CT Construction Digest Monday February 28, 2022
An unsigned memo provoked a vigorous defense from Kosta Diamantis
MARK PAZNIOKAS
Enlisting the help of contractors and his former boss at the state Department of Administrative Services, Konstantinos Diamantis mounted a fast and furious defense in the summer of 2020 against an accusatory memo produced by the building trade unions ahead of a meeting with Gov. Ned Lamont.
The unsigned memo accused Diamantis of using “fear mongering and threats” to engineer an emergency declaration that fast-tracked the replacement of a structurally unsound school in Tolland without competitive bidding — then provided the town with bid specs, a contract and a suggested construction manager.
None of those things were true, Diamantis replied in a four-page rebuttal that, along with a letter solicited from the main contractor on the Tolland project, were delivered to the governor’s office. What happened next, however, is unclear.
Lamont said Friday he never saw the initial building trades memo or the letters responding to it.
Today, the question of who saw the building trades memo or took its claims seriously is relevant to the broader question of when the administration had reason to examine the school construction grants office, which Diamantis directed until his dismissal on Oct. 28, 2021.
But at the time, the conflict between Diamantis and the union was a dispute confined to the small world of construction in Connecticut. A subtext to the union’s complaints was the suspicion that Diamantis, then the state official in charge of school construction grants, was disparaging the use of project-labor agreements that guarantee, among other things, the use of union labor.
Union officials have declined to comment on the accusations laid out in the memo. In addition to Diamantis, they have been forcefully rebutted by Melody Currey, the former DAS commissioner who made the emergency declaration for Tolland, and the contractor that rebuilt the school, D’Amato Construction.
“I was very shocked by the July letter, which is probably why my response was so vehement,” Diamantis said.
Seventeen months later, Diamantis still is offering a vociferous defense against allegations that he steered contracts, only now the stakes are higher. He’s been fired, the FBI is investigating, audits are under way, and Diamantis complains the media is confusing details and making him a villain.
Diamantis, 65, is a lawyer and former Democratic state representative from Bristol, a struggling industrial city with a history of bare-knuckles politics. He is a weight-lifter of broad shoulders and average height, often brusque by his own account, arrogant in the view of others.
He is the father of five daughters, one a central figure in the troubles that has reached far beyond his family: Anastasia Diamantis.
It is a tangle that has contributed to the forced retirement of Chief State’s Attorney Richard Colangelo Jr. over his hiring of Anastasia Diamantis and the decision by Melissa McCaw to resign last week as the secretary of the Office of Policy and Management. She is leaving a job overseeing Connecticut’s budget for a job as finance director in East Hartford.
Diamantis was fired in October over questions pertaining to Colaneglo’s hiring of Anastasia Diamantis to a $99,000-a-year executive assistant job while the chief prosecutor was lobbying Diamantis and McCaw for their help in securing raises for top prosecutors. The FBI investigation became public on Feb. 2.
Diamantis was McCaw’s deputy secretary at OPM as well as the director of OSCGR, the Office of School Construction Grants & Review. When McCaw named him to the politically appointed job of OPM deputy in 2019, she consented to one of his conditions: that he retain his civil-service school construction job and move it from DAS to OPM.
Lamont held a press conference Friday to announce McCaw’s departure and address efforts underway to examine how the OSCGR was run under Diamantis and reforms already made to increase oversight. The office was returned to DAS after Diamantis was fired.
‘Never saw it’
The controversy over the school construction program binds Diamantis to the governor who authorized his firing.
Diamantis is defending himself against allegations of dishonesty; Lamont, engaged in a reelection campaign, against the suggestion his administration was negligent in overseeing school construction grants, an important yet relatively obscure function of state government.
The governor said he never saw the trades’ accusatory memo or the point-by-point rebuttal produced by Diamantis on July 22, 2020, after Lamont met with the unions for a clear-the-air talk about a variety of construction issues. Lamont and union officials say the complaints about Diamantis didn’t come up during that meeting.
Lamont is resolute on the question of the memo produced under the letterhead of the Connecticut State Building Trades Council, an association of construction unions that endorsed his reelection in December.
