Funding to fix CT’s roads and bridges is drying up, and officials don’t have a solution
Keith M. Phaneuf and Kasturi Pananjady While the coronavirus dominated summer headlines, Connecticut’s five-year effort to accelerate the transportation rebuilding program slowed to a stroll on July 1.
A risky initiative to force tolls — by borrowing and spending billions of extra dollars on new projects between 2016 and 2020 — concluded July 1, without those controversial fees or any other plan to pay for all of it.
Now Connecticut is left with a $2.8 billion bill, a cash-starved Special Transportation Fund headed toward insolvency, and a construction industry poised to shrink even as the state struggles with unprecedented unemployment.
Unless Gov. Ned Lamont and the legislature order more revenue for transportation — a risky proposition as they near a new state election cycle — construction and labor leaders say Connecticut’s aging and congested highways, bridges and rail lines are at risk of further deterioration.
And the administration already has begun to delay transfers of funds to the transportation building program, something advocates say will only postpone projects.
“Once we get out to the next several years, nothing is [fully] funded,” said Nate Brown, vice president of the Connecticut State Building Trades Council. “It’s a construction industry issue statewide, and the men and women who rely on that as a living could have some really severe consequences going forward.”
“It’s going to significantly hamper the state’s ability to make any progress at all,” Don Shubert, president of the Connecticut Construction Industry Association, warning that construction contractors and workers could soon migrate to other states to find employment. “The construction industry pulls back as soon as it recognizes uncertainty. Drastic cuts like this cause deep adjustments in the industry.”
Now, faced with the overlapping problems of more debt to pay off, more infrastructure needs, the lack of a new revenue source and less of an appetite to borrow, the state’s transportation funding situation is dire. There are not many ways out of the jam.
State funding for highway, bridge repairs plummets
These “drastic cuts” center around slightly more than $900 million Connecticut is expected to borrow this year for transportation work.
That’s down a whopping $711 million, or 44%, from last year, the final stage of the five-year “ramp-up” launched in 2015 under then-Gov. Dannel P. Malloy.
Transportation borrowing, which enables Connecticut to qualify for federal construction grants, is paid for by the Special Transportation Fund — which is supported largely with two fuel taxes and a share of sales tax receipts.
Last year, Connecticut funneled nearly $2.5 billion into its capital program, chiefly through state borrowing and federal grants. This year, the projected total is $1.64 billion.
Further complicating matters, the state saved $74 million this fiscal year by waiting longer to borrow funds for infrastructure work.
Making the DOT wait longer for less money helps keep borrowing costs down as the bill for the “ramp-up” comes due. But it also will slow infrastructure repairs, Shubert and Brown noted — an odd prospect given that Malloy, Lamont and other leaders have warned constantly that the rebuilding was proceeding too slowly and barely maintaining a state of good repair.
“The key to an efficient transportation program is long-term, dedicated, dependable funding,” Shubert said. “As soon as you break from that, it affects the DOT’s ability to plan and deliver projects immensely.”
Bonding backlog explodes over the past decade, costing tens of thousands of jobs
Delays in transportation funding are nothing new in Connecticut.
When Malloy took office in 2011, the state had $1.7 billion in approved financing for transportation, but it hadn’t actually borrowed the money — partly because it couldn’t afford to make the debt payments on it.
By the time Lamont succeeded Malloy in 2019, the amount approved but not borrowed was up to $3.8 billion.
The bonding backlog now stands just shy of $4.4 billion.
Every $1 billion in stalled bonding translates into 10,000 construction and related jobs that could have been created, said Fred V. Carstensen, who heads the University of Connecticut’s economic think-tank.
“Clearly one of the things that is hamstringing the state’s economy is that we have bad infrastructure,” he said. “Now you’re putting austerity on top of that?”
But things weren’t supposed to be like this. Malloy’s “ramp up” was never supposed to ramp down.
To cover part of the ramp-up’s debt costs, Malloy and legislators dedicated more sales tax revenues to transportation — just not enough to cover the whole bill.
