January 31, 2020

CT Construction Digest Friday January 31, 2020

House-Senate deadlock prompts postponement

Democratic legislative leaders informed the office of Gov. Ned Lamont on Thursday that there will be no vote on a truck tolls bill before the General Assembly convenes its regular session Wednesday, despite assurances each chamber has sufficient votes for passage, said Max Reiss, the governor’s communications director. 
“Senate Democratic leaders have confirmed they have 18 votes needed to move our state’s economy forward, reduce the state’s carbon footprint and finally make a long overdue investment in transportation,” Reiss said. “Additionally, House Democratic leaders confirmed they, too, have the votes to improve the state’s infrastructure.”
But not on Monday, the day Senate President Pro Tem Martin M. Looney, D-New Haven, had set aside for a special session on the governor’s $19 billion, 10-year transportation infrastructure plan.
Or Tuesday, the only other day before the regular session opens.
Senate Democrats informed their members by email there would be no session but did not offer a reason.
Looney and House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz, D-Berlin, could not be reached Thursday evening, but numerous sources said the two leaders had been unable to agree on which chamber would vote on the bill first, a sign that neither leader fully believed the other had the firm votes for passage.
House Majority Leader Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, would not comment on the House-Senate tensions, but he said there also were legal complexities about whether a special session could be interrupted to open the 2020 session on Wednesday and then resume. That only would be an issue if Republicans decided to prolong a debate into Wednesday.
“We are prepared to debate this issue until the good, hardworking people of Connecticut are satisfied we have represented their interests. They don’t want tolls,” House Minority Leader Themis Klarides, R-Derby, said.
Lamont’s staff informed the governor of the postponement by phone at 5 p.m. after he left a meeting of his workforce development council. He is to meet with Looney and Aresimowicz to discuss what comes next.
A public hearing on the bill will go forward at 1 p.m. Friday.
The development Thursday was a stark demonstration of how opponents of tolls have succeeded in rattling lawmakers about what is a relatively modest measure: Tolls on heavy trucks on a dozen highway bridges, raising about $180 million annually. Lamont began 2019 with a proposal for more than 50 gantries that would charge tolls on all motor vehicles, raising close to $800 million.
Klarides said all evidence pointed to the Democrats not having the votes for passage.
“The old adage in Hartford is, ‘When you have the votes, you vote.’ They don’t have the votes for a draft bill we are going to air tomorrow, which could change radically by the time the Democrats decide, if they ever can, to ram through this legislation and shatter the recognized legislative process at a later date,” she said. “The Democrats are desperate to avoid public scrutiny at all levels, and that has been made clear by them pulling the plug on this process, at this point.”
The governor’s original measure never came to a floor vote, as Senate Democrats said they could not produce a majority for a bill that would impose tolls on passenger cars. House leaders said they could pass a broader tolls measure, but their refusal now to call vote without the Senate going first calls that into question.
Unless the House and Senate leaders can agree on a path forward, the 2020 session will begin with the Democratic governor, Senate president pro tem and House speaker at odds, in the awkward position of being unable to publicly explain why they could not produce a vote on what emerged as the highest priority and most difficult issue of Lamont’s first year in office.
As is tradition on opening day, Lamont is scheduled to address a joint session of the General Assembly on Wednesday. One rationale for acting on a transportation bill in special session was to allow lawmakers to highlight other issues in the three-month, election-year session. It also would free up the governor’s staff to move on from an issue that has been all-consuming.
Democrats hold solid majorities in both chambers, 22-14 in the Senate and 91-60 in the House. Organized labor, especially the construction trades, have said a failure to pass a transportation funding measure will complicate re-election endorsements for Democrats later this year.
All 187 seats of the General Assembly will be on the ballot in November.
The proposed toll locations:
  • I-84 at the Rochambeau Bridge between Newtown and Southbury.
  • I-84 in Waterbury near the “Mixmaster” junction with Route 8.
  • I-84 in West Hartford at the crossing over Berkshire Road.
  • I-91 in Hartford at the Charter Oak Bridge.
  • I-95 in Stamford over the MetroNorth rail line.
  • I-95 in Westport crossing over Route 33.
  • I-95 in West Haven over the MetroNorth line.
  • I-95 in East Lyme crossing over Route 161.
  • I-95 at the Gold Star Memorial Bridge over the Thames River, between New London and Groton.
  • I-395 in Plainfield crossing over the Moosup River.
  • I-684 in Greenwich overpassing the Byram River.
  • Route 8 in Waterbury south of the interchange with I-84.
Special session vote on tolls is off; support unclear
Ken Dixon and Kaitlyn Krasselt
HARTFORD — The long-delayed special legislative session on tolls for heavy trucks will be delayed yet again, after lawmakers late Thursday afternoon canceled next week’s anticipated vote.
Notice was sent to lawmakers from the House and Senate Democratic caucus offices telling them not to come to the Capitol early next week. A vote had not been scheduled but top Democrats had said it would happen Monday or Tuesday, after lawmakers had been told to plan on coming to the Capitol early in the week.
It’s unclear whether the delay means support is softening for Gov. Ned Lamont’s signature legislation, and whether the tolls bill will advance in the regular legislative session that starts on Wednesday.
Sources said that disenchanted House Republicans threatened to stretch the scheduled debate next Tuesday, all night and into the Wednesday morning.
Friction has emerged over which chamber, the House or Senate, would first debate and vote on the legislation.
The vote was considered razor-close in the Senate, with no Republicans supporting it and several Democrats opposed. Democrats can pass the bill 18-18 in the Senate with four defections in their ranks.
State Sen. Carlo Leone, D-Stamford, co-chairman of the legislative Transportation Committee, said Thursday night that the delay was not the result of a reduction in support. Democrats can easily bring the bill up for special consideration in a process called emergency certification, called an “e-cert.”
House Minority Leader Themis Klarides believes the cancellation of the special session is a sign that the toll bill could be on the verge of collapse. “The old adage in Hartford is when you have the votes you vote,” said Klarides, R-Derby. “Clearly they don’t have the votes for this. If and when at some point in the future they decide to e-cert this bill and abrogate the standard parliamentary procedures, it will be another instance of them going around the traditional legislative process. We are prepared to debate this issue at length until the good hard-working people of the state of Connecticut are satisfied that the process has served them.”
Pat O’Neil, House GOP spokesman, said blaming Republicans is a typical Democratic ploy.
“Of course they would blame us for their inability to muster the votes for a bill they can’t get the support for in their own caucuses,” O’Neil said Thursday night. “They control the process. They control the agenda and this is an abject failure on their part.”
A public forum on the plan is still scheduled for Friday at 1 p.m. at the Legislative Office Building, next to the Capitol in Hartford.
Under the plan, the state would charge tolls ranging from $6 to $13 at a dozen locations of highway bridges in need of rebuilding or major repairs. The plan would raise $150 million to $170 million a year — significantly less than earlier plans put forth by Gov. Ned Lamont.
Lamont had campaigned on trucks-only tolling, then proposed a broad tolling plan with 53 gantries around the state in February. When that plan did not receive a vote, he downsized that to 14 bridge locations for cars and trucks, then to the latest plan.“Senate Democratic leaders have confirmed they have the 18 votes needed to move our state’s economy forward, reduce the state’s carbon footprint and finally make a long overdue investment in transportation,” said Max Reiss, communications director for Gov. Ned Lamont.
“Additionally, House Democratic leaders confirmed they, too, have the votes to improve the state’s infrastructure,” Reiss said. “Democratic legislators have presented the only responsible bill to impose tolls on trucks only, combined with historically low federal financing — which we support and look forward to its eventual passage.”
Lamont and supporters of the latest tolling plan say the alternatives are worse: “Doing nothing, or raising taxes on the middle class and dipping into our state’s budget reserves, two things Republicans support,” Reiss said.
While most opponents of the bill did not want to see tolls on any vehicles, Sen. Alex Bergstein, D-Greenwich, said Thursday night she would not have voted for the plan because it prevents tolls on cars.
“It would have been intellectually dishonest and fiscally irresponsible to have passed that bill,” Bergstein said.
She has long argued for full tolling of all vehicles as the only responsible way of financing transportation improvements.
Republicans had proposed to use half the state’s projected emergency reserve fund of $2.8 billion to pay down pension liabilities, then use the estimated $225 million savings in pension payments to back federal loans to fix roads and bridges.
And Republicans oppose measures in the bill.
Earlier on Thursday, supporters of truck tolls outnumbered Republican opponents during a confrontational but friendly morning news conference at the iconic commuter station in Westport.
While state Rep. Laura Devlin, R-Fairfield and Sen. Tony Hwang, R-Fairfield, charged that regional rail commuters are not even mentioned in the 32-page bill that will be the focus of a public hearing Friday in the State Capitol, a dozen toll supporters held up signs in favor of the legislation.
It made the New Haven-bound platform a little crowded.
“There is no mention whatsoever in covering rail commuter interests in Fairfield County for me,” Hwang said.
The thorny political subject has been great fodder for photobombing, with toll opponents in recent months getting the upper hand on optics, particularly as backdrops for Gov. Ned Lamont’s public events promoting the legislation. Some lawmakers see the subject as a potentially toxic election-year issue.
Reiss said that the legislation will not affect the governor’s plans for rail improvements.
“We proposed more than $6 billion in rail upgrades,” Reiss said. “No administration has ever proposed these kinds of historic upgrades to Metro-North accompanied by a funding mechanism to pay for it.”