“Never saw it. Never came up. Never distributed. Didn’t see it.” Lamont said.
The same was true of the letter from Diamantis, who also was the deputy secretary of the Office of policy and Management under McCaw, which brought the school construction function from DAS to OPM.
“No, sir,” Lamont said, when asked Friday if he saw the rebuttal. “That’s why I have an OPM secretary.”
Diamantis does not know who in the administration saw the building trades memo or his rebuttal, other than the gubernatorial adviser who he says accepted it: Jonathan Harris, who had accompanied Lamont to the meeting.
Harris, who left the administration in December, was vacationing out of the country last week and could not be reached. But Diamantis said he assumed his rebuttal was persuasive; no one in the administration followed up with him.
“I can’t tell you what happened with my documents that I gave. All I know is nothing negative happened,” he said.
Months earlier, a warning
Two months before the July 2020 meeting, a demolition contractor, Stamford Wrecking Company, complained to McCaw and Josh Geballe, then the commissioner of DAS, that OPM had interfered with competitive bidding on hazardous materials abatement on school projects in Groton.
The complaint centered on whether municipalities could hire from a state emergency bidder list of four companies under a state contract that set some parameters on price, though the final cost was up to bidding or negotiations by the towns. Stamford Wrecking was not among them.
Diamantis said the list, as well as an expert in his office, helped municipalities guard against the cost overruns common to hazardous abatement during.
“We were not interfering with contracts at all,” Diamantis said. “All that was happening was letting the towns know that you can use state contracts for hazmat abatement.”
Stamford Wrecking’s complaint initiated nearly a year-long review by lawyers at OPM and DAS over the propriety of using the list, which had been compiled by the procurement office at DAS, not the school construction unit overseen by Diamantis.
It only had four contractors, and Diamantis said he had argued that it should be broadened.
Noel Petra, the deputy commissioner of DAS assigned to review school construction practices, said the list was intended for small, emergency jobs, but DAS slowly had allowed wider use over over the years.
Separate from the hazardous abatement issue are the broader complaints from municipal officials since Diamantis’ dismissal. They say that he urged them to hire certain contractors, including one that employed his daughter Anastasia Diamantis, Construction Advocacy Professionals.
Diamantis declines to respond to those allegations or talk about how his daughter came to moonlight for a construction management company while she also was a state employee. For now, he said, his focus is on rebutting claims that he ever undermined competitive bidding.
The only overall school construction project exempted from competitive bidding on his watch was the reconstruction of Birch Grove Elementary in Tolland, which was abruptly closed after the failure of its foundation due to contamination by pyrrhotite, a mineral that expands and causes uncontrollable cracking when present in concrete.
Currey said the emergency declaration was made by her in consultation with DAS legal staff. Its initial impact was to allow Tolland to skip bidding and hire D’Amato Construction of Bristol to immediately begin work constructing a temporary modular school complex.
The union memo suggested that D’Amato was an odd choice since it had no history of school construction. Edward D’Amato Jr., the vice president of the multi-generational family business, immediately sent a letter to Lamont saying the union had misrepresented his company’s 60-year history and how it was hired in Tolland.
His son, Tony D’Amato, the operations manager and third generation of D’Amatos in the business, said the union claim was insulting.
“I just personally take a little bit of offense in the fact that they paint school construction as a specialty,” he said. “There’s nothing specialized about it. We’re a builder. We’ve built every different type of building from the ground up. The school is no different than that.”
D’Amato Construction was hired by Tolland for demolition, then kept to the install the modular units and, ultimately, the new school in record time.
“I was happy to be part of it,” D’Amato sad. “For the folks who work here, it was the project of a lifetime.”
D’Amato is currently building a school in Bristol, a joint project with Downes Construction of New Britain that was awarded by competitive bidding. The use of the emergency bid list for demolition was an issue, due to what Diamantis insisted was a misunderstanding. The demolition work eventually went to bid.
D’Amato said his company has not been approached by the FBI. The federal subpoena demanded documents of D’Amato and a dozen other companies that did school construction or worked on the reconstruction of the State Pier in New London, a project supervised by Diamantis.
