May 7, 2019

CT Construction Digest Tuesday May 7, 2019

A railroad bridge in the Elmwood section of West Hartford is getting a makeover

A Michigan contractor this week began cleaning and repainting the rusty Amtrak bridge in West Hartford’s Elmwood section, ending a 20-year campaign by business owners.
“I can’t remember the last time that bridge looked good,” said Democratic state Rep. Joe Verrengia, who represents West Hartford, as he looked over progress from the first couple nights’ work.
When work wraps up later this month, the roughly 85-foot-long bridge over New Britain Avenue will be part of an attractive gateway to Elmwood, according to Verrengia, who grew up in West Hartford and lobbied Amtrak for years to clean up the span. “This has been on my radar a long time. I worked on it when I was elected eight years ago. I was trying to do something when I was on the town council in 2005,” he said. “I used to work out at Bally’s back in the ’80s and the bridge was bad back then.”
With Amtrak steadfastly refusing to strip and paint the bridge, the state government has stepped in to commission a $331,000 makeover. Atsalis Brothers Painting is blasting off the peeling paint and putting down primer this week and next, and will repaint the bridge before the contract deadline of May 19, Verrangia said.
The bridge was put up in 1959 to carry rail traffic between Hartford and New Haven. When the paint faded and rust set in, Amtrak declined the town’s request to clean it up. The bridge is structurally sound, and Verrengia said the railroad argued that it owns far too many similar bridges to spend significant money on painting the Elmwood one.
Some West Hartford residents hoped that a makeover would be part of the CTfastrak construction project seven years ago. Workers built the busway alongside the rail bridge, and created an attractive concrete wall along the western side. But the Amtrak bridge got no work, so New Britain Avenue drivers arriving from the east still see the chipped, peeling and rusting steel.
The Elmwood Business Association has been pressing for someone to intervene, pointing out that the town and many property owners have invested heavily in a streetscape, facade upgrades and general beautification in the area.
Verrengia got his colleagues to approve legislation authorizing the state Department of Transportation to do the work. Atsalis Brothers Painting got a $331,000 contract for the job, which requires nighttime construction to minimize traffic disruption on heavily-used New Britain Avenue. Among the other companies bidding for the work was Olympus Painting Contractors at $346,730, and P.S. Bruckel, which quoted a price of $648,650.
Verrengia said there had been talk of creating a mural instead of a single paint color, but the expense was too much. Instead, Atsalis will put down a final coat of oxblood red paint.

