February 6, 2026

CT Construction Digest Friday February 6, 2026

Lamont’s budget keeps commuter rail, bus service flat

John Moritz and Keith M. Phaneuf

Lamont’s budget proposes slowing the growth of the Special Transportation Fund — the primary vehicle used to finance road and public transit projects

Connecticut’s commuter rail and bus services will continue running at current levels for the next year under Gov. Ned Lamont’s latest budget proposal, which otherwise warned of an impending fiscal cliff due to loss of pandemic-era federal funding for rail.

Lamont’s budget proposed a increase of $19.7 million for rail and $9.4 for buses in the fiscal year beginning on July 1. That would amount to an increase of 6% and 3%, respectively, over the current year’s budget. The intention of the increase is to keep their operations flat, budget officials said.

In addition, the governor proposed spending $3.5 million to provide half-priced bus fares to students and free bus fares for veterans. That money would be split between the Department of Transportation and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

This year’s budget proposal does not include any increases in the cost of a bus or rail ticket, following an overall 10% fare hike for Metro-North and CT Rail that will take effect by July 1.

After 2027, the budget document prepared by the Office of Policy and Management warned that roughly $45.6 million in federal pandemic relief funds being used to subsidize CT Rail services will expire and need to be replaced. Several of the state’s commuter rail services, including Metro-North’s New Haven Line, have struggled to rebound to their pre-pandemic ridership.

Sen. Christine Cohen, D-Guilford, co-chair of the Transportation Committee, said Wednesday that she and other lawmakers planned to push for additional funding that would allow for increased service, including along Shore Line East.

“I’m a firm believer that you really need to expand and enhance public transportation in order to get ridership up to lower the subsidies,” Cohen said. “It’s a win-win for the environment, in terms of workforce development, and making sure we’re getting the flow of people and things to where they need to go.”

Cohen and other Senate Democrats also filed legislation on Wednesday to provide for a one-year extension of a microtransit pilot program that began in 2024. The initial $19.5 million in state funding for that program is due to expire in July.

The pilot provides on-demand rides for people in nine different towns and transit districts. Some of those services, such as New Haven’s Via NHV, operate similar to private rideshares such as Uber and Lyft, but at a subsidized cost to riders. The program is intended to boost last-mile service to and from existing transit stations.

Lamont’s budget also proposes slowing the growth of the Special Transportation Fund — the primary vehicle used to finance road and public transit projects — which represents about 10% of the overall state budget.

The STF would grow by $114 million next fiscal year, under the governor’s budget, pushing it to nearly $2.4 billion. But that’s still $12 million less in growth than he and the legislature originally endorsed in an earlier draft of 2026-27 finances approved last June.

Lamont, who tried unsuccessfully to convince legislators in 2019 and 2020 to approve electronic tolling on state highways, warned in November that Connecticut might need to curb borrowing for highway, bridge and rail repairs.

The Special Transportation Fund pays off the principal and interest on the infrastructure rebuilding program while subsidizing public transit costs and operating expenses for the departments of transportation and motor vehicles.

Connecticut, which finances most of its transportation construction work by selling bonds on Wall Street, has issued $1.3 billion this fiscal year, according to the state treasurer’s office. Lamont’s budget staff projected in November, though, that transportation bond sales would drop to $1.2 billion next fiscal year, $1.1 billion in 2027-28 and remain there through 2030.

Don Shubert, president of the Connecticut Construction Industry Association, said this approach to transportation funding “is going to have a very fast, negative impact,” warning businesses would curtail plans to add workers and invest in new equipment.

“When the industry sees the program slow down, they pull back — right away,” he said.

The association has been insisting state borrowing must exceed $1.5 billion per year if Connecticut is to cover both basic maintenance and make the infrastructure changes necessary to improve transportation efficiency.


Old Lyme’s Sewer Project Gets Go-Ahead Without Sound View

Charlotte Harvey

OLD LYME — The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection announced that it would allow three private beach associations to proceed with installing sewers, even without the town’s cooperation.

Nearly 90 days after a Dec. 16 town referendum overwhelmingly opposed a request for additional borrowing to install sewers in Sound View and an adjacent neighborhood dubbed “Area B” in the planning, the state agency informed Old Colony, Miami Beach and Old Lyme Shores Beach Associations that they could now enter into contracts to begin the project.