Diamantis was elected to the House of Representatives in 1992, the same year as Currey, the commissioner who would hire him in 2015 during the administration of Gov. Dannel P. Malloy to oversee the school construction grants program at the Department of Administrative Services. Diamantis left the legislature after losing a Democratic primary in 2006.
By reimbursing a portion of the costs, the state plays an influential role in the construction and remodeling of local schools, offering guidance about standards and costs. Currey said she thought his predecessor overseeing school construction grants had been “arbitrary” in dealing with municipalities.
Diamantis had co-chaired an Appropriations subcommittee overseeing school construction grants, and he had been a town attorney, Currey said.
“I wanted somebody who followed the rules and somebody who would adhere to the proper procedures and protocols, and as an attorney would know what those proper protocols and procedures were in relation to all aspects of doing construction,” Currey said.
And that somebody, she said, was Kosta Diamantis.
Company Linked to Ganim Kickback Scheme Resurfaces at Center of No-Bid Contracts Probe
STAMFORD – A 2006 lawsuit that an asbestos removal company brought against the state may be remarkable for having gone to court at all.
The company filed the suit after one of its top employees – the son of the owner – admitted in 2001 that he defrauded Bridgeport taxpayers of $80,000 in a widespread kickback scheme that landed that city’s mayor, Joe Ganim, in prison for seven years on convictions for corruption.
Still, AAIS Corp. took the state Department of Administrative Services to court for refusing to consider it for a lucrative contract.
DAS officials told the court AAIS was excluded because of the “prior criminal activities” of one of its employees, according to the lawsuit.
DAS said the company did not “insulate itself from further corruption by the employee” because Bannon kept the same job he had when he overcharged Bridgeport for removing asbestos from abandoned properties, billed for equipment that was never used, and paid kickbacks to a Ganim friend and political fundraiser.
The only thing Bannon changed was that he transferred his 44 percent ownership interest in AAIS to his wife. That, the DAS charged, was “an inadequate security measure.”
AAIS said the state was guilty of favoritism for not considering the possible criminal backgrounds of other contractors. The company lost in trial court, took it to appellate court and lost again.
Now AAIS is back in the news.
It is one of two companies named in a federal grand jury subpoena investigating Konstantinos Diamantis, who ran the Office of School Construction Grants & Review at DAS and another state agency until he was fired in October.
The probe stems from a list of contractors, created by DAS five years ago, naming AAIS and three other companies to handle all hazardous waste removal for state buildings. The list was supposed to help the state, and municipalities, expedite emergency hazmat work.
By statute, municipalities hire contractors, but the federal probe raises questions about whether Diamantis or others pressured municipal officials to hire those on the emergency list.
It’s not how the system should work, said Max Reiss, director of communications for Gov. Ned Lamont.
“Municipalities do the hiring. We provide a list of vendors who have met the standards, but the state is not in a position of driving things one way or another,” Reiss said.
Media outlets have reported that, between 2017, when AAIS was put on the list, and the end of last year, the state paid contractors nearly $29 million to remove asbestos, lead, mold and other hazards. More than $20 million of it went to AAIS.
So AAIS has gone from being excluded from bidding on state hazmat removal contracts to almost exclusively getting state hazmat removal contracts.
The state does not, as a rule, tag contractor behavior, Reiss said.
“If they end up on the list it means they’ve met the standards and requirements,” he said. “There may be information on a contractor that’s out there publicly that we may be aware of, as happened in 2006. Municipalities also can use publicly available information when they are looking to hire a contractor.”
AAIS, a West Haven company founded in 1986, has gone through changes since 2006. State records show Bannon family members were involved in the company after 2006, though Brian Bannon is not among them. AAIS merged with a Pennsylvania company, Spectrum Environmental, in 2019.
Federal investigators are looking at why so many contracts for work on state buildings went to so few companies, but no one knows all the work contractors do on municipal buildings. The state does not keep track of municipal contracts.
It appears that municipal officials give a lot of weight to state contractor lists.
