for us in the state, we’d certainly consider that as an option.”
MGM Resorts International has drawn plans for a $675 million resort casino on Bridgeport Harbor and the creation of 2,000 local jobs.
It’s unclear if the tribes could afford a similar facility or where they would locate one. Foxwoods has had months of declining revenue, hurt by a new MGM Springfield casino.
Butler said in an interview the tribes are not actively looking at sites in Bridgeport, but are analyzing what size casino development the market could support.
“We’re at a 40,000-foot level,” he said.
Staff level negotiations between the governor’s office and tribes have been occurring weekly and will continue, Butler said.
If the governor were to offer a deal exclusively to the tribes without a bidding process, MGM is almost certain to refile a lawsuit against the state. A 2016 lawsuit by MGM against Connecticut was thrown out by a federal judge because permits for the East Windsor casino were not yet awarded. MGM has threatened to sue again.“While we appreciate Governor Lamont’s diligent efforts to work with all parties and put Connecticut’s interests first, our view remains, and the residents of Connecticut overwhelmingly agree, that an open, competitive, transparent process is the best way for Connecticut to maximize economic benefits,” the company said in a statement. “In our view, that is as true for a commercial casino license as it is for sports wagering.”
Casino policy is tied up with the legalization of sports betting in Connecticut, both of which need to be negotiated in relation to the two-decades old compact, which gives the tribes gambling exclusivity. In exchange, the tribes pay the state 25 percent of gross slots revenue — about $8 billion total since 1993.
Although a tribal casino would still bring development to Bridgeport, it flies in the face of legislation that Bridgeport and New Haven lawmakers have supported for years: a plan to issue a request for proposals to construct a commercial casino in Connecticut.
That would plan would allow MGM, which has a land contract with the property owners of Steel Point waterfront peninsula, to bid to build a Bridgeport casino, but potentially other companies could bid too.“A job is a job for the people of the city of Bridgeport, no matter where it is coming from,” said Rep. Chris Rosario, D-Bridgeport. “But with that said, we’ve been steadfast. MGM has a commitment to Steel Point. They’ve been committed to the city of Bridgeport and although the tribes have been committed to the state of Connecticut and the city of Bridgeport through the Pequot fund, they haven’t really had a presence in the city up until recently with their agreement with the [Webster Bank] arena and even that has kind of underwhelmed.”
The Bridgeport and New Haven delegations met Wednesday afternoon to discuss gambling. They emerged from the meeting continuing to back the proposals to get commercial casino bids, Rosario said.
Bridgeport Mayor Joe Ganim did not indicate a preference for a commercial versus tribal casino in his city on Wednesday.
“There has been no shift in our focus or goals to have Bridgeport be the host destination of a premium casino-resort,” Ganim said. “This remains a top priority for me, and I am committed to working with the Bridgeport delegation and the Governor’s office to move forward any investment in our city that will increase jobs opportunities, and complement the city’s growing entertainment district.”
New Fairfield moves ahead with school plans
Julia Perkins
NEW FAIRFIELD — The town is one step closer to building a new high school and an early learning academy for students at Consolidated School.
The school board voted unanimously Wednesday night to ask the selectmen if the district could seek state funding for both projects, which would cost $109.4 million without the grant.
“This is good news for us,” Superintendent Pat Cosentino said.
The plan is to build a $79.3 million high school on the site of the existing campus and construct a $30.1 million addition onto Meeting House Hill School.
Pre-kindergarten through first grade would move out of Consolidated and into the addition, while second-graders would go into an existing wing at Meeting House.
The state grant would bring the cost to the town down to $59.5 million for the high school and $23.4 million for the addition.The vote comes about a week after the New England Association of Schools and Colleges placed the high school on warning for its accreditation, citing the poor facilities.
If the district does not address the problems, then the school could be put on probation or lose its accreditation, said Rich Sanzo, director of business and operations.
“That would prevent our students from accessing post-secondary opportunities and have a dramatic impact on real estate values here in the community,” Sanzo told board members at a recent meeting.
The application for the grant is due June 30, but the town will decide in the fall whether it will pursue the projects.
“This does not bind the New Fairfield community or taxpayers to anything,” Cosentino said.She expects a referendum would be held in October. The state must know by Nov. 15 whether the town approved the plans. The town would then learn the following spring if it received the grant.
Conditions in the schools are so poor that renovating would cost about the same as constructing new buildings, Cosentino said. The state will also not provide grant money if the district renovates.
Both buildings are plagued by water leaks, poor energy efficiency and a lack of handicap accessibility, among other problems.
The average taxpayer would pay $210 more in taxes in 2022 and again in 2024 thanks to the projects, preliminary estimates show. Tax increases during the other years would be not be as large.
This could hurt seniors living on fixed incomes, resident Joseph Galanti said at the meeting.
“I don’t think the seniors in this town—people who have put their kids through (the schools and) have had to put up with whatever is in the buildings—should be asked to pay that kind of money,” he said.
But the projects will be an investment that improves the entire town, said Dominic Cipollone, a board member.
“It’s for the benefit of everyone who lives in this town to have schools we can all be proud of both physically and academically,” he said at Wednesday’s meeting.Completing both projects at once will save the town money on architect, construction and other costs, Cosentino said.
“We’re really trying very hard to be fiscally responsible and efficient with taxpayer money,” she said. “But from all the financial people who have looked at the projects and looked at the buildings, it just makes more sense to do them at the same time.”The district has held two tours in the past week of the schools and plans to hold more, Cosentino said.
One mother with a child in first grade at Consolidated said the tour solidified the need for new schools.
“I came away from the tour on Saturday horrified,” she said at Wednesday’s meeting. “I had no idea that the building had so many fundamental issues that needed to be addressed.”