Special Session On Truck-Only Tolls Canceled

There was no immediate reason given for the cancellation. However, sources said Republican lawmakers planned to talk the bill overnight until the regular session is scheduled to start Wednesday, Feb. 5.
Larry Perosino, a spokesman for House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz, said they still expect to vote on the legislation within the first week of the regular session.
Some speculated that the cancellation of the special session means the Democrat-controlled House and Senate don’t have the votes to approve truck-only tolls.
House Minority Leader Themis Klarides, R-Derby, said the old adage is, “‘When you have the votes, you vote.’ They don’t have the votes for a draft bill we are going to air tomorrow, which could change radically by the time the Democrats decide, if they ever can, to ram through this legislation and shatter the recognized legislative process at a later date.”
She added that “Democrats are desperate to avoid public scrutiny at all levels, and that has been made clear by them pulling the plug on this process, at this point. We are prepared to debate this issue until the good, hardworking people of Connecticut are satisfied we have represented their interests. They don’t want tolls.’‘
Max Reiss, a spokesman for Gov. Ned Lamont, said that’s not true.
“Senate Democratic leaders have confirmed they have the 18 votes needed to move our state’s economy forward, reduce the state’s carbon footprint and finally make a long-overdue investment in transportation. Additionally, House Democratic leaders confirmed they, too, have the votes to improve the state’s infrastructure,” Reiss said. “Democratic legislators have presented the only responsible bill to impose tolls on trucks-only, combined with historically low federal financing – which we support and look forward to its eventual passage. The alternatives are unacceptable: doing nothing, or raising taxes on the middle class and dipping into our state’s budget reserves, two things Republicans support.”

Dixwell Plaza Plan Unveiled, Embraced
Thomas Breen
An ambitious planned $200 million redevelopment of Dixwell Plaza would bring a new performing arts center, banquet hall, grocery store, museum, office complex, daycare center, retail storefronts, and 150-plus apartments and townhouses to the neighborhood’s fraying commercial hub.
The local team behind the project received nothing but praise from longtime community members who heralded developers for striving to keep — and build—inter-generational wealth in the heart of black New Haven.
Over 100 people filled the Stetson Branch Library on Dixwell Avenue Wednesday night to learn about, and ultimately celebrate, those newly unveiled details of the Dixwell Plaza overhaul planned by the Connecticut Community Outreach and Revitalization Program (ConnCORP).
A for-profit subsidiary of the Science Park-based nonprofit Connecticut Center for Arts and Technology (ConnCAT), ConnCORP has been steadily buying up condos over the past year-and-a-half in the 1960s-era shopping complex on the western side of Dixwell Avenue between Webster Street and Charles Street. They’d been mum over the past 18 months about their plans for the 7.5-acre, suburban-style complex directly across the street from the now-under-construction new Q House.
Wednesday night, they took their intentions public.ConnCORP President and CEO Paul McCraven, ConnCAT President and CEO Erik Clemons, ConnCAT Chairman of the Board Carlton Highsmith, and ConnCAT Chief Operating Officer Genevieve Walker stood alongside the project’s development consultant, local builder Yves-Georges Joseph II, and dived deep on the team’s estimated $200 million rebuild of Dixwell Plaza.
They urged the dozens of neighbors who showed up for this first public presentation to give feedback on the still preliminary sketches, They invited people to help shape what will ultimately be built as the project moves from the ideas stage to more formal planning and fundraising, followed by rezoning quests, site plan reviews, demolition, and construction. The team plans to host three more community meetings at Stetson Library on March 11 at 6 p.m., April 22 at 6 p.m., and May 16 at 1 p.m.
ConnCORP still owns only five of the plaza’s 11 condos. It hopes to finish negotiating purchases for the remaining properties by the end of this year and to begin construction in early 2021.
Clemons said Wednesday that the idea for the ConnCORP-led Dixwell Plaza project emerged from him watching ConnCAT grow and succeed over the past decade by providing culinary school, medical billing, and phlebotomy job training for class after class of local students.
And yet, he still saw those same graduates struggle to stay in New Haven and afford to buy a home or start their own business.
He said that 85 percent of Dixwell residents are renters, 17 percent are unemployed, and 55 percent are low-income.
The mixed-use residential, commercial, retail, office, and recreational suite of buildings that ConnCORP has planned for the prospective Dixwell Avenue superblock are all geared towards addressing that core issue of poverty, Clemons said. A key focus of the project is also the investment of dollars and resources provided by black New Haveners like himself and McCraven and Highsmith and the rest of the ConnCORP team into the historic center of New Haven’s African American community.
“This is not about us making more money at all,” Clemons said. “This is about us being a part of the social contract. Because of the fact that we have been blessed, we need to share those blessings. That’s what this is about.” The founder of the Specialized Packaging Group (SPG), a board member of KeyBank, and one of the key funders behind ConnCAT, Highsmith stressed at the top of the meeting that this planned Dixwell Plaza redevelopment has no connection to the university down the block.
He said he is frequently confronted with the question, “Is this a project of Yale University?”
“The answer is: No,” he said to applause.
Instead, Clemons said, the money required to make this all-new construction project a reality will come from a mix of private equity, subordinated debt, new market tax credits, and fundraising. McCraven said ConnCORP initially planned on focusing its Dixwell economic revitalization efforts at the long-vacant former C-Town grocery store building at 156 Dixwell Ave., which the company bought in February 2018.
After the ConnCORP team presented its plans for that building to the city, Then-Mayor Toni Harp encouraged the local developers to dream bigger.
So the team started canvassing Dixwell community leaders and residents as to what they would like to see in the neighborhood. They polled Dixwell Community Management Team Chair Nina Silva, Newhallville Community Management Team Chair Kim Harris, and DataHaven to better understand the demographics and history and economic makeup and needs of Dixwell.
McCraven said that they heard the same requests everywhere they turned: Dixwell needs jobs, retail, daycare, banking, housing, open spaces, public safety, cultural and entertainment venues, spaces to launch and grow a small business.
He said people they spoke to frequently referred to a long and proud history of African American residents and businesses in the neighborhood. People recalled a dynamic, diverse, and self-sufficient economy in the mid-20th century. So the ConnCORP team started brainstorming. They hired local developer Joseph and architect Peter Cook, who helped design the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington D.C., and started planning.
McCraven walked Wednesday’s audience through ConnCORP’s plans for the 11 different parcels that make up the soon-to-be-transformed Dixwell Plaza.
“It’s all preliminary sketches,” he cautioned. “None of this is in stone.”
The first building, closest to Webster Street, would consist of a performing arts center, a banquet hall, and a museum.
“We plan to do jazz concerts there,” he said. “The whole idea would be an entertainment and cultural center for the community.”
Further north in the complex would be a 20,000-to-30,000 square-foot grocery store and food hall.
“Not a big box like Stop & Shop,” he said, “but a big market that would serve the community.” That site would potentially contain commercial kitchens that local culinary entrepreneurs could use to for their own food-related businesses — something akin to the kitchen incubator space the city has been planning for years on building. An adjacent building to the southwest would be ConnCAT’s new headquarters, he said. “Our dream is to bring ConnCAT over to Dixwell” from Winchester Avenue and to expand upon the current job training offerings to include more computer-based skills as well as advanced manufacturing.
That building would include a roof-top daycare center, he said.
McCraven said that ConnCORP initially planned on building an above-ground parking garage to accommodate the office, commercial, and retail uses on the southern half of the super-block.
But after talking with local alders, who expressed concerns about a parking garage towering over the neighborhood, ConnCORP is now committed to building an underground parking garage accessible off of Webster Street, according to McCraven
Building underground parking is significantly more expensive than building above-ground parking, he said. Nevertheless, “we’re committed to making that happen.”
The Dixwell-adjacent middle of the block will house an art gallery and a landscaped plaza under the plan, he said.
And the northern half of the block closest to Charles Street will consist of a mix of rental apartments and townhouses. ConnCORP anticipates building around 150 to 180 housing units in total, he said, though the exact number of units and bedrooms per unit has yet to be finalized.
The northern half of the block would also contain an office building, ideally housing a mix of start-up businesses and anchor tenants. McCraven said they’re already in serious conversations with a Hamden-based biotech company that is interested in relocating to the Dixwell neighborhood.
“And implanted in all of this would be retail,” he said. Banks, food shops, fitness centers, bike stores, entertainment venues, clothing stores, pharmacies. “We’re pretty confident we can bring most or all of those things to this site.”
Clemons said that everything included in the project so far, though still preliminary, has been informed by conversations with community leaders and data scientists.
“Now we want to hear even more,” he said. “We want more input” from the broader public. Over the next hour, dozens of people present offered that input.
They pressed ConnCORP to make sure that the redeveloped Dixwell Plaza both includes affordable apartments and contributes to greater homeownership in the surrounding area. They called on the developers to make space for mental healthcare providers and to employ local minority contractors over the course of construction.
Even the most critical of comments was couched in an enthusiastic embrace of the idea that local black developers are spearheading such a large project in the city’s historic black neighborhood.
“This is one of the first projects I’ve seen come to the city where people who look like us are building it for us,” said small business contractor Rodney Williams.
The city more broadly and the Dixwell neighborhood in particular are currently rife with development dollars, he said, referencing the planned new nearly 400-unit apartment complex at 201 Munson St.
That money, those jobs, and the subsequently built buildings rarely trickle down to the mostly working-class African American population that defines the Dixell and Newhallville neighborhoods.
“How could we not support them?” he asked about ConnCORP.
A woman behind him agreed. “This is our time,” she said. Shepard Street blockwatch captain Addie Kimbrough (pictured) also threw her support behind the project. “All they want to do is build and make Dixwell look like it used to,” she said. They deserve the neighborhood’s support.
“This reminds me of what Dixwell looked like when I came here” in 1959, said Claudine Wilkins-Chambers. Whatever help or support ConnCORP needs in order to make this vision a reality, she said, she’d be happy to do her part to provide.Sean Reeves (pictured) recognized that most people are wary of change. “But change has to happen in order for our children to be successful,” he said.
And this project could very well lay the groundwork for the economic welfare of generations of Dixwell residents to come. Katurah Bryant (at center in photo, in sunglasses) agreed.
“It’s refreshing to see that people who look like us want to engage us,” she said.
She added that she’s tired of seeing out-of-town developers and large-scale landlords based in other neighborhoods of the city scooping up all of the rental housing in Dixwell and Newhallville.
“It is going to be a beautiful thing for our community to look like a place where we want to live.”