Fate of Gov. Ned Lamont’s highway tolls initiative hinges on holdout Democrats

Key Democrats in House and Senate are still on the fence on whether to support highway tolls, leaving Gov. Ned Lamont with his work cut out if he is to usher through his signature policy initiative during the final month of the legislative session.
The holdouts in Lamont’s own party say they want to see the fine print on toll collection points and discounts for Connecticut residents and low-income individuals, which have yet to be fleshed out in a legislative proposal.
Behind the scenes, Lamont’s administration is applying a full court press to try to win approval for tolls, which would be installed every six miles on I-91, 84, 95 and Route 15. The governor’s office has tasked top aides with convincing potential swing voters in the legislature that tolling all vehicles — not just trucks, as Lamont campaigned on last year — is the only viable option for the state to fix its crumbling and gridlocked transportation infrastructure.
Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, who is from Fairfield County like Lamont, said he is still undecided on tolls.“I get the intellectual argument. [But] we need to find some relief for in-state residents who drive on our highways," Duff said.
Democrats have ample majorities in the House (91 to 60) and Senate (22 to 14) to pass tolls without Republicans, who say they are united as a caucus against tolls.
Republicans have proposed their own plan to pay for needed improvements to state roads and highways without tolls. It relies exclusively on borrowing money by reallocating money from other construction projects, such as schools.
“There doesn’t seem to be any rush to have a vote. It just tells me that there’s not enough commitment by people there yet,” said Rep. Bob Godfrey, a prominent Democrat from Danbury who has long opposed tolls. “It could still come together in the next four weeks, but the earth would have to move.” Lamont senior adviser Colleen Flanagan Johnson said the governor’s office is working with its legislative partners on a bill that will take lawmakers’ concerns into account and give them more clarity on the scope and logistics of a tolling plan.
“For people who want to see what specifically is in the bill, I would say, kudos to you,” Flanagan Johnson said. “We’re not looking for a bill. We’re looking for the right bill and that may take time.”
Several Democrats from blue-collar districts such as Jane Garibay of Windsor and Christine Conley of Groton have emerged as potential swing votes. Both House freshmen voted in March to send toll legislation to the full House and Senate from the Transportation Committee, but said publicly at the time that they reserved the right to vote against the final package if it lacked detail.
“I’m still not decisive either way,” Garibay said Monday night. “I would really hope that we could come up with a bipartisan deal somehow.”
Garibay, who served as the executive director of the Windsor Chamber of Commerce for 20 years before running for the legislature, said there’s uncertainty in a number of areas on tolls.
“I understand they’re reviewing how much money will we really make on it,” Garibay said. Garibay said she wants further details about how long it’s going to take for the state to start making money on tolls and whether there are plans to offset Connecticut’s gas tax, one of the highest in the nation.
“I really don’t have a clue how it’s going to come through,” she said.
Conley declined to comment through a spokesman, who said she’s waiting for “the final bill” before discussing tolls further.
State Rep. Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford, the deputy Republican leader in the House, said the silence of some of his colleagues on the other side of the aisle, who campaigned in support of tolls, is telling. “Candidates who are now senators and representatives have gone dark,” Candelora said. “There is buyer’s remorse.”
State Rep. Michelle Cook, a Democrat from the blue-collar city of Torrington and deputy speaker who is seen by Republicans as a potential swing vote on tolls, did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
In the Senate, Joan Hartley of Waterbury, one of three Democrats who broke party ranks in 2017 to support a GOP budget in the chamber, also did not make herself available for an interview.
Sen. Mae Flexer, D-Danielson, is taking a wait-and-see approach.
“I’m still listening,” Flexer said. “The details of the actual proposal are very important.”
Flanagan Johnson said Lamont’s administration is “confident” it will have the votes to pass tolls. There’s no debate on the scope and magnitude of Connecticut’s transportation woes, just how to pay for it, she said. The governor’s office has estimated that tolls will generate $800 million annually for transportation improvements, with out-of-state drivers shouldering 40 percent of the cost. Flanagan Johnson said lawmakers will have sufficient time to examine the final language of a tolling bill before the June 5 close of the session.
“There’s no intention of anybody to run this at 11:59 on June 4,” Flanagan Johnson said.
Much of the negotiations between Lamont’s administration and legislative Democrats have focused on providing credits or some other form of relief to low-income individuals and families. Flanagan Johnson said transportation officials are looking at what works in other states with tolls to address those concerns.
Sen. Marilyn Moore, D-Bridgeport, said she sees no better options for Connecticut to modernize its highways, roads, bridges and mass transit than to install tolls.
“It’s not a hard call for me. I’ve been a yes from the beginning,” Moore said. “I’m not sure how it’s going to happen or how we’re going to pull together. [But] I see the conditions of the roads.”
Moore said low-income residents are not heavy users of the interstate or Route 15.
“It’s only going to impact people who spend a lot of time on the roads,” Moore said. “Who’s traveling 50 miles to make $10 an hour? Low-income people are not traveling 50 miles for a job.”
Drivers with Connecticut-issued E-ZPass transponders would pay an average of 4.4 cents per mile during off-peak travel periods, which DOT officials have said is a 30 percent discount off the 6.3-cent-per-mile price for out-of-state vehicles. The rates would go up 25 percent during rush hour as part of a congestion mitigation plan proposed by the DOT. Drivers who make more than 20 round trips per month would get an additional 20 percent discount. Said Duff, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, “There’s still nothing yet to vote on.”
Duff declined to discuss the discount aspects laid out by DOT officials.
“I’m not going to negotiate in public,” he said.
Rep. Stephen Meskers, who last year became the first Greenwich Democrat to win a House race since 1912, said the Republican plan, known as “Prioritize Progress,” would take on long-term debt for the state and is a nonstarter.
I’m in favor of tolls because I don’t see another viable option to fund our infrastructure,” said Meskers, who spent 35 years working on Wall Street. “I’m not willing to put it on our credit card.”
Meskers said the Republican plan won’t capture any income from out-of-state motorists.
“So you’re the putting the burden on everybody in Connecticut to fund the users of our roads,” Meskers said.
The freshman lawmaker acknowledged that the process of bringing Democrats together to pass tolls isn’t easy.
“I would describe the political process, as a neophyte, as herding cats,” Meskers said.