In Stamford, which has spent millions in the last decade to remediate mold and asbestos in aging municipal buildings, particularly schools, AAIS is listed as the contractor on multiple jobs.
A 2012 bid waiver form on a project to insulate 37 classroom air-handling units at Toquam Magnet Elementary School, for example, was characterized as a “critical emergency purchase.” A note on the form to proceed with the $73,849 job without a bid states that AAIS was chosen because it “has the state contract in this field.”
There’s another issue with contracted jobs – they add up.
The cost of removing hazardous materials is notoriously difficult to estimate, since contractors often don’t know the extent of a problem until they start taking things apart, especially in older buildings.
In 2017, Stamford signed a five-year contract with AAIS to remove hazardous materials in two high schools, one middle school and five elementary schools. The $73,878 contract “allows for additional work,” according to a notation on the document. The total ended up at $121,757, a 65 percent increase.
As the state waits for federal officials to conclude their investigation, DAS has placed restrictions on how municipalities hire from the emergency contractor list.
The stakes are high for taxpayers – and contractors.
“Companies want to work with the state,” Reiss said. “The state is a reliable payer and generates a lot of work, so they want to be in the mix.”
NEW BRITAIN – The city’s Common Council will consider adding language to the Code of Ordinance to allow for more oversight on school building projects.
The resolution was introduced by Alderman Robert Smedley and referred by the council to the Consolidated Subcommittee for further discussion. Smedley told the council Wednesday the proposed change would be a modification to an existing resolution regarding the School Building Committee.
“We’re going to add some language to some of the paragraphs and we’ll discuss it further in committee,” Smedley said. “In short, any modification that’s at any school building will need to go through the School Building Committee in an effort to protect the city’s investments in our school buildings.”
As it stands, the current resolution allows the School Building Committee to oversee the preliminary plans and cost estimates for school construction projects, which are presented to the mayor, the Common Council and the Board of Education. The School Building Committee plans and supervises the construction of all proposed schools and reviews existing school construction plans to revise them when necessary and practicable.
In a Facebook Live before Wednesday nights’ meeting, Mayor Erin Stewart made references to investigations into state school building projects, including New Britain.
Stewart said New Britain was one of several cities throughout the state that was “held hostage” by Gov. Ned Lamont’s administration and pressured into making certain hires. She said moving forward the city wants to ensure any contract or any contractor having to do with school buildings or planning and supervision of school construction modification must go through the School Building Committee.
“What happened here is that the School Building Committee was not consulted and the school district hired their own people on their own because the state was pressuring them to do so,” Stewart said. “If we had this level of checks and balances in our system that would not have happened.”
The additional language outlines the committee would also supervise “modifications” or “renovations” of any kind to school buildings. According to the proposed resolution, the purpose of the change is to allow that any construction or modification of a school be submitted through the School Building Committee.
The resolution was referred to the Consolidated Subcommittee for discussion, which is slated to meet Thursday, March 3 at 7 p.m. in Council Chambers at City Hall.
Bristol City Council will consider purchasing land for new fire station
BRISTOL – The Bristol Board of Fire Commissioners voted Thursday to push forward a motion to the Bristol City Council to consider purchasing land for the building of a new fire station.
Engine Company Three’s station is currently located at 81 Church Ave. Bristol Fire Chief Richard Hart brought a proposal to the city’s 10-Year Capital and Strategic Improvement Planning Committee last week for a new station. A new station would serve to house a larger fire apparatus and serve as a storage facility for the department’s equipment and “consumables,” said the chief. City officials have expressed concerns in the past with the location being at the outside of a street curve and reports of several vehicles colliding with the current facility. Should a new station be built, such an endeavor could cost $7,800,000.
Continuing conversation revealed that nearly $400,000 had been appropriated previous to the current mayoral administration for a new station.
“I wasn’t aware until we were going through the capital budget a little while ago that money has been sitting there and earmarked, and as we talked about, probably for some time,” said Bristol Mayor Jeff Caggiano. “There is currently a hold on the property that we have with the owners to potentially purchase the property. I think it expires on March 15.”
The mayor said he felt it may be a good time to talk about acquiring the property at the urging of another commissioner.