 
 
.

January 30, 2020

CT Construction Digest Thursday January 30, 2020

SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR TRANSPORTATION FUNDING!
Attend the Hearing!
The Transportation Committee is holding a PUBLIC HEARING
This Friday, January 31, 2020
1:00 PM
Room 1E
Legislative Office Building
LCO #373 "An Act Concerning the Sustainability of Connecticut's Transportation Infrastructure



Winstanley planning major lab space building in downtown New Haven
Mary E. O’Leary
NEW HAVEN — Winstanley Enterprises LLC, a major biotech developer in the city, has plans to bring lab incubator space to a building that would sit in front of Alexion on reclaimed land from Route 34.
For sometime, the city and Yale University officials have hoped that Carter Winstanley would come through to help fill the gap in laboratory space needed in New Haven for new research companies that are now at capacity or soon will be as the life sciences sector continues to grow in New Haven.
The city, in the past, has counted on lab projects developed by Winstanley who filled up 300 George St. with companies in four years, after it sat empty for a decade. Now Alexion at 100 College St., built by Winstanley, soon will be filled, and there is a lack of space at Science Park, which he also developed.
Economic Development Administrator Michael Piscitelli said the city has had a memorandum of understanding since the spring with Winstanley for another building that would be a minimum of 350,000 square feet, although it could be bigger, that would add a significant amount of lab space.
Other uses, such as traditional offices, would also be part of the construction, as will a public plaza.
Piscitelli said the negotiations have been positive, but some technical details are still being worked out as are equitable employment concerns. Ultimately the project would have to be approved by the Board of Alders, City Plan and the state Department of Economic and Community Development.
“It is a significant opportunity for the city,” he said, given the $800 million neuroscience center approved for the St. Raphael’s campus of Yale New Haven Hospital and the success of such companies as Biohaven and Arvinas, both of whom have gone public. These successes continue to attract more development. Yale University’s Office of Cooperative Research has attracted an average of 10 venture-backed startups in the last three years. A total of 75 companies have emerged in the last 15 years from research at Yale, with 50 in the New Haven area, according Jon Soderstrom, who directs the OCR.
The office, which is the university’s tech transfer department, takes faculty innovations and research and connects them to venture capital opportunities to develop commercial products or services. Soderstrom recently said the university continues to have a robust pipeline of businesses moving up from startups.
The city is currently in construction on Phase 2 of the Downtown Crossing which has been reclaiming the land that was the Route 34 corridor. Alexion was the first building constructed on the new acreage.
Phase 2, which extends Orange Street across Route 34, is currently in construction, while phase 3 will extend Temple Street to the Hill, connecting it to downtown.
Piscitelli said the city, in any final agreement, would work in tandem with Winstanley on the Phase 3 portion. Phase 2 is expected to be completed in the summer of 2021, while Phase 3 will start at the end of 2020 and take two years to complete. Some aspects of both phases have been blended to make up for the $20 million federal grant, which was half of what the city had sought.
The address of the new building would be 101 College St., in front of Alexion at 100 College St.
Winstanley has traditionally had commitments from companies that need this expensive laboratory build-out before investing in it, but that need has been confirmed by Yale and the city for a long time.
Another recent positive development for the growth of the life sciences was the purchase of the 145,000-square-foot former Higher One headquarters on Munson Street by a joint venture of Twining Properties, L+M Development Partners and the Goldman Sachs Urban Investment Group which plans to put $25 million into renovations with labs possible in some 75,000 square feet of the structure.

