Bridgeport rebids arena upgrade after prices run over $28M budget
BRIDGEPORT — Twenty-eight million dollars may not stretch as
far as it used to.
That is how much city officials agreed to spend upgrading
the entertainment and sports arena as part of a 2021 deal to keep the
Bridgeport Islanders hockey team —formerly the Sound Tigers — in town. The
Islanders manage the municipally-owned venue.
But when the city recently sought quotes from contractors
for some of that work, the responses were too high. So the city is now
requesting a new round of bids.
"Yes, the initial bids came in over budget,"
confirmed Thomas Gill, Bridgeport's director of economic development.
He declined to say by how much, arguing it would compromise
the integrity of the second effort to solicit prices.
Specifically the city wants to move forward with masonry,
structural steel and extensive heating, ventilation and air
conditioning improvements at the 10,000-seat arena, which opened in 2001.
New bids are due April 4.
It has been known for a while that the aging building needs
significant help. Questions over who was responsible for paying for what
contributed to a legal battle between the Islanders and Mayor Joe Ganim's
administration that started in 2016 when the latter accused the hockey team of
owing significant back rent.
The Sound Tigers countered that Bridgeport owed the team
money it had sunk into repairs and maintenance, and took the matter to court.
Five years and $615,328 worth of city legal expenses
later, in
the summer of 2021 the City Council approved a settlement that would
keep the Islanders skating at the arena for at least another 10 years. In
exchange, Bridgeport was to invest as much as $28 million to return the venue
to like-new condition.
The city so far has set aside $15 million toward that goal.
"Everything these days is high and expensive and going
up," Councilman Scott Burns, a co-chairman of the economic development and
budget committees, as well as an fan of the Bridgeport Islanders, said
Wednesday.
"It's our building so we need to take care of our
buildings," Burns said. "It's not something we've been necessarily
good at. We delay or postpone or cut corners and then we're not in great
shape."
Bridgeport's state legislators are also eager to learn more
about how much the renovations will ultimately cost. State Reps. Antonio
Felipe. whose district includes the arena, and Steven Stafstrom both said that
the Ganim administration has asked them and their colleagues to try to obtain
state aid for the arena during the current legislative session at the Capitol
in Hartford.
"We still haven't gotten a formal proposal from the
city in terms of what that money is gonna be used for," Stafstrom said.
"We need to have an exact dollar figure."
"We need specific costs. We can't just say ... 'general
repairs,'" Felipe said.
Their intent is to try to match Bridgeport's investment. So
if the city spends $15 million, the state would be asked to provide $15
million.
"We want to help," Felipe said.
Stafstrom argued that although the arena is located in
Bridgeport, it is an economic benefit for Connecticut.
"The arena is really a regional and statewide asset,"
he said. "So the state should have some 'skin in the game' in terms of
maintaining it as the highest quality venue it can be."
Fairfield Selectmen Approve $10.5 Million for Rebuild and Cleanup
Sophia Muce
FAIRFIELD – The Board of Selectmen approved a $10.5 million
appropriation for construction and remediation of Penfield Pavilion to meet a
federal deadline, but some local officials are calling the decision rushed and
drawing comparisons to the former Tetreau administration.
The Penfield Pavilion was originally constructed in 2011 and
rebuilt in 2017 for $7.3 million under former Democratic First Selectman
Michael Tetreau’s administration following damage from Hurricane Sandy. The
rebuild was completed despite requests by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency to stop construction and comply with federal regulations.
In addition to addressing the outstanding notice of
violation lodged by FEMA, the town must remove fill containing PCBs and
asbestos from under the pavilion.
In an effort to avoid a 10 percent flood insurance hike for
almost 1,800 Fairfield residents, the Board of Selectmen voted at a Monday
meeting to appropriate $3 million to raise the height of Penfield Pavilion. The
board also appropriated $4 million to remove the contaminated material and $3.5
million for the associated construction costs.
But some questioned the rush to approve the spending,
suggesting alternative ways to address the March 31 deadline –
the day FEMA officials would alert insurance companies to a downgrade in the
agency’s Community
Rating System, which gave a 10 percent discount to residents in flood zone
hazard areas based on Fairfield compliance with FEMA standards.
“My position is that we don’t have enough [information] to make
a decision,” said Democratic Selectwoman Nancy Lefkowitz.
Lefkowitz suggested the board delay the vote, review
construction and remediation cost estimates and study the impact of FEMA’s call
to raise the pavilion. She suggested using the town’s American Rescue Plan Act
funds to offset flood insurance increases for residents in the meantime.
But the remaining board members, First Selectwoman Brenda
Kupchick and Selectman Thomas Flynn, both Republicans, argued that the town had
exhausted its options and needed to avoid the insurance downgrade.