Pro-tolls lobbying group launches $900K advertising campaign

In the past three weeks, the road-building industry has pumped more than $700,000 into the effort to sell highway tolls to the public. Move CT Forward, a coalition of labor and construction industry groups, has spent $734,057 since April 15 on a pro-tolls public relations campaign, according to filings with the Office of State Ethics.
“We’re just trying to get our message out,” said Don Shubert, president of the Connecticut Construction Industries Association, which is part of the coalition paying for the campaign. “If we don’t start moving on tolls right now, we’re going to be in really big trouble down the road.”
The group has a $900,000 contract with Kivvit, a well-connected lobbying and public relations shop with offices in Chicago, Washington, Miami and several other cities, according to ethics filing. The firm counts former Obama adviser David Axelrod as one of its founders.
The spending push comes as debate on the contentious issue heats up at the Capitol. Advocates, including Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont, say electronic tolls on I-95, I-91 and I-84 as well as the Merritt Parkway would generate $800 million annually to fund much-needed repairs to the state’s roads and bridges. In March, the legislature’s transportation committee endorsed three bills that would each establish tolls in the state; a vote is expected before the legislature adjourns on June 5. Critics of tolls are also ramping up their public relations efforts. They say tolls would place a heavy economic burden on Connecticut motorists, who would pay an estimated 60 to 70 percent of the tolls.
But while Move CT Forward is underwriting a six-figure television, radio and digital ad campaign, the anti-toll forces are harnessing the power of free media to spread their message.
"This is David vs. Goliath here,'' said Patrick Sasser of Stamford, the founder of No Tolls CT. The pro-toll movement is well-funded and well-connected, he said.
“They’ve got the voice of the governor’s office, the speaker of the House and the Senate leader, who are pushing very hard for tolls,” Sasser said. "We are just the regular, working class taxpayers of Connecticut.”Without the ability to pay for television and radio commercials, Sasser’s group has launched a grassroots campaign and relied on Connecticut’s right-leaning talk radio hosts to amplify its message. Toll critics will also hold a rally at the state Capitol on May 18.
“One of the sources we’re using to get out message out is social media as well as getting on radio stations and talking to radio hosts,” Sasser said. “As far as buying commercial TV and radio ads, those are expensive and we don’t have the funds to do that.”
Shubert said Sasser and other toll opponents have developed an effective public relations operation, despite their lack of funds. “I thought the other side [has] a pretty good communications game going,” he said. Shubert rejected efforts to portray the pro-toll campaign as a slick campaign led by an out-of-state firm. “We do our own grassroots lobbying,” he said. “That’s our normal course of doing business. We’re a trade association. But we think this is an important discussion in Connecticut right now.”
Rejecting tolls leaves the state with two options, Shubert said: borrow billions to fix the state’s roads and bridges or “you can do nothing and let the system fall further into disrepair.”
In addition to the construction industries association, the coalition behind Move CT Forward includes the New England Regional Council of Carpenters, LiUNA!, Laborers’ New England Region Organizing Fund, the Connecticut Laborers’ District Council and the Connecticut Ready-Mixed Concrete Association.
Keith Brothers, business manager of the 5,000-member laborers’ council, said he views the campaign as “money well spent.”
The thousands of men and women I represent approve of this,” Brothers said. “We’re trying to educate people ... it’s no different than a political campaign. It’s a campaign for a better Connecticut.”