Lamont has a trucks-only tolls plan. Trade groups on both sides have questions.
PAUL HUGHES
Two trade associations on opposite sides of the highway toll debate share some doubts about claims being made about the latest truck-only tolling plan.
One of the most recent and biggest surrounds a statement from Gov. Ned Lamont last week that Connecticut could simultaneously put up toll gantries on the approaches to 12 targeted bridges across the state.
The presidents of the Motor Transport Association of Connecticut and the Connecticut Construction Industries Association both questioned if that could be done.
Joe Sculley, president of MTAC, said it is highly unlikely, and Don Shubert, president of CCIA, said it is hard to judge without funding and project schedules for each proposed bridge improvement project.
MTAC opposes the latest plan to toll heavy commercial trucks to finance the rehabilitation or replacement of the 12 targeted bridges. The CCIA preferred an earlier proposal to toll cars and trucks at 50 location on five major highways, but supports the limited tolling plan on the table now.
The working assumption is the state government will start collecting tolls starting in mid-2022. Lamont cited an estimated that tolls are expected to net $180 million a year.
SCULLEY IS SKEPTICAL the 12 tolling locations can be built at the same time because he said he doubts all necessary federal requirements can be met as quickly as Lamont made out.
For one, Sculley said, environmental assessments will be required for each site. Also, he said the state will have to submit an investment grade traffic and tolling study to determine if enough trucks will continue to use the tolled bridges to repay construction bonds.
Sculley and Shubert questioned the ability of state Department of Transportation to develop, design and deliver the tolling projects on top of its other construction management responsibilities.
“It just doesn’t seem like they have the time, money or manpower to get 12 gantries up all at the same time. I just don’t see that happening,” Sculley said.
“I’d love to see the schedule, a schedule of just the funding and the project development because you really won’t know a lot until you see those,” Shubert said.
Sculley observed the state of Rhode Island has experienced unexpected delays in the completion of 12 truck-only toll gantries there. The state and federal governments executed all the required tolling agreements in September 2016.
In December, only five gantries were in operation in Rhode Island. The first two tolling locations went live in June 2018. Rhode Island officials had been anticipating building the remaining 10 at a pace of one gantry a month starting in the spring of 2019.
In mid-January, Rhode Island Gov. Gina Riamondo submitted a budget recommendation for upcoming fiscal year that assumed $44 million in revenue from a fully operational network of truck-only bridge tolls.
THE PLAN IN CONNECTICUT is to use truck tolls to secure an anticipated $1.5 billion in low-interest federal loans through the Transportation Infrastructure and Innovation Act to help finance the 12 planned bridge improvement projects.
Sculley said he is also doubtful that Connecticut can secure TIFIA loans for all 12 projects at once. He said he is suspect of the estimate that the truck-only tolls will raise $180 million annually to go toward repaying those loans.
“I think the only numbers that exist are what I call back of the napkin calculations, which do not meet the standards of what you need for a TIFIA loan,” he said. “You need to do investment grade traffic and revenue studies that take six months. They do not have what they need for a TIFIA loan.”
The CCIA’s Shubert said the TIFIA loans appear a viable funding option, but he also questioned if the anticipated toll revenue will be sufficient.
He cited a DOT analysis from October 2019 that calculated annual state funding levels currently fall $400 million of the estimated $2 billion needed to maintain the highway and mass transit systems in a state of good repair. He said there is still a funding gap with the estimated $180 million in toll revenue.
The Democrat-controlled legislature appears poised to approve the 12-only truck tolls early next week, and approval of the long-delayed bonding package is expected to quickly follow. Lamont and Democratic leaders have agreed to bond $1.7 billion a year, including an extra $100 million for transportation spending.

Alex Bergstein (opinion): Dems’ proposals ‘modest and short-sighted’
Senate Democrats recently unveiled their caucus priorities at a series of press events in Hartford. These priorities were determined primarily by the caucus leader, Senate President Pro Tempore Martin Looney. While I agree with many of the proposals, I did not attend these press events because I think the agenda fails to address the biggest issues facing our state and country. In my opinion, the Senate Democrats’ agenda does not adequately address urgent issues for Connecticut such as: attracting businesses and creating jobs, fixing our crumbling infrastructure and reversing the exodus of taxpayers. Nor does it adequately address the top priorities for our country which include mitigating unsustainable health care costs and environmental
While I support my colleagues’ efforts to advance good legislation, I’m disappointed that the proposed solutions are so modest and short-sighted.
When we face a true existential crisis — such as the Climate Crisis — why is the Agenda silent? The only environmental proposal is “Protecting Water from Lead & Harmful PFAS.” I introduced a bill last year, SB78, to ban PFAS so I clearly support this idea, but it’s just one of many urgent problems we must fix. What about reducing our reliance on fossil fuels? Carbon pricing is a hot topic that gained wide support at the World Economic Forum in Davos (and the subject of another bill I introduced in 2019 — SB74 ) but it doesn’t show up anywhere on the caucus agenda. Shouldn’t we be setting state environmental priorities based on global priorities as well as pushing back on the gutting of environmental protections occurring at the federal level?
Another problem with the agenda is that some proposed solutions are too limited in scope. For instance, the proposal regarding domestic violence is to “expand Civil Gideon, create a bench book (for judges) and require proper training (for judges).” That’s good, but it’s a partial solution that may actually solidify the status quo. A few weeks ago, I proposed a comprehensive solution to address issues experienced by victims of abuse in every part of Connecticut. It’s called the Child Safety First bill and is based in part on House Congressional Resolution 72, which passed with bipartisan support in 2018. It tackles a range of problems including awarding child custody to abusers and the legal definition of Domestic Violence, which is so narrow in Connecticut that many victims are not believed when they ask the courts for protection. Shouldn’t we design a system that believes victims? And craft solutions based on best practices and the recommendations of Congress?
And finally, some of the caucus “solutions” are not solutions at all because they create an entirely new set of problems. For this reason, I remain firmly opposed to legalizing recreational marijuana. Until we have reliable detection technology and the ability to regulate the safety and use of this dangerous substance, which often falls into the hands of young people, damages brains and destroys lives, I cannot support full legalization. Marijuana is already legal for medicinal purposes in Connecticut and is decriminalized for small amounts. That’s far enough, in my opinion.
The 2020 legislative session lasts just three months, from Feb. 5 through May 6. Individuals cannot introduce bills, only committees can. I hope we accomplish more than modest changes. My mission is to tackle the biggest issues and steer us toward a future of opportunity, equality, health and prosperity for all. And in a continued quest for government transparency and accountability, I’m also proposing term limits for legislators. Because no individual should have the power to control our state or country. Democracy relies on all of us.

January 29, 2020

CT Construction Digest January 29, 2020

Plainville contractor sentenced to 20 months for stealing $3.3M from employees
Joe Cooper
The former owner of Plainville’s Ferguson Electric and Ferguson Mechanical Co. Inc. will spend 20 months in federal prison for bilking more than $3.3 million from his 300-plus employees, prosecutors say. Lee Furguson, 62, of Farmington, was also sentenced Monday in Hartford federal court to one year of supervised release and ordered to pay a $200,000 fine for stealing about $1.60 to $3.15 an hour from each of his employee’s fringe benefits as a “third party administrator fee” for the employees’ pension plans, the Connecticut U.S. Attorney’s Office said. Ferguson, who led the business from 1983 to spring 2019, pleaded guilty to one count of money laundering last July. He is free on a $50,000 bond, and must report to federal prison on April 28, authorities said. According to investigators, from approximately 2013 to 2017, Ferguson deducted money from employees’ hourly pay for their pension plans, but he instead diverted the money to TPA of Connecticut, a Florida company that he formed. TPA then sent the money to another Florida company Ferguson established, DJS Associates, which prosecutors said he created to perform business-consulting services for himself and his companies. However, Ferguson used the funds entirely for personal expenses, and the business did not provide any services. Through the scheme, Ferguson stole more than $3.3 million from more than 300 employees, prosecutors said. He has since made full restitution. Ferguson Electric was founded in the 1920s by Roy T. Ferguson and specialized in industrial and electrical services, according to the company’s website. His son, Thomas R. Ferguson, took over the business in 1948 before Lee Ferguson assumed leadership in 1983. Lee Ferguson resigned from the company last spring, and his son, Ryan Ferguson, assumed the role of president. Today, the company employs more than 150 full-time workers.  He has taken full and complete responsibility and at no time did anyone else at his former companies participate in or was aware of his actions or motives," a company spokesman said Tuesday. “Full restitution had been made to effected employees prior to his sentencing today.”


Fasano says tolls bill has loophole that could capture cars 
The top Senate Republican accused Democratic lawmakers Tuesday with building a “workaround” provision into the new transportation bill that would allow the General Assembly to expand tolls on large trucks to all other vehicles after two years.
Senate Minority Leader Len Fasano of North Haven also charged Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont with scaling back his proposed “debt diet” and endorsing more borrowing for various initiatives to “buy votes” for tolls.
“After two years, we could very well see cars and all trucks tolled in Connecticut without the fear of a bond covenant stopping it,” Fasano said during a late morning press conference. “That could happen.”
Also Tuesday, Democratic legislative leaders confirmed that Friday’s hearing on the tolls bill, set for 1 p.m. in the Legislative Office Building in Hartford, would be open to the general public as well as transportation experts and Lamont administration officials.
The only anticipated legislative support for tolls comes from majority Democrats in the House and Senate — some of whom insisted the bill provide special protections so that only large commercial trucks would be tolled, both now and into the future.
The proposed solution involved special language to be included in the bond covenants — the contracts between the state and investors who buy Connecticut bonds that are sold to finance various bridge and highway construction work.
The draft bill lawmakers are expected to consider next week — which was prepared in consultation with state government’s bond counsel — specifies only trucks will be tolled.
It also states that construction bonds issued over the next two years include language pledging the trucks-only policy would remain in place throughout 2030.
Fasano, who is an attorney, pointed out that this alone is not an absolute legal guarantee against change.A future legislature could refinance those bonds, paying them off early and replacing them with new financing that doesn’t include restrictive covenants. 
And while “that can be an expensive proposition,” Fasano argued there was a much easier, cheaper end-run around the covenant restriction.
Section 8 of the draft measure states the General Assembly can alter the rules “if and when adequate provision shall be made by law for the protection of the holders of such bonds.”
In other words, as long as the state’s ability to repay the bonds is protected, then Connecticut could change the rules about which vehicles it tolls.
How would making cars subject to tolls, which would only increase revenues to the state, make it harder for Connecticut to pay off its debts?, Fasano asked.
He also noted that the 2007 legislature approved bonding about $2 billion to shore up the teachers’ pension fund, pledging in that bond covenant not to alter the schedule of contributions to the pension system until those bonds were paid off, around 2032.
That all changed last May when legislators endorsed a proposal from Lamont and state Treasurer Shawn Wooden to restructure pension payments. The governor and treasurer asserted this would not violate the bond covenant provided Connecticut set aside an amount equal to the maximum yearly debt payment on the bonds, about $380 million.
 