But the linchpin of Malloy’s “Let’s GO CT!” plan was that by 2020, state officials would have embraced tolls — or some other new funding source. With that money, Connecticut not only could have maintained the accelerated pace of repairs but enhanced it further.
The governor formed a study panel to spend a year figuring out how to cover the long-term costs. Meanwhile, the ramp-up went forward while the administration dreamed big.
Under Malloy, the DOT established a “vision level” annual investment in infrastructure of $3.2 billion per year, enough to maintain safety and make various strategic improvements to relieve congestion.
CT Slams the brakes on funds for transportation construction
A five-year program to "ramp up" Connecticut’s meager transportation building program expired quietly last summer. Launched in 2015 to accelerate overdue repairs until lawmakers approved tolls or some other new revenue source, it was the linchpin of a plan to push annual construction funding upward toward a “vision level” of $3.2 billion. But legislators subsequently rejected tolls and the expired ramp-up now must be paid off, even as dollars for highway and bridge work evaporate.
| Financial Year | CT's Ramp Up (Millions of $) | State Bond Authorizations (Millions of $) | Federal Funding (Millions of $) | Total (Millions of $) | Shortfall from "vision level" (Millions of $) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | 1,403 | 1,797 | |||
| 2015 | 1,592 | 1,608 | |||
| 2016 | 1,745 | 1,455 | |||
| 2017 | 2,049 | 1,151 | |||
| 2018 | 2,163 | 1,037 | |||
| 2019 | 2,427 | 773 | |||
| 2020 | 2,470 | 730 | |||
| 2021 | 1,636 | 1,564 | |||
| 2022 | 1,652 | 1,548 | |||
| 2023 | 1,664 | 1,536 |
East Haven school board OKs no bid project for new roofs on 'temporary' classrooms
Mark Zaretsky EAST HAVEN — The town will spend $48,000 to put new roofs on portable classrooms at D. H. Ferrara School despite the fact that the classrooms — which have been in place at the school for many years — never were intended to be permanent.
The Board of Education approved the work, money for which is in the town’s capital budget, this week 6-2 with one abstention.
The contractor that will do the job, A & G Contracting Inc., came off the state bid list. The project did not formally go out to bid. The school is located at 22 Maynard Road.
The board approved the work after several members — including members voting both for and against it — raised questions about whether it should have gone out to bid, the wisdom of spending taxpayeron new roofs for temporary classrooms, and whether it might make more sense instead to put a small addition on the school.
Board members Tom Murtagh, MaryAnn Pellegrino, Erika Santiago, John “Jack” Stacy, Vice Chairwoman Patricia “Tia” DePalma and Chairwoman Michele DeLucia — all Democrats — voted in favor of it. Republicans Tom Hennessey and Jennifer DiLungo voted against it, while Republican Lisa Geraci-Anastasio abstained.
Because money for the job is in the town’s capital budget, the town selected the vendor, Finance Manager Lynn Boisvert told the board. The town already was using A & G on other projects in town and “thought it was a good deal,” Boisvert said.
Mayor Joe Carfora, Director of Administration and Management/Chief Administrative Officer Ray Baldwin, Director of Public Services Charles Coyle and acting Finance Director Jim Keeley all said Wednesday that they were unaware of the project and had not been involved.
“That project should go out to bid,” said Hennessey, a onetime board chairman, at this week’s meeting. “That’s a lot of money.”
He went on to tell the board, “We should get rid of those portable classrooms and do something permanent. Those classrooms have been here as long as I’ve been here.”
Stacy, Pellegrino and DiLungo all agreed in subsequent comments.
“I have to say, I agree, as well,” said DeLucia. “We should look at a capital funds project to extend that part of the building.”
Superintendent of Schools Erica Forti told the board that adding on to the building with permanent construction would mean more money as part of a project “in a bigger scope.”
The decision to use temporary classrooms was made years ago after a process involving a consultant who advised the town, she said.
“We certainly can revisit that and try to work collaboratively with the town and try to get some of those things done,” Forti said.