New underground water pipe beneath Merritt to close lanes
Jim Shay

A $3.9 million project not on, but beneath the Merritt Parkway, will cause evening lane closes for about 10 weeks.
The state Department of Transportation says a new drainage pipe will be “jacked, ” - or pushed - under the parkway between Horseneck Brook and Putnam Lake reservoir. Jacking refers to a contruction technique of pushing a pipe and casing materials forward through a bore hole using a great amount of force. The technqiue is common practice in trenchless construction, according to trenchlesspedia.com“Soil stabilization is necessary to proceed with the pipe jacking operation,” the DOT said in a release. “The contractor will progress from the southbound side of the parkway to the northbound direction, closing one lane at a time. The operation is expected to take eight to 10 weeks to complete.”During the work, lane closures are planned between Exits 29 and 31 in Greenwich.
Lane closures are allowed only on northbound Route 15 from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. and on southbound Route 15 from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. on weekdays. Allowable lane closure hours are extended on weekends.

Groton voters again support elementary schools’ plan
Kimberly Drelich 
Groton — At Monday's referendum, residents again supported a revised plan to build two new elementary schools, rather than convert the current middle schools into elementary schools.
The vote was 1,132-265.
Superintendent Michael Graner said he was delighted that community members again supported the construction of two brand new elementary schools, which he said will provide great value to the town and will serve the education of children in the community for decades to come.
"I am grateful to the citizens of Groton who have voted to support the education of our children, and I look forward to exciting learning opportunities these buildings will provide," he said.
He said the buildings, slated to open in 2021, will be "modern learning centers that provide far more value to the town then would've been available through renovation."
Monday's vote represented the third referendum on the Groton 2020 plan, and the third time voters have voted to support it.
In 2016, voters approved the $184.5 million Groton 2020 plan, with $100 million in state reimbursement, to build a consolidated middle school near Robert E. Fitch High School, renovate the existing middle schools into "like new" elementary schools, and close three older elementary schools: Claude Chester, S.B. Butler and Pleasant Valley. Pleasant Valley has since closed in 2017.
In December 2018, voters supported amending the plan so the town could build two new elementary school buildings, rather than convert the current middle school buildings into elementary schools. The second referendum came after the state changed its guidelines and it was determined that new buildings would be more cost efficient. New buildings would cost the same price as renovations, but would last longer and be designed specifically for elementary school students, Graner has said.
But the legal notice for the December referendum was published in the newspaper only 20 days before the referendum, rather than the 30 days required by the state — making another referendum necessary.
Town Manager John Burt said Monday that he is grateful to the voters for supporting the new elementary schools, which will be built on the sites of the existing middle schools.   
"It makes sense to build new to best suit the needs of our students rather than to try to modify outdated buildings that would never meet the same standards. I'm excited that we finally have everything in place to allow us to move forward with all three school projects," he said.
Construction has already started on the new consolidated middle school on the former Merritt Farm property and is expected to be completed in June 2020.
On Monday, some voters objected to the overall price tag of the Groton 2020 plan, but others said the project has already been voted on and they are supporting building two new elementary schools, rather than having renovated buildings.
"If the state says for the same amount of money or less you can get brand-new buildings, you might as well," said voter Nancy Clang.
"I just think we need to get our schools upgraded in town," added voter Shawn Cabral. He said it's better for the students and it helps families to be able to have facilities that support all the extracurricular activities, from band to sports.
In the uncontested City of Groton municipal election, also held on Monday, Mayor Keith Hedrick was elected to a second term, and incumbent City Councilors Jamal Beckford, Rashaad Carter, Gweneviere Depot and Jill Rusk and first-term candidates Lisa McCabe and Minerva Ortiz were elected to the City Council.