 
Senators clash on trucks-only tolls before Friday public hearing

Senate Republican leader Len Fasano charged Tuesday that Gov. Ned Lamont is buying votes for electronic highway tolls by expanding and sweetening the state’s bond package that has been tied to tolls.
Lamont announced Monday that he had reached an agreement on the annual bond package of construction projects for $1.7 billion. The legislature’s vote on the bond package, which is normally passed at the same time as the state budget in June, has been repeatedly delayed over the past seven months as lawmakers squabbled about tolls. The latest proposal calls for truck-only tolls on 12 bridges across six highways stretching from Greenwich to Groton. “This toll was bought and paid for by taxpayers,” Fasano told The Courant Tuesday. “This governor has moved from his $1.4 billion, line-in-the-sand bonding to $1.7 billion. He took that $300 million that he didn’t want to do, and he bought votes for it. It’s the only way he can get it across the finish line. He had to buy off votes. It was supposed to be $1.4 billion with $100 million toward transportation."Fasano, an attorney, said Lamont made the move “to give out the goodies to get the votes. That’s why they never released [the bill]. That’s why they didn’t want us to know about it."
But Senate President Pro Tem Martin Looney, a New Haven Democrat, rejected Fasano’s assertions.
“The bond package at $1.7 billion, where it stands now, is not anything that we see as making any specific representation,” he said. “The bond package has not been agreed to in any final form yet, other than the overall number. ... The size of a bond act is, in many cases, irrelevant. What is relevant is what goes through the Bond Commission, and that continues to be something that will be negotiated month by month.” Fasano says the language in the 38-page toll bill is not tight enough — and would potentially allow tolls on cars in the future due to “a loophole the size of the Grand Canyon” and would allow more than the planned 12 toll gantries. But Max Reiss, Lamont’s chief spokesman, said Fasano and other Republicans are wrong. “To no one’s surprise, it’s an election year and with little to show for how they have helped move Connecticut forward, Republican legislators are reverting to the oldest play in the book: fear mongering — but Connecticut voters are smarter than that," Reiss said. “They know what this bill is and what it isn’t. This bill only authorizes tolls to be collected on heavy 18-wheeler and above commercial trucks, and explicitly prohibits tolls on passenger vehicles.” The legislature’s transportation committee will hold a public hearing on the latest toll plan starting at 1 p.m. Friday at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford. Lamont’s administration will start the hearing by giving a presentation to legislators, and both written and oral testimony will be accepted from the general public. Looney said the Senate is expected to vote Monday, while House members have been told to reserve Monday and Tuesday on their calendars for potential votes.
 
I don't know which is worse, the fact that Gov. Ned Lamont is planning in secret to spend probably millions of dollars more than the $35 million already promised for its share of a rebuild of State Pier for exclusive use by a rich Danish conglomerate, or that Connecticut lawmakers don't seem to care.
Worse, it appears the governor is agreeing to a blank check for overruns on a project first estimated at $93 million. Is the sky the limit?
Are lawmakers complicit? Uninterested? Mute? Whatever the handicap or reason for inertia, it is disheartening and seems pervasive among both Democrats and Republicans.
Don't any of them want to see something so important, expensive and long lasting deliberated in the open?
I have not heard one peep from a single lawmaker about plans revealed last week to have the scandal-crippled Connecticut Port Authority soon sign a new deal — negotiated in secret — for the controversial conversion of State Pier into a wind turbine assembly facility, with Connecticut taxpayers apparently pledged to funding cost overruns.
The little we know about this pending deal is all that David Kooris, Lamont's puppet chairman of the port authority, seated by the governor after leaving state employment, with an interim appointment due to expire before lawmakers can review it, has agreed to disclose.
Kooris said after a board meeting last week — in which the finished deal, with its undisclosed, escalating price, was discussed in executive session — that the board could vote on it at a February meeting or sooner.
Kooris suggested there might be a news briefing of some kind ahead of time but couldn't promise anything, certainly not an actual release of the documents.
Any lawmaker with a heartbeat, especially those representing eastern Connecticut, which is about to lose its public historical port, with ship traffic diverted to one privately owned in New Haven, should cry foul about this secret deal.
A backroom deal with such significant long-term consequences for the regional economy — not to mention rising and undisclosed costs for Connecticut taxpayers, probably in the many millions but who knows? — ought to be aired publicly before getting a green light by the remnants of a nonelected board that presided over a deal-making swamp, toasting themselves with cocktails paid for by the public.
This is Ned Lamont's Connecticut.
Kooris said after last week's meeting that the cost of the pier remake has risen because of changes to accommodate complaints from Cross Sound Ferry, which worried about ferry maneuvering space, and to improve connections to the rail link at the pier.
Of course, we have no idea what the changes are or exactly how much they will cost, and apparently won't before the port authority board acts.
It is also not clear how the rebuild of the pier can better accommodate the federally funded improvements to the rail line, since the proposal envisioned in the memorandum of understanding signed in April said traditional cargo could only be accommodated at the discretion of the wind companies.
Most disturbing to me, from what I heard from Kooris last week, is that a provision of the memorandum — that Connecticut cover all cost overruns for the project — remains in the final deal.
That's why, he said, the cost of improvements for the ferries and rail are being paid by Connecticut taxpayers.
How much more than $93 million will this thing cost? I can't imagine the possible cost overruns on a two-year project that would fill in seven acres of the harbor.
We only recently got to see the memorandum, with its blank check provision, after months of stonewalling by the broken port authority and weeks of denial by the governor of a clear Freedom of Information request.
Who knows how much Lamont eventually will give away secretly with this backroom deal? Connecticut taxpayers could be on the hook and paying this debt long after he is gone.
Lots of people are making big money on this deal and Connecticut taxpayers have no idea how much it is costing them, just like they don't know how much more they will pay for wind-generated electricity.
Sadly, Connecticut lawmakers haven't asked and don't seem to care.
This is the opinion of David Collins.