“Not making a decision right now is not an option,” said
Flynn.
According to Planning Director Jim Wendt, if FEMA were to
move forward with the downgrade, they would not reconsider Fairfield’s rating
in the National Flood Insurance Program until construction was complete, which
would take 12 to 18 months. After that, the town would need to reapply for the
program, requiring a review of town building permits by FEMA.
“I think it’s more likely there would be at least a two-year
period over which that discount would no longer apply,” Wendt said.
Kupchick said she was not expecting the March deadline when
she spoke to federal officials by phone on Feb. 10, and said the only way to
prevent the flood insurance increase was for town bodies to approve the
appropriation by the end of the month.
But Lefkowitz said she didn’t want to repeat past mistakes
by the Tetreau administration.
“Things were rushed through in the year before an election.
I would hate [for] us to make the same mistake twice,” Lefkowitz said. “We’re
here, and I think we do have opportunities to slow this process down.”
Lefkowitz also questioned the source of the $10.5 million
appropriation – which came from previous budget surpluses that were transferred
to the town’s Fill Pile Remediation Account – and referenced confusion at
a March 2 Board of Finance meeting.
At a meeting of the Board of Finance, Chief Fiscal Officer
Jared Schmitt updated officials on the status of the Fill Pile Remediation
Account. He said Fairfield had approximately $15 million in the account – about
$6.6 million remaining from an initial $9.8 million in surplus transfers,
and $8.4
million from the 2021-22 surplus on remediation,
In addition to Penfield Pavilion, over 30 sites across town
require remediation for pollution, according to the March update, and of those
sites, the town has completed remediation on more than 20.
But Board of Finance Chair Lori Charlton questioned the
almost $3 million spent on remediation from the account,
“I did not think that we authorized an appropriation. I
thought we simply authorized a transfer,” Charlton said. “And that $9.8 million
– we would need to [authorize] an appropriation in order to spend it. So, I was
actually surprised at that.”
Schmitt said that to his recollection, the money was put
aside specifically for remediation. Rather than coming back to the board for spending
authorizations, he said, the town would create reports to show officials
exactly how it was being spent.
Charlton requested a review of the previous transfers, and
later reached out to Kupchick’s administration for clarification.
“I just think that we should consult with either bond
council or the town attorney to make sure that we just don’t have a legal
problem,” Charlton said. “Because the last thing we want to do is have a legal
problem when monies are being spent without authorization.”
At the Monday Board of Selectmen meeting, Lefkowitz echoed
Charlton’s confusion and called the spending into question.
“To me, it also leads to the question of – I’m not going to
say the legitimacy because I don’t know if that’s the case – but it is
certainly something to question,” Lefkowitz said.
John Stafstrom, an attorney with Pullman & Comley, said
it was clear that the town would need RTM approval to spend the latest $8.4
million surplus transfer, but said the minutes of Board of Selectmen and Board
of Finance meetings approving prior transfers were “pretty thin.”
Stafstrom said that the newest motion to approve the $10.5
million from the remediation account would also pass through the Board of
Finance and RTM, a process he said would foster transparency.
“I’ve heard a lot of talk about transparency tonight, and I
think this is honestly also the most transparent way to deal with the funding
for the project,” said Stafstrom.
Kupchick said she appreciated Stafstrom’s explanation and
assistance.
“I just want to follow the rules,” Kupchick laughed.
The Board of Selectmen voted to approve appropriation with
Kupchick and Flynn in favor, and Lefkowitz opposed. Prior to the vote,
Lefkowitz urged the Board of Finance and RTM to take her questions into account
before their meetings later this month.
“I hope by my questioning today, even if you’re not in
agreement with my position… that you really take into consideration the things
that we’ve talked about, the questions I’ve asked and that those are
considered,” Lefkowitz said. “This is a decision that’s going to impact the
community for decades.”
East Hartford agrees to sell Showcase Cinemas site for $1 in return for 300-apartment development
East Hartford’s Town Council, meeting Tuesday night,
unanimously agreed to sell the 25-acre former Showcase Cinemas site for $1 to
developers planning to build at least 300 apartments.
The council also unanimously signed off on a series of
conditions that in some ways ease the expectations and burden of developers
Brian Zelman and Avner Krohn – acting through Jasko Zelman 1 LLC. The changed
conditions are intended to allow the long-simmering development to continue
despite rapidly rising interest rates and a tightening lending market.
“We gave them more flexibility because we understand the
banking market is not the same anymore,” Mayor Michael Walsh said after the
meeting.