Lawmakers running out of time to find new transportation funding plan

With less than a month left until adjournment, state lawmakers are no closer — at least on paper — to charting a new course for Connecticut’s overburdened, decaying transportation system.
Though somewhat dysfunctional by design, the legislature’s latest budget proposals — which don’t feature tolls — would leave the Special Transportation Fund nearly $11.5 million in deficit by 2021, according to a new, nonpartisan analysis.
And while Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont continues to rally support for electronic tolling on the state’s major highways, Republican minorities in the House and Senate are pressing equally hard for a non-toll alternative that relies exclusively on borrowing.
“I think everybody realizes there is a level of punting that’s going on,” House Minority Leader Vincent J. Candelora, R-North Branford, said Monday, referring to separate Democratic proposals for transportation spending and revenue adopted last week that are out of balance.
The Appropriations Committee, which recommends spending levels, proposed a $1.7 billion transportation fund for the fiscal year that begins July 1, and a $1.81 billion fund for 2020-21. These totals effectively match the spending Lamont recommended.
The Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee — as its name implies —  recommends the other half of the budget: how much money should be raised, and by what means.
But the finance committee opted not to endorse a series of motor vehicle fee increases the governor recommended for 2020-21, setting up the potential deficit the nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis identified Monday.
The Appropriations and Finance committees aren’t required to ensure their respective spending and revenue plans match up, and often they don’t.  But given the approaching June 5 session adjournment date, and the transportation crisis Connecticut is facing, the numbers need to add up, Candelora said.
“I don’t think anybody takes that (committee budget) process seriously at all,” he said. “We as a legislature have a long way to go.”
“At least we’re working on something,” countered Rep. Jason Rojas, D-East Hartford, House chairwoman of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee.
Rojas noted that Republicans, for the first time in more than a decade, have not proposed an overall state budget. Having a GOP transportation plan, without defining the other spending cuts or revenue increases needed to keep state finances in balance, is context you simply can’t skip, he said.
“If you’re not interested in engaging, in putting something forth, it’s fairly disingenuous to criticize,” Rojas added.
The challenge facing legislators and Lamont is two-fold.
Firstly, transportation officials have been warning for years that Connecticut is barely spending enough money to maintain the average condition of its aging highways, bridges and railways. That means strategic initiatives to ease congestion, and speed up travel times are stuck in fiscal limbo.
Secondly, even with the treading-water approach to the transportation capital program, Connecticut’s transportation budget is headed for its own crisis. Analysts say the budget’s Special Transportation Fund is headed for insolvency, absent new revenues, at some point in the mid-to-late 2020s.
Lamont has proposed electronic tolling on Interstates 84, 91 and 95 and on the Merritt Parkway.
But toll receipts wouldn’t be available until 2024 or 2025 and the governor, who is trying to close major projected deficits in the budget’s General Fund, also wants to cancel a major transfer of sales tax revenues from the General Fund into the transportation program.
Republicans have said tolls can be avoided if legislators redirect hundreds of millions of dollars in borrowing earmarked annually for schools and other non-transportation initiatives and use it for roads, bridges and rail lines.
But while this would buy the transportation program more time, it still is headed for insolvency, absent new revenues, by the late 2020s.
The finance committee did raise an electronic tolling bill for consideration, but opted not to vote on it before the committee deadline passed last Thursday.
Sen. John Fonfara, D-Hartford, the other co-chair of the Democrat-controlled finance panel, said last week that the tolls bill wasn’t ready for a vote. 
“The public deserves to know what it would cost, not only to keep our infrastructure system on a steady course and run it as efficiently as possible, but also to to make the major infrastructure improvements that we need,” he said.Legislators have said they are awaiting new details from the governor on his tolling plan, including whether some borrowing earmarked for non-transportation programs could be diverted for a few years for road, bridge and rail work until toll receipts become available.