“My feeling is that the likelihood of federal grants and getting dollars from some of the potential bills that may pass, it would be good to have a shovel-ready project and to have that in our hands now,” said Caggiano.
The mayor was asked what might happen if the property was not bought by the target date. He responded that the property had been held for three years prior to him coming into office.
“I got the letter signed when I came in as mayor in November so I don’t think there’s a lot of pressure but I do think this allows me to have the conversation to see if they’re still willing. Again, they have to accept as well,” said the mayor of the property owners.
He said he was unaware of any urgencies to build or sell the proposed land but it was good to move the potential purchase forward just in case.
The board passed the motion unanimously for the mayor to bring the matter before the council and for the council to potentially approve the mayor to make contractual arrangements for the purchase of land for a new fire station.
Hart has previously said the areas of Bristol’s fire stations have contributed well to fire response times within four-minute professional standards. The mayor said he believed the city was considering the purchase of 157 Church Ave.
HARTFORD — A break in a two-year logjam over using $65 million in state funds to finance a major renovation of downtown Hartford’s XL Center could come this spring, as the arena’s new management company seriously considers investing in the project.
Oak View Group, which manages 300 sports and entertainment venues globally and redevelops others, said it is “very likely” the Los Angeles-based company would invest in a renovation of the aging Hartford arena.
A financial commitment would bring private investment to the table sought by Gov. Ned Lamont as a way to ease the burden on state taxpayers.
“We’re looking at this with an eye toward a public-private partnership,” Peter Luukko, chairman of OVG Facilities, said. “We’re more than willing to put our own funds into this renovation.”
Luukko said OVG has not yet determined how much it would invest because a study of the scope of renovations must be updated. Details of a partnership with the state also would have to be negotiated, Luukko said.
“We believe the facility has the bones,” Luukko said. “It’s dated, and if we could restore it, it could become an incredibly active facility as it was many years ago.”
Luukko said OVG is involved with the redevelopment of an even older arena in Baltimore and another just outside of Toronto.
Michael W. Freimuth, executive director of the Capital Region Development Authority, which oversees the XL Center’s operations, said an OVG commitment would be a major step forward, after two years that included shutdowns during the pandemic.
“It’s someone saying they are willing to invest in the building, too,” Freimuth said.
The long debate
The future of the 47-year-old arena in the heart of downtown Hartford has been debated for more than a decade.
Supporters say it is a vital amenity for fostering downtown’s revitalization and its ecosystem of restaurants and bars. The XL Center, they say, is an attraction for the region. Critics argue the state should not keep pouring money into a venue that historically has lost money, typically $2 million a year.
A $250 million plan for a massive, top-to-bottom makeover failed to gain traction with legislators. Two years ago, the vision was slimmed down to $100 million. CRDA argues a major renovation is needed to put the arena on the path to profitability and keep it competitive in the industry.
Pressure to move forward with some plan flared up in recent weeks, as the University of Connecticut negotiates what is expected to be a one-year lease extension at the XL Center arena. UConn men’s and women’s basketball and men’s ice hockey play roughly 30 games a year.
Some local sports pundits argued a decision about an XL renovation should be made or it would be better for UConn to play in Storrs.
In a statement, UConn said it hoped to reach an agreement that is beneficial to both sides for playing in downtown Hartford.
“It is obvious that the XL Center is overdue for a major renovation,” the statement said. “Tuesday’s game against Villanova displayed that building can provide a fantastic atmosphere, but many of the off-campus venues our peers are competing in are NBA or NBA-level facilities.”
“Our basketball programs deserved to be housed in facilities that are considered among the best in the Big East,” the statement said.
UConn said it is obviously more convenient for its students to watch games on campus — Gampel Pavilion for basketball — and are key supporters and create a “high-energy environment on game day.
But UConn also said students are just one part of the equation.
“The XL Center provides a more convenient commute to many of our fans from around the state simply by the nature of its centralized location than campus,” the statement said. “That convenience, along with the building’s capacity, translates into larger crowds being able to watch the Huskies in action.”