Jasko Zelman 1 and town officials had previously set terms
in agreements last year that, included, among other things, a 27-year tax
fixing agreement. In those agreements Jasko Zelman 1 agreed to build a minimum
of 360 apartments. They secured local land-use permits that would allow up to
477 units.
Given toughening borrowing conditions, Zelman and Krohn
approached Walsh late last year asking for flexibility. That led to the refined
agreements settled Tuesday that, among other things, drops the minimum
apartments to 300.
Zelman and Krohn say they still want to build more than 400
units but need flexibility to build less should financing prove elusive.
Walsh has taken some heat from a small segment of residents
about plans to sell the Showcase site for $1, but notes the town is getting
more than $100 million in investment in return. Bringing higher-income earners
to an amenity-rich development on the site will be a pillar of ongoing efforts
to revitalize the long-declining Silver Lane commercial corridor, Walsh said.
Zelman and Krohn anticipate development costs of $100
million to $110 million.
“The town has been a great partner throughout the entire
process,” Zelman said Wednesday. “The unanimous vote in support of our
amendments shows town officials understand the current market conditions and
are aligned with us in their desire to get this project started.”
Krohn noted it is to the developers’ advantage to build as
many units as possible, as there is tremendous pent-up demand in East Hartford
alone. The town has not seen new apartments built in five decades, he said.
Krohn and Zelman stress they will not sacrifice amenities or
quality despite the tough borrowing market.
Planned amenities include a dog park, pool, 12,500-square
foot clubhouse, band rehearsal room, 3,000-square-foot fitness center, outdoor
exercise space, 2,000-square-foot coworking center, golf simulator, library,
lounge, indoor party room, playscape, small movie theater and a community
garden.
The development will also offer direct access to the East
Coast Greenway and “ample” indoor bicycle storage, according to the partners.
The agreements with Jasko Zelman 1 call for the town to secure $10 million in
state, local and/or federal grants for the project, which would be spent on
infrastructure upgrades. Walsh said this aid is necessary to make the project
feasible.
The original development agreement called for Jasko Zelman
to inject at least $10 million in equity into the project. The changes approved
Tuesday would allow Walsh to drop that demand to $5 million. Walsh said
Wednesday that change will only be allowed if it is required to secure bank
financing.
Under the original tax fixing agreement, Jasko Zelman was to
deliver at least 360 apartments by Oct. 21, 2026, at which time they would be
taxed at $2,100 per unit, rising 2% every year through 2052. The new agreement
would allow the town to delay the implementation of higher taxes reflecting the
improved site beyond Oct. 21, 2026, should it be determined as necessary to
“resolve unforeseen circumstances.”
Under the original development agreements, Jasko Zelman 1
was to secure financing by March 31. The amendments approved last night now
require financing to be secured by Sept. 1. Jasko Zelman 1 would pay a $30,000
monthly option fee to retain the agreements beyond that date.
The amended agreement pushed back the deadline to secure
financing to Sept. 1, Walsh said. Beyond that, Jasko Zelman 1 would face a
$30,000 penalty for every month that passes without financing secured, he said.
“We can close on the sale of the property as soon as they
get their financing,” Walsh said. “If they get their financing in two months,
we will close in two months. If they get their financing in six months, we will
close in six months.”
Half of construction’s job openings vanish
The number of construction job openings in January plummeted
by 240,000, a result dubbed “simply shocking,” by Associated Builders and
Contractors’ Chief Economist Anirban Basu.
ABC’s
monthly analysis of the Bureau of Labor Statistics data indicated
there were 248,000 unfilled construction jobs in January, a sharp, 50% drop
from the month before and 148,000 jobs below the same time last year.
Basu even questioned the accuracy of the numbers. “While
this construction job openings number is likely to be revised or at least
eventually viewed as aberrational as new data arrive, there are likely some
construction segments that have substantially slowed their pace of hiring,”
said Basu.
The total number of open jobs in the U.S. hit 10.8 million
in January, Basu reported, indicating there were more job openings than
unemployed Americans. But as those numbers remained lofty, construction’s
plummeted — nearly half of all job openings vanished in a month.
“In a nation that is set to rebuild much of its
infrastructure and is operating in the megaproject era, including the
construction of manufacturing facilities for computer chips, inputs to growing
alternative energy industries and electric vehicles, today’s numbers seemingly
defy credulity,” said Basu.
But the head-scratching data isn’t without some possible explanations.
Specifically, Basu called attention to the BLS data not
differentiating between residential and nonresidential numbers. So, “while many
nonresidential contractors continue to report lengthy backlog and numerous open
jobs, the single-family homebuilding segment has entered a period of
significant retrenchment,” he said.
Finally, indications from the Federal Reserve point to
further hiking of interest rates and for that elevation to stick around longer
than previously thought, which could further dry the well of job openings.