East Hampton approves sale of outdated town hall to developer
EAST HAMPTON — Residents narrowly approved a proposal to sell the existing Town Hall to a Bristol developer for $316,000.
The proposal was approved this week despite angry complaints from several residents, including members of The Chatham Party, that the town was in essence giving away a “town asset.”
In particular, Kyle Dostaler, the party chairman, complained the town had not gotten an appraisal of the building’s value before selling it.
He denounced the proposed sale as “a taxpayer rip-off.”
“This is a horrible thing for the town to be doing, to sell this (building) for such a ridiculous price,” Dostaler said.
His wife Mary Ann Dostaler, concurred, saying she was “incredulous that the town was moving forward with the sale without doing its due diligence.”
Town officials said they had hoped for a higher offer.
Town Council Chairman James “Pete” Brown said two other bidders had previously come forward but then withdrew their offers.
Bristol developer John Calciano presented his offer late last year.
The town bought the building, which was built in 1946 as a customer service center for the utility from CL&P, in the early 1970s.
But almost immediately after buying it, the town began what turned out to be a 35-year-long discussion and debate about finding a new site for a larger town facility.
In the meantime, the building began showing its age. The well that services the building is contaminated, forcing employees and town officials to rely on bottled water.
It is settling unevenly, is prone to leaks, doesn’t have adequate space for town departments and does not meet the standards for access by the handicapped that were enacted into law under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which was adopted in 1991.
Located on a down slope, there is also inadequate parking for the building, which also contains the town’s Police Department.
When CL&P/Eversource began an expansion for its maintenance and service facility located behind Town Hall, it reclaimed a road police had used to park their vehicles.
That forced the town to rent space at another site more than a mile east of Town Hall where officers could park their civilian cars, change into their uniforms and then take their cruisers out on routine patrol.
Other town departments were forced to use rental space as well.
Myriad problems with the building — highlighted when a sewage drain backed up spreading what was euphemistically called gray water throughout much of the interior of the Police Department — made town councilors realize it was time to do something.
Eventually, the town council accepted a proposal to build a new town hall/police headquarters inside a mixed-use community in the Edgewater Hills development.
Construction is winding down on the new facility.
Town Manager David E. Cox said earlier this month he expects the building will be ready for use in early April.
After some initial reluctance, the Board of Education agreed to re-locate to the new 34,000-square-foot building as well.
At the time, officials said relocating town offices from satellite facilities would save the town money and help defray a portion of the $18.9 million construction costs.
Resident Scott Minnick said he believes that by selling the building at such a low price the council was “duping us as a town.”
The Board of Finance approved the proposal, as did the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Earlier this month, the council voted 6-1 to also approve the sale, which led to the public hearing and town meeting that was held this week in the Town Hall Meeting Room.
The lone “no” vote was cast by Councilor Derek Johnson.
At the time, he did not give a reason for voting against the proposal.
But Monday night, pressed by Mary Ann Dostaler, Johnson said he had “manifold objections” to the proposal.
They included the lack of an appraisal, the cost of an appraisal, and the cost of maintaining the building if the town held on to it, Johnson said.
In 2014, CL&P offered the town a proposal to buy back the building for $1 million.
The two sides could not reach an agreement, however.
Council Vice Chairman Mark Philhower said the offer “was never in writing,” and was far less favorable to the town than was commonly believed.
The town would have wound up owing money, Philhower said, while Kyle Dostaler repeatedly interrupting saying, “That’s not true.”
Moderator Richard Greco initially asked for a voice vote.
When that was too close to call, he asked for a show of hands, which decided the result in favor of the sale.

January 28, 2020

CT Construction Digest Tuesday January 28, 2020

READ THE BILL: AN ACT CONCERNING THE SUSTAINABILITY OF CONNECTICUT'S TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE... CLICK HERE

A deal on bonding and a drafted transportation bill move CT closer to tolls

Gov. Ned Lamont and the General Assembly took two significant steps late Monday toward ordering electronic tolls on large trucks that travel Connecticut’s highways.
Lamont announced a compromise deal on a new state bond package — a prerequisite for any tolls vote — that curtails borrowing for non-transportation projects, but not as sharply as the governor envisioned in the “debt diet” he unveiled last February.
Majority Democrats in the state Senate also released a first draft of the tolls bill and confirmed an informational hearing on the measure has been scheduled for Friday.
These conditions set the stage for a vote on tolls next week. And Lamont said he still expects lawmakers will act in special session on Monday or Tuesday next week, just before the regular 2020 session begins on Wednesday.
“We’ve got a good bond package,” the governor said. “We’ve reached agreement on where we’re going to go there.”
Lamont didn’t release all the details of the two-year bond plan, but said the centerpiece is $1.7 billion in general obligation [G.O.] bonding for the current fiscal year.
During the eight-year administration of Lamont’s predecessor, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, new G. O. bonding — financing for projects paid off with General Fund budget revenues — had averaged almost $2.1 billion per year.
“I thought we needed some discipline in terms of how much borrowing we do going forward,” Lamont said. “We’re going to be borrowing significantly less than they have, on average, over the last eight years.”
Details on bonding for the 2020-21 fiscal year were not released late Monday.Lamont asked lawmakers last February to limit their new G.O. bonding to just over $1.4 billion this fiscal year, but many of his fellow Democrats in the legislature argued this was too lean.
Connecticut uses general obligation bonds to fund municipal school construction, capital projects at public colleges and universities, state building maintenance, open space and farmland preservation, and various, smaller community-based projects.
Transportation construction is paid for with a mix of federal grants and a second type of state bonding, Special Tax Obligation bonds. These STO bonds are repaid with resources from the budget’s Special Transportation Fund. The STF primarily draws revenues from fuel taxes and a portion of the state sales tax.
Lamont insists tolls are needed because the transportation fund has not kept pace with the maintenance needs of Connecticut’s aging, overcrowded highways, bridges and rail lines.
As part of the tentative bond agreement, about $100 million of the $1.7 billion in G.O. bonding approved for this fiscal year will be dedicated to transportation work.
Rep. Jason Rojas, D-East Hartford, co-chairman of the legislature’s Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, said both the Lamont administration and lawmakers compromised to find common ground on a two-year financing plan.
“It’s taken us a while to get here, and not from a lack of interest or a lack of effort,” Rojas said. and this financing advanced top priorities in education, health care and economic development that otherwise would have languished.
The governor would not sign off on a new bonding plan until legislators either adopted a tolls proposal, or otherwise showed how they planned to pay for necessary transportation upgrades in the coming years.
Many legislators who supported tolls countered by saying they would not vote for this new revenue source unless a bonding agreement had been reached.
The tentative deal also marks a big win for Connecticut’s cities and towns.
Three municipal aid programs, which distributed $150 million to communities last fiscal year, have hung in limbo as Lamont and legislators sparred over borrowing. Sources say these grants, including a crucial $60 million local road maintenance program that also pays for winter snow removal, are funded in each year of the tentative, two-year bond package.
Details of the tolls billThe bill calls for tolls to be placed on large, commercial trucks with a rating of Class 8 or higher. This would exempt many Connecticut small businesses from paying the toll.
The bill authorizes the Transportation and Motor Vehicles departments to hire a toll operator. The DOT commissioner may establish rates provided they fall within a range of $6 to $13 per gantry. E-ZPass holders would be eligible for a discount.
Lamont estimates this would generate about $180 million per year in revenue for the budget’s Special Transportation Fund.
Toll rates could be increased by the DOT to reflect the general rate of inflation or the construction cost index, provided those increases are approved by the state’s Transportation Policy Council.
The bill also contains two provisions to guard against any effort by future legislatures to order tolls on smaller trucks or cars.
Until any bonds issued through mid-2022 for transportation projects are paid off — which likely would take into the late 2040s or early 2050s — “the state of Connecticut shall not charge tolls for any class of vehicle other than large commercial trucks,” the bill reads.
The measure also directs the state treasurer to write into the bond covenant — the contract between the state and the investors that purchase Connecticut’s transportation bonds — “that no public or special act of the General Assembly” approved between now and 2030 would attempt to alter this arrangement.
The bill orders 12 toll gantries, chiefly at the locations of aging bridges. All of these locations were identified months ago by the Lamont administration as priorities, primarily because they involve aging bridges.
I-84 at the Rochambeau Bridge between Newtown and Southbury.
I-84 in Waterbury near the “Mixmaster” junction with Route 8.
I-84 in West Hartford at the crossing over Berkshire Road.
I-91 in Hartford at the Charter Oak Bridge.
I-95 in Stamford over the MetroNorth rail line.
I-95 in Westport crossing over Route 33.
I-95 in West Haven over the MetroNorth line.
I-95 in East Lyme crossing over Route 161.
I-95 at the Gold Star Memorial Bridge over the Thames River, between New London and Groton.
I-395 in Plainfield crossing over the Moosup River.
I-684 in Greenwich overpassing the Byram River.
Route 8 in Waterbury south of the interchange with I-84.