OVG’s Luukko said UConn playing at the XL Center — and the fact that UConn sports are so ingrained is the state’s culture — plus having the AHL’s Wolf Pack was an extremely strong base to build on.
Public-private partnership
The $65 million approved by the legislature is key to the $100 million renovation and was supported by Lamont. But Lamont said the funding — raised through the sale of bonds — was contingent on private investment.
“The governor always prefers public-private partnerships when available and this is no exception,” Max Reiss, a Lamont spokesman, said in a text.
The last major renovation of the XL Center was in 2014, at a state taxpayer-cost of $35 million. The project added a fan club and loge premium seating, and made improvements to the concourse and restrooms.
The work was intended to carry the arena through perhaps a decade or so until the decision was made to either do something bigger so the XL Center would remain competitive or let it wind down.
The $65 million would come on top of $40 million bonded in 2017 for repairs and to attract a private investor or buyer, which drew little interest. The funds in 2017 also were intended for purchasing the privately owned atrium off Trumbull Street to expand the concourse.
About half of the $40 million has been spent replacing the arena floor, installing a new ice rink and ice-making system and repairing elevators and escalators, work that couldn’t wait for a larger renovation.
Port of New London critical component of Offshore Wind Industry Cluster
Paul Whitescarver
It has been a momentous start to 2022 for the burgeoning offshore wind industry in the United States, the state of Connecticut and its southeastern region. Southeastern CT has never been more poised to take advantage of existing assets in skilled labor, a robust manufacturing supply chain and the Thames River, to ensure that offshore wind becomes a mainstay in our region.
The Southeastern Connecticut Enterprise Region, or seCTer, is putting forward economic development projects to ensure the offshore wind industry will continually grow within the region. SeCTer’s coalition of six projects was selected to compete in phase two of the U.S. Economic Development Administration’s Build Back Better Regional Challenge in December 2021 that could see up to $100M pour into the region to anchor the industry in the Northeast.
Most recently, Ørsted and Eversource broke ground on South Fork Wind, New York’s first offshore wind farm, which will generate approximately 130MW of clean energy — enough to power 70,000 homes. At the same time, the State Pier infrastructure improvement project also continues to progress and will reshape the Port of New London in the coming years. The revitalized facility will be home first to South Fork Wind’s 12 Siemens-Gamesa 11 megawatt turbines starting in 2023, as they are staged, assembled, and brought out to sea from the port while supporting dozens of offshore wind jobs.
Additionally, the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management held an auction Feb. 23 for six offshore wind farm lease sites along the coasts of New York and New Jersey in waters of the so-called New York Bight with a potential for 5.6GW of energy. Added to future sights in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, 13GW of power generation may see their birth from our State Pier. The Port of New London’s proximity to all wind farms off the southern New England coast makes it the primary staging and shipping point for projects in those waters, and our coalition’s proposed projects will reap the benefits.
Every day, I look at the activity underway to transform State Pier, a long-underutilized state asset, into a modern, heavy-lift capable facility, and I smile thinking about the possibilities for our region’s future. I see not just the dozens of construction jobs, including union laborers that have already been created on-site at State Pier in recent months, but all of the activity our coalition is proposing to create a robust offshore wind ecosystem in the region. Our coalition’s collective efforts to develop an Offshore Wind Industry Cluster in southeastern Connecticut and beyond hinges on the industry’s continued growth and State Pier. From the Thames River and the State Pier as a hub, industrial sites in distressed communities along the shoreline, rail sites leading north, Business Park North in Norwich will all see new life by supply chain manufacturers. Add UConn Blue Tech business Incubator and Accelerator and Research and Development programs at UConn Avery Point with the development of an Offshore Wind Pipeline Initiative that mirrors the existing work being done by the Eastern Connecticut Workforce Investment board, the coalition’s goal is to catalyze and diversify the region’s economy.
At the center of what we hope to achieve for Connecticut lies the Port of New London, and we must not lose sight of just how transformational the State Pier project is for our state’s leadership in the green economy and its ability to assist the national effort to reduce our carbon footprint.