The authorizations were issued on Jan. 31, and will allow the private beach associations to install sewer infrastructure within their neighborhoods and a shared sewer line connecting to a New London wastewater treatment plant.

In a statement, DEEP said that the project was expected to start in the spring.

It’s unclear how the town intends to satisfy the state agency without joining the project, but DEEP officials have repeatedly warned the town that it would not be released from its responsibility to address the high density of septic fields in Sound View.

Old Lyme is not yet the subject of a consent order — forcing the town to act — but the state agency has said it expects to enter into one to formalize a corrective plan.

In a statement to the CT Examiner, the agency reiterated its position that the town needed to address pollution, and that sewers were the most feasible solution.

“As the Town was not ready to participate in the sewer project, the sewer project is moving forward with the three associations to allow them to permanently address their pollution issues,” the statement read. “The Town similarly will need to address its areas of pollution caused by substandard and/or failing septic systems and the Department continues to believe that connection to the sewer system is the most feasible solution.”

First Selectwoman Martha Shoemaker, Selectman Jim Lampos and WPCA member Mary Daley declined to comment, preferring to speak after the next WPCA meeting.

Selectman John Mesham sent a statement to the CT Examiner by email stating that social media was rife with disinformation regarding the referendum, and had misled voters.

But, he said, that vote may mean that the WPCA needed to change strategy.

“Regardless, the vote sent a strong message of opposition to sewers for the town portion of the project,” Mesham said. “With that in mind, it may be time to refocus the WPCA on sewer avoidance. That could include better monitoring of septic pump outs, mandatory inspections when pumped, use and recognition of advancements in septic system designs, and re-testing of groundwater sampling, something that has not taken place in many years.”

DEEP officials meanwhile said that there would still be financial assistance should the town decide to change course.

“Through the Clean Water Fund, and for eligible project costs, the Department would fund the Town’s aspect of the project with a 25% grant/75% low-interest loan,” DEEP wrote in a separate statement. “The Town also benefits from the $15 million in loan forgiveness funding directed to the three associations, as this funding is being used to cover the shared sewer infrastructure aspects of the project.”

The next WPCA meeting on Feb. 10 is the first since the resignation of Steven Cianmi, a strong supporter of sewering, as chair.

He said in a call to CT Examiner that the town was making a mistake by not cooperating.

“I think the town is missing out on a fantastic opportunity to improve the environment down at the beaches,” Cinami said. “I think the town is going to continue to pollute until something is done.”


CT Siting Council rejects United Illuminating’s Fairfield monopole appeal

Eddy Martinez

Fairfield’s long running fight against installing tall electrical transmission lines, known as monopoles, along the MetroNorth rail line may be over, for now.

The Connecticut Siting Council (CSC) Thursday, rejected United Illuminating’s (UI) application in a final decision which mirrored its earlier decision made in October to reject a plan to install monopoles in Fairfield and Bridgeport.

In a statement, UI immediately criticized the decision Thursday, saying rejecting the plan would harm ratepayers. The statement read in part:

“As long as the Siting Council continues to deny the Fairfield to Congress Project, a critical portion of the transmission system between Bridgeport and Fairfield will be vulnerable to both safety and reliability risks.”

Fairfield First Selectperson Christine Vitale praised the decision in a press release issued shortly after the decision.

“We appreciate the Connecticut Siting Council’s thorough review and its decision to deny UI’s application in Docket 516R,” Vitale said. Throughout this process, our community has consistently expressed strong concerns, and we are grateful that the voices of residents, local leaders, religious institutions, businesses and preservationists were heard.”

Khristine Hall, a member of the CSC, said during the vote further talks to propose an alternative could be possible.

“I am deeply disappointed that discussions among the parties yielded no results. I hope those discussions will start again in good faith by all parties,” Hall said. “Based on the above I will vote to deny the certificate.”

Many residents in Bridgeport and Fairfield opposed the original plan. They joined Bridgeport, Fairfield and local businesses in suing the CSC over UI’s proposal. The lawsuit argued the plan threatened to seize private land, threaten property values and negatively impact local businesses.

Opponents of the plan celebrated a victory last year when UI was ordered to come up with an alternative plan to installing monopoles. The company revamped its proposal, which was also rejected by the CSC late last year.

The company appealed that decision in November, according to previous reporting from WSHU.

UI stated other proposals including installing lines underground, could cost ratepayers at least half a billion dollars.