Ferrara Principal Paul DeBernardo did not immediately return a call for comment.
Hartford seeks redevelopment proposals for key Downtown North parcels
Matt Pilon ith the construction of new apartments and retail space now underway around Hartford’s Dunkin’ Donuts Park, the city is expanding its redevelopment gaze to another cluster of nearby properties it now controls.
The city this month issued a request for redevelopment proposals for the vacant Arrowhead Building at 1355 Main St. and three vacant adjacent land parcels that together act as the tip of the arrowhead-shaped Salvin Block, which is bordered by Chapel, High, Pleasant and Main streets.
The area is seen as a key connector between downtown and the Clay Arsenal neighborhood that lies just to the north. The city has been working to leverage the ballpark, which opened in 2017, to attract investment to the surrounding area.
RMS Cos. broke ground last fall on the first phase of its $250 million planned redevelopment around the park, which will include 270 apartments, 11,000 square feet of retail space and a parking garage located along the right field side of the ballpark.
The Arrowhead redevelopment site lies to the west, approximately one block behind home plate.
Right across the street is the “Flatiron” building at 529 Ann Uccello, acquired nearly a year ago by major Hartford landlord-developer Shelbourne Global Solutions.
The city has simultaneously issued an RFP to study a broader area ‒ the Arrowhead Gateway ‒ that includes the Arrowhead site and Main Street and Albany corridors extending northward to Seyms and Williams streets, respectively. The intent is for the developer of the Arrowhead Building sites to work in tandem with the broader vision for the gateway area, according to documents.
The city is working on the effort with Connecticut Main Street Center, which issued development recommendations for the area several years ago.
Responses to the two recent RFPs are due in late February and March, respectively.
KBE Building Corporation, the general contractor in charge of the construction project at 291 Federal Road was given a stop work order on Dec. 23 when issues arose over one of its subcontractors, according to Department of Labor spokesperson Juliet Manalan.
According to Manalan, subcontractor Wall to Wall Drywall — a drywall company based in Brighton, Colorado — brought over 22 workers from various states including Colorado, Nebraska and Texas despite not being registered to do business in the state nor having any Connecticut Workers Compensation coverage.
These workers were wrongly classified as independent contractors and not compensated for working overtime, Manalan said.
KBE did not return request for comment but construction has since resumed. Manalan said all workers had to be put on the project payroll and registered with the state Department of Revenue Services before the order could move forward. Additionally, the labor department had to obtain a state worker’s compensation policy before construction could proceed.
Columbia Pacific Advisors, which owns the site, declined to comment.
Construction broke ground earlier this fall but Brookfield’s land use officials do not know when the project will be completed. The soon-to-be, three-story senior living facility is expected to provide beds for over 130 people to meet the growing demand for senior housing.
Brookfield construction temporarily shut down following alleged misclassification
BROOKFIELD — The construction of an assisted living facility was temporarily halted by the state Department of Labor after their officials say a company incorrectly classified its workers.
KBE Building Corporation, the general contractor in charge of the construction project at 291 Federal Road was given a stop work order on Dec. 23 when issues arose over one of its subcontractors, according to Department of Labor spokesperson Juliet Manalan.
According to Manalan, subcontractor Wall to Wall Drywall — a drywall company based in Brighton, Colorado — brought over 22 workers from various states including Colorado, Nebraska and Texas despite not being registered to do business in the state nor having any Connecticut Workers Compensation coverage.
These workers were wrongly classified as independent contractors and not compensated for working overtime, Manalan said.
KBE did not return request for comment but construction has since resumed. Manalan said all workers had to be put on the project payroll and registered with the state Department of Revenue Services before the order could move forward. Additionally, the labor department had to obtain a state worker’s compensation policy before construction could proceed.
Columbia Pacific Advisors, which owns the site, declined to comment.
Construction broke ground earlier this fall but Brookfield’s land use officials do not know when the project will be completed. The soon-to-be, three-story senior living facility is expected to provide beds for over 130 people to meet the growing demand for senior housing.