(Paul Whitescarver, a retired U.S. Navy captain, is Executive Director of the Southeastern CT Enterprise Region.)
$39M, 151-unit apartment development ‘The Pike’ pitched in Newington
A development firm has proposed building a $39 million, 151-unit apartment project in Newington, a town that has become a hot spot for new rental housing.
Smith & Henzy Affordable Group Inc., which is active in New York and Florida, has submitted plans to the town for the four-story, two-building development to be constructed at the corner of Pane and Maselli roads, which is currently a vacant 5-acre lot, according to the project plans.
The development — to be called “The Pike” — would include one-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments, and 10% of the units would be designated as workforce/affordable housing for people earning up to 80% of the area median income, plans show.
Timothy Henzy, principal and owner of Smith & Henzy Affordable Group Inc., said Friday morning that his firm already has special permit and site plan approvals. It still needs building permit approvals.
He said he was attracted to the project because of the strong apartment market in central Connecticut and the goal would be to begin construction this summer and have the project completed in 18 months.
According to the plans, the apartments will offer high-end finishes including 9-foot ceilings, open floor plans, large windows, in-unit laundry, open kitchens with high-end appliances and a breakfast bar.
Amenities will include large furnished lobbies/lounges, a community room, fitness center and outdoor recreation area. The site is located close to Sam’s Club and Stew Leonard’s.
Newington has attracted several apartment development proposals in recent months, including one on Deming Road, another on the Berlin Turnpike and a third near CTfastrak’s Cedar Street station.
Lamont calls on lawmakers to adopt 2040 zero-carbon goal for state’s electric grid
Gov. Ned Lamont is pushing the state legislature to take up and formally codify his goal of a zero-carbon electric grid in Connecticut by 2040.
In a statement released Thursday, Lamont said the General Assembly’s action is needed to provide state policymakers and the electricity sector a “shared goal of fully transitioning the state away from relying on natural gas and oil.”
Lamont first announced the 2040 goal in 2019. A bill now under consideration in the Senate, SB 10, would write that timeline into state statutes.
“We’ve already made great progress in decarbonizing our grid, but we need to make sure we get the rest of the way there,” Lamont said. “Codifying the 2040 zero-carbon electric grid target will provide critical direction to the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority, the electric utilities, the municipal utilities, and others in planning and implementing energy policy.”
The governor noted that neighboring states have set similar goals, including Rhode Island, which aims to reach zero-carbon status by 2030, and New York, which has adopted a 2040 deadline.
“Let’s get this done for the sake of doing our part to mitigate climate change, improve our air, and support clean energy jobs across Connecticut,” he said.
According to state officials, ratepayers are already supporting zero-carbon resources equivalent to nearly 74% of the electricity consumed by customers of the state’s two electric distribution companies. That figure is expected to rise to 92% by 2025, as new offshore wind and grid-scale solar projects come online.
Middletown considers $766K school track, field project
MIDDLETOWN — The Middletown Board of Education is considering a plan to fully replace the track and turf field at the high school at a cost of $766,300.
The track is nearly 15 years old, according to Middletown High School Athletic Director Elisha DeJesus.
“It’s definitely overdue,” she said at last week’s facilities committee meeting, adding that she fully supports the project.
Andrew O’Connell, Northeast regional sales manager for Keystone Sports of Pennsylvania, and Patrick Bugan, of New Jersey-based ATT Sports, delivered the virtual presentation.
The Keystone turf project will be tackled first. Two years ago, Keystone worked on a similar project at a high school in New Jersey, O’Connell told committee members. He showed a photo of the field with lettering, artwork, alternating patterns and end-zone coloring.
The turf would have Rhino slip-resistant coating, which, he said, is “super dense,” more durable, and performs like a natural grass field. Keystone has used the product at the University of Connecticut, Penn State, Princeton University and other colleges, he said.
It has a 2.25-inch pile height for easy maintenance, O’Connell said, and a ⅜-inch gap between each row (or stitch gauge). He said other companies use a ¾-to-1-inch-high turf.