In latest tolls plan, appointed board would set gantry rates
Kaitlyn Krasselt
A panel of 12 people would have the power to set toll rates, according to the latest version of a bill that would implement trucks-only tolling on a dozen highway bridges across the state.The transportation commissioner would establish the initial base rate for tolls — between $6 and $13 — and have the ability to propose future changes, under a version of the bill released Monday night by Senate Democrats.
A new Transportation Policy Council would then have the sole authority to change the rates on any tolled bridge.
The new draft is a departure from previous proposals that would leave the rating structure in the hands of the legislature. The trucks-only scheme is projected to raise about $175 million a year, after expenses, for Gov. Ned Lamont’s 10-year, $19.4-billion transportation infrastructure proposal.
Charges would apply only to the largest trucks, mostly interstate carriers, not in-state delivery vehicles. The fees would be higher than those proposed for trucks in an earlier plan by Lamont that included all vehicles.
A public hearing on the 32-page bill is scheduled for Friday, with a vote expected early next week — ahead of the start of the General Assembly’s regular session.
Sources say Democrats have enough votes in the Senate to pass the plan. House leaders have said they had adequate support for earlier, more expansive versions of Gov. Ned Lamont’s toll plans.
No Republicans have said they would support tolling in any form.
The council would comprise appointees by legislators who have expertise in various transportation areas, including commuter rail, transportation equity, bus transportation, municipal government, public safety, and construction or engineering. Also on the council would be the secretary of the Office of Policy and Management, the state Treasurer and commissioners of economic and community development, energy and environmental protection and housing.
One appointee selected by the Governor would be required to have expertise in transit-oriented development, while another would represent the building trades.
Nonvoting members of the council would include the transportation commissioner and the chairs and ranking members of the General Assembly’s transportation committee and bonding subcommittee.
The locations are the same as those that were in Lamont’s proposal for 14 gantries in November, which included tolls for cars as well as trucks.
Toll Locations
Interstate 84 crossing the Housatonic River in Newtown and Southbury
Interstate 84 and Connecticut Route 8 in Waterbury
Connecticut Route 8, south of I-84 in Waterbury
Interstate 84 over Berkshire Road in the town of West Hartford near exit 43.
Interstate 91 and Connecticut Route 15 at the Charter Oak Bridge in Hartford, leading toward East Hartford
Interstate 95 over the Metro-North Railroad in Stamford
Interstate 95 over Connecticut Route 33 in Westport
Interstate 95 spanning the Metro-North Railroad in West Haven
Interstate 95 over Connecticut Route 161 in East Lyme
Interstate 95 over the Thames River in New London and Groton, the Gold Star Bridge
Interstate 395 over the Moosup River in Plainfield
Interstate 684 over the Byram River in Greenwich, a location of almost entirely New York State traffic
Ken Dixon contributed to this story.

Landmark legislation on transportation is in the works
PAUL HUGHES
HARTFORD — State lawmakers could finally vote early next week on re-establishing highway tolls in Connecticut following the release of a much anticipated transportation funding bill on Monday.
Work continued through the weekend on the landmark legislation that Lamont and legislative Democratic leaders are looking to approve before the General Assembly opens its regular 2020 session next Wednesday.
Senate Democrats released a 32-page version of the bill late Monday afternoon. The Transportation Committee has scheduled a hearing on the legislation for 1 p.m. Friday. No date for the special session was set Monday, but legislators were advised last week to keep next Monday and Tuesday open.
The legislation will propose a network of 12 truck-only bridge tolls that Gov. Ned Lamont said Monday is estimated to raise $180 million annually when all tolling locations are up and running.
The state removed tolls from Interstate 95, the Merritt and Wilbur Cross parkways and a couple of bridges in the 1980s. Tolls are being reconsidered now as a means of financially shoring up the Special Transportation Fund.
As expected, the legislation exempts all vehicles but the largest commercial tractor-trailers using the 13-category classification system that the Federal Highway Administration developed. The bill includes two guarantees against expanding the tolling system to passenger cars or lighter trucks.
The measure requires that special tax obligation bonds that are generally used to finance transportation projects include restrictions that no other vehicles will be subject to tolls. It bars the legislature from altering this provision from July 2020 to July 2030.
 The plan is to use toll receipts to secure low-interest federal loans through the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act to help fund the 12 bridge improvement projects. The legislation specifies loan agreements must also include a restriction against tolling other vehicles.
Only trucks in class 8 and higher would have to pay bridge tolls under the bill. This cutoff will spare lighter commercial vehicles such as box trucks that many small businesses use. The class 8 category includes two-axle trucks pulling one- and two-axle trailers, two-axle tractors pulling one- and two-axle trailers, and three-axle tractors pulling one-axle trailers.
The legislation directs the state commissioner of transportation to set the initial toll rates. It specifies the base rate for trucks equipped with a Connecticut-issued electronic transponder will range from $6 to $13, depending on the cost of a bridge project. Rates will be 50% higher for trucks without one.
The list of bridge projects includes the Mixmaster interchange of Interstate 84 and Route 8 in Waterbury, four bridges on Route 8 south of the I-84 interchange in Waterbury, and the Rochambeau Bridge over the Housatonic River on I-84 in Newtown and Southbury.
Trucks with a state-issued electronic pass will only be charged one toll per bridge per day in each direction. Round trips would initially range from $12 to $26.
The legislation authorizes the creation of a Transportation Policy Council to set future toll rates. It limits increases to the greater of the rate of inflation, or the construction cost index.
The National Highway Construction Index is quarterly estimate of the rising cost of domestic highway construction and maintenance over time that the Federal Highway Administration issues.
The Department of Transportation may propose rate changes, but none may take effect until the Transportation Policy Council approves the toll charges.
The Transportation Policy Council will have 13 voting and nine nonvoting members. The six top legislative leaders get to point one voting member each. The governor gets to appoint two more members, plus four cabinet officials who will serve on the panel. The state treasurer will round out the voting members.
The cabinet members are the secretary of the Office of Policy and Management and the commissioners of economic and community development, energy and environmental protection, and housing.
The commissioner of transportation will serve as a nonvoting member along with the four co-chairmen and the four ranking members of the Transportation Committee and the tax-writing Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee.
The bill states council members will appoint a chairman among themselves. It specifies the council must meet for the first time by June 1, and then it must meet at least once during every calendar quarter.
Lamont said approval of the transportation funding bill will clear the way for the adoption of a two-year bonding bill. He had refused to agree on a borrowing package until he had a deal on transportation. The governor said the bonding bill will authorize $1.7 billion in general obligation bonds a year, with $100 million going to support transportation spending.

January 27, 2020

CT Construction Digest Monday January 26, 2020

Transportation projects expected to disrupt Stamford traffic in 2020
Ignacio Laguarda
Hearst Connecticut Media
STAMFORD — If you hate being stuck in traffic, this is the story for you.
At a recent meeting of the city’s Transportation Committee, members of the Traffic Department presented an inventory of big construction projects that will likely cause traffic this year.
One project intended to make it safer for people on foot in Glenbrook received some push back from a member of the Board of Representatives.
The project would eliminate the northbound right-turn lane on Hope Street at Glenbrook Road, instead creating more green space. Cars would still be able to make the right turn, but the intersection would be narrower. The idea is that eliminating the right-turn lane, described as a “slip lane” since cars do not have to slow down to continue on the road, would make it much safer for pedestrians.
10 projects in 2020 that will impact traffic:
West Avenue and West Main Street traffic design changes
Atlantic Street Bridge improvements
Replacement of Route 1 bridge over Noroton River
Replacement of South State Street Bridge over Rippowam River
Repair of I-95 bridge over South State Street and Metro North tracks
Summer Street pedestrian improvements at Hoyt Street, North Street, Broad Street and Main Street
Traffic signal modernization at various intersections
Glenbrook Road at Hope Street redesign
Davenport Street reconstruction
Rep. J.R. McMullen asked if the redesign would create more traffic.
“We’ll be creating an environment that ask drivers to drive the speed limit, which is not what happens there now,” Jim Travers, transportation bureau chief, responded. “If we want to keep pedestrians safe, the only way we can do it is to normalize intersections.”
McMullen said Hope Street is one of two major thoroughfares used by residents in the neighborhood to get to downtown.
“So this is going to create congestion that’s going to back up into Glenbrook and then ultimately into Springdale,” he said, before describing rush-hour traffic in the area as a “nightmare.”
“All I’m asking is that we create roadways that are safer for all users,” Travers said.
Overall, Travers and his department presented about 10 projects that would likely create traffic snafus in 2020. However, the list is far from complete. Road paving projects organized by the Highways Department and utility projects from the Engineering Department were not included.
One of the projects discussed was the intersection of West Avenue and West Main Street, a common bottleneck during rush hour. The West Side intersection will be getting a makeover meant to solve the problem of traffic building up behind cars turning left on West Avenue. The redesign will include new dedicated left turns in all four directions. The project should be completed by June.
Other ongoing projects include improvements to the Atlantic Street Bridge that carries Metro North tracks and the replacement of the Rt. 1 bridge that goes over the Noroton River near the Darien line that will be done by 2021.
New projects for 2020 will include the rehabilitation of the bridge on South State Street between Greenwich Avenue and Washington Boulevard that was originally built in 1847. The bridge needs to be fixed because of the deterioration of the stone masonry piers and arches that support the structure.
That project will begin in the spring, said Garrett Bolella, traffic engineer for the city.
The I-95 bridge that travels over Metro North tracks, Myrtle Avenue and South State Street will be the recipient of a number of repairs starting this year. The work, which is funded by the state with a budget of roughly $26 million, will result in frequent off-peak hour closures of travel lanes and periodic closure of the Elm Street northbound I-95 on-ramp.
Another project that could create traffic slowdown is the Summer Street pedestrian plan.
“This is going to be a transformative project for our downtown,” Bolella said.
The pedestrian-focused project will bring improvements to four intersections - Hoyt Street, North Street, Broad Street and Main Street - along Summer. Those improvements will include curb extensions to create wider walkways for pedestrians, as well as better signals for crosswalks.
The construction, which is 95 percent funded by the federal government, has a budget of $1.7 million.
The area around Pulaski Street will also be the site of a number of traffic improvements and temporary traffic buildup.
Work will involve installing the city’s first roundabout at the intersection of Pulaski and Greenwich Avenue, to relieve congestion in the Waterside neighborhood, as well as improve travel lanes at the intersection of Greenwich Avenue and Davenport Street, the latter of which will be the recipient of brand new bike lanes.
Once complete, the redesigned streets should provide for safer passageways for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers, according to the city’s website.
 
