Banking Committee
JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT
Bill No.: SB-150
AN ACT ESTABLISHING THE CONNECTICUT INFRASTRUCTURE
Title: AUTHORITY.
Vote Date: 3/9/2021
Vote Action: Joint Favorable
PH Date: 3/2/2021
File No.: 106
Disclaimer: The following JOINT FAVORABLE Report is prepared for the benefit of the
members of the General Assembly, solely for purposes of information, summarization and
explanation and does not represent the intent of the General Assembly or either chamber
thereof for any purpose.
SPONSORS OF BILL:
Sen. Alex Kasser, 36th Dist.
Rep. Michael A. Winkler, 56th Dist.
Rep. Susan M. Johnson, 49th Dist.
Banking Committee
REASONS FOR BILL:
The bill will establish the Connecticut Infrastructure Authority to, among other things, finance
eligible infrastructure improvement projects, expedite and support their implementation, and
give project finance expertise. The Connecticut Infrastructure Authority will perform as an
essential public and governmental function. Addressing the need for public transportation
projects and the creation of infrastructure jobs, the bill creates an entity to support high
quality, cost-efficient infrastructure projects to stimulate economic growth and development in
Connecticut.
RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:
Colleen M. Murphy, Executive Director and General Counsel, Freedom of Information
Commission: In order to ensure transparency, the proposed bill should be amended to add
language that clearly states that the Connecticut Infrastructure Authority is a public agency,
and that records relating to public-private partnerships and agreements are public records
subject to the disclosure provisions in the FOI Act.
Diedre S. Gifford, Acting Commissioner, Connecticut Department of Public Health:
Recognizes the need for reinvestment in Connecticuts infrastructure, but has concerns about
existing infrastructure financing programs having money taken away for the new
infrastructure funding. The Connecticut Department of Public Health does not want to have
existing and successful funding mechanisms weakened by the creation of a new Fund.
Joseph Giuletti, Commissioner, Connecticut Department of Transportation: The
Department of Transportation (CTDOT) opposes the creation of a new authority because the
funding sources it would receive will jeopardize the Departments grant applications for
Federal Transportation Funds from the US DOT. The CTDOT will have a reduced federal
funds that it relies on for its infrastructure program and the new Authority also risks
duplicating existing efforts.
Melissa McCaw, Secretary, Office of Policy and Management: Opposes SB 150
because it would take away funding that other agencies rely on for infrastructure programs
and projects already in place. The diffusion of authority and duplication of effort that this bill
would provide for is unwarranted and unnecessary. A new infrastructure authority is
premature at best and this particular concept is not recommended at this time.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:
Chris Edge, Director, Department of Economic Development: The creation of the
Connecticut Infrastructure Authority can be a good thing if the role and oversight is clear. If
this bill is passed, he would like the role to include looking closely at the large amount of
property that the State of Connecticut owns, particularly in urban centers. He wants the
Authority to consider selling state assets and keeping state agencies in place under leases.
Donald Shubert, President, Connecticut Construction Industries Association:
Supports the bill in general because it would provide additional means to help fill a growing
deficit between current revenue streams and much needed investments. The Connecticut
Construction Industries Association is concerned with the language in Section 5(b) (1). They
believe giving the Authority the ability to use any federal funds will add another entity to
compete for the much-needed federal funding that is critical to supporting the State
programs.
Donna Hamzy, Advocacy Manager, Connecticut Conference of Municipalities:
Supports the underlying bill and its intent but suggests removing the language that require a
municipality to gain permission from the Department of Transportation before submitting an
application for financing to the Bank. CCM also wants municipal representation on the Board
of such Bank.
Michael Harris, Member, Public Bank Connecticut: An Infrastructure Authority is a
practical, non-partisan approach to improving and maintaining the commons. The
Infrastructure Authority will serve the community equitably and have the power to leverage
deposits through credit creation. The bill will greatly raise the economic and social equity and
well-being of the State of Connecticut.
Ralph Savy, Technical Director, Savy & Sons: Connecticut suffers from aging wastewater
infrastructure and this bill will create an infrastructure bank to help incentivize improvements.
Page 2 of 3 SB-150
Justin Good, Ph. D., Public Bank Connecticut: Supports SB 150 because a public
infrastructure bank would create new money via loans for infrastructure projects, making the
bill profitable for the state to pursue. Private banks fail to lend at the socially optimal level,