“What that means, is you’re getting less turf (with the larger heights),” O’Connell said. “You have a gap that needs to be filled by even more rubber and sand. That’s not a natural release when you’re stepping and planting as an athlete.”
“When you’re stepping on this, and the cleats are releasing, you want to be releasing from the turf,” O’Connell said.
The school board is also considering whether to add a maintenance package, which would be an additional cost to the project. The package would include grooming, deep cleaning and up to 20 linear feet of seam repair. High school maintenance crews will supplement the work, according to facilities committee
member John Giuliano.
The last time the track was resurfaced was about six years ago, DeJesus said.
“Unfortunately, it did not go well,” she said. “That’s why we’re here now talking about getting both done at the same time.”
ATT Sports is a running track surfacing company, Bugan said. Its clients have included high schools in Ledyard, East Haven, Guilford and Derby.
The track will be built using a two-layer “sandwich system,” he said.
Two options were given to the BOE — one that uses recycled rubber, and the other, renewable resources.
The former is comprised of a black mat made of recycled rubber granules in polyurethane, a plastic, with a coating surface of colored, fine dust rubber, which makes it impermeable, Bugan said.
The second is a plant-based “green” renewable made of soy.
The track comes with a five-year warranty, which includes resurfacing, Bugan said.
Getting the work complete over the summer is important to the school community, DeJesus said.
“I’m excited that we are very close to final approval. ... Our students, coaches and staff deserve to have the best facilities, and we are hopeful that this project will do just that,” she said.
The proposal will be reviewed by the full Board of Education at its March meeting.
‘Utterly horrific’ and a ‘dangerous situation’: Why both new Norwalk High options face opposition
NORWALK — Residents on King Street say the proposed bus entrance for the new Norwalk High School will exacerbate traffic issues in the neighborhood, while some parents warn of health concerns associated with the district’s other construction option.
Norwalk Public Schools invited the public again to share their thoughts and concerns about the two options for the new Norwalk High School building during a community forum last week.
In the “option B” plan, an entrance off King Street would be used for bus transportation as well as some staff parking.
Tyler Fairburn, who lives directly across from the proposed entrance, said the street is already unsafe at school pick-up and drop-off times for Naramake Elementary School, located on King Street. Cars line up from Strawberry Hill Avenue to the Beth Israel Chabad of Westport/Norwalk synagogue, making it difficult for drivers to see pedestrians.
“I just want to reiterate what an utterly horrific idea it would be to have that there,” said Fairburn, who spoke at the last public meeting for the project and “will do it every single opportunity I have until we see an option B plan that does not have the entrance on King Street.”
Fairburn said his children have nearly been hit by a car three times this year trying to walk home from school.
Three other King Street residents also expressed their concerns about the traffic and questioned the location of the new building. The school district is expected to answer some of these questions when it releases an FAQ about the project on Monday.
Option B would place the new school building where the high school football field and tennis courts are currently located on the south side of the property. The estimated $193 million project for a 330,000-square-foot building will be completed in two phases spanning about 50 months.
Several parents of current and future P-TECH Norwalk students focused their concerns on “option A,” which would construct the new high school in phases on the building’s footprint. Parents expressed health concerns because the demolition would be occurring so close to their children.
Gloria Neidworth’s son will be a freshman at P-TECH next fall, and she believes it’s “completely unfair” that those students will be “in the most dangerous situation” during the early phases of the project.
“I do not want him walking outdoors to go to the Norwalk High wing at that phase of construction to get to core classes. I do not want him to be near hazardous materials when wings B, C and D are going to be demolished,” Neidworth said.
The estimated cost of option A is $191 million for a 347,000-square-foot building. The estimated construction timeline is estimated at 55 months, spanning between May 2023 and December 2027. More than half of the new school would be built on the current footprint.
Other concerns voiced at the previous community forum included the temporary elimination of the football field, track, and tennis courts under option B, the lack of a cafeteria for three years under option A, and the possibility a pool doesn’t get built in either scenario due to lack of funds.
“Our main focus is to really listen to the community,” Superintendent Alexandra Estrella said. “As we continue to move this conversation forward, we are able to continue to refine the work that has already been started.”