Sacred Heart University will build a nearly 4,000-capacity, $60 million hockey and skating arena on its West Campus in Fairfield, according to a press release from the University.
“The facility will be home to our Division I men’s and women’s hockey programs, our nationally ranked figure skating team and our men’s club ice hockey team. It is the continuation of a robust, multi-year building and expansion program reflecting our significant growth, appeal and national status,” SHU President John J. Petillo said in the release.
The release said the arena would be completed in 2022, and will feature a number of amenities for students and guests, including a pro shop, beer gardens, food venues, suites, meeting rooms and offices. Construction will begin this summer.
“This arena will be the Division I intercollegiate skating crown jewel and a standout facility in the Northeast,” Jim Barquinero, senior vice president, enrollment, student affairs & athletics said in the release. “In addition to providing a sophisticated and beautiful home venue for our teams, it will serve our entire university community and residents throughout the region,” he said. Barquinero gave a nod to SHU coaches and hockey players, past and present, whose dedication and commitment led to this moment. “It truly is the culmination of many years of athletic excellence by all our former hockey players—men and women—who have donned the Pioneer jersey.” He said future plans call for the addition of a women’s club ice hockey team, synchronized skating and more.
“The arena will be engineered to the highest standards, with enormous attention to detail and quality involving the design of locker and training rooms, spectator space and the rink itself,” Michael Kinney, senior vice president for finance said in the release. “It will include broadcast facilities and a wide range of complementary amenities.”
Sacred Heart said the the building would have multiple uses, including hosting special events such as guest lectures, concerts, convocations and other activities open to students and the community. There will be also ice skating time available to students, faculty, staff and community members. And the arena will also serve serve as a classroom for SHU students studying in the areas of sports communication & media, sport management, hospitality and others.
“This arena will be a game-changer for Sacred Heart University, our student-athletes and coaches, visiting teams and the youth and families already supporting our athletic teams,” Bobby Valentine, executive director of SHU athletics said in the release. “Not only does it provide a fitting venue for what will soon be a national hockey powerhouse, but it creates a halo effect that elevates all of our Division I athletic programs. It’s another example of Sacred Heart’s commitment to providing our student-athletes, students and fans with a remarkable experience whenever they step on our campus.”
Petillo noted the new arena will also “They will use it as a practice space for learning sound and video equipment, doing broadcasts, filming and more,” he said.
The arena is being designed by architectural firm ALG of North Dakota and the S/L/A/M Collaborative of Glastonbury.
It will be built on SHU’s West Campus, home of the University’s Jack Welch College of Business & Technology, Isabelle Farrington College of Education, a wide range of innovation and technology resources, a 27-room guest facility and a variety of other University departments and programs. It is located a minute off Exit 46 of the Merritt Parkway.

Marine construction firm envisions expansion, new pier in New London
Greg Smith           
New London — Mohawk Northeast Inc., a heavy civil construction and engineering company that operates a marine services division in Groton, is contemplating an ambitious expansion project in New London that would boost use of the city's waterfront.
The Plantsville-based company recently purchased three acres of land off Lewis Street on the Thames River adjacent to State Pier that a century ago was the site of the Thames River Lumber Company, a thriving lumber yard complete with a pier for offloading ships carrying wood.
The site, just north of the Gold Star Memorial Bridge, now features a collection of warehouse buildings that Mohawk had been leasing for the past several years and uses for storage of vehicles, equipment and material. Public records show the company, under the name West Bank Properties LLC, purchased the site, listed as 18 Eastern Ave., for $2 million from Eastern Avenue Properties.
Under plans in the early conceptual stage, Mohawk imagines a bulkhead to expand use of the shoreline, a staging area, railroad spur, and a 100-foot-by-400-foot pier — enough space to dock barges and other vessels for repairs or offloading equipment and bulk materials. The parcel offers water access and straddles the rail line, making the site an optimal place to use both the waterway and freight rail for its marine construction operations, said J. David Schill, Mohawk's vice president of special projects and business development.
As opposed to the state-owned State Pier, Mohawk would provide a significant tax boost to the city.
“The area is just not being used. Other than water access, rail access is critical,” Schill said. “There just hasn’t been any private shorefront development related to construction, heavy civil operations, in I can’t remember how long. It’s a shame.”
Mohawk’s marine operations are contained to a Groton site directly across the river from the New London parcel. It maintains four tugs, has numerous barges and cranes and clients that include the Navy, Electric Boat, Coast Guard and state Department of Transportation. Mohawk was the general contractor of the work on the Gold Star Memorial Bridge and performs work on state highways, bridges and shorefront structures.
“Right now, there’s no port other than the State Pier that can be used for these types of projects,” Schill said. “We’re already vested in this area and would love to see New London thrive. Developing this and expanding our operation down here would mean more jobs and more opportunities for the city and for us. It’s a great opportunity for the region.”
Schill said the company performs fabrication work and envisions the New London site being used as a staging area for any number of projects happening in the region.
“The city is extremely excited about this,” New London Mayor Michael Passero said. “It’s an area famously underutilized. They will actually restore port infrastructure to a section of the river that historically had infrastructure but was lost. It’s just another sign that the maritime economy in the Thames River is coming back to life.”
Other recent activity in the commercial and industrial area under the bridge includes the opening of a solid waste management and recycling facility by Connecticut Waste Processing Materials at 45 Fourth St.
Schill is quick to point out that Mohawk’s plans still are in the "very preliminary stages.” The company has had discussions with city officials and the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection and plans future talks with the Army Corps of Engineers about the feasibility of the project.
While initial meetings were positive, Schill said there is still a long way to go before it becomes clear the project can move forward.
Mohawk’s plans are separate from the planned redevelopment of State Pier, which is expected to be transformed into a base of operations for the offshore wind industry. An agreement, among offshore wind developers Ørsted-Eversource, the Connecticut Port Authority and State Pier operator Gateway for the more than $93 million redevelopment of State Pier, still awaits final signatures.
The plans would shrink traditional uses of State Pier and is expected to displace DRVN Enterprises Inc., which stores and provides salt to area municipalities.
Schill said the two projects are not related, though he did not rule out Mohawk performing construction work at State Pier, accommodating operations displaced from the State Pier or even work to support some of the offshore wind industry’s ancillary operations, such as steel fabrication.
Schill said Mohawk’s idea of an expansion project was underway years before news of the offshore wind industry’s venture in New London was made public. Schill said Mohawk in is the marine construction industry and does not anticipate accepting cargo ships at the site.
“It’s not our industry. It’s not what we do. We’re not cargo handlers,” he said. “State Pier has its own operation. There are other entities in the area that need access to marine operations. We’re looking to support any local businesses that we can.”
Passero said the city would partner with Mohawk and any other industry looking to develop the city’s shoreline, and would support their various regulatory applications “vigorously.”
“This is going to be a long process and it's just out of the gates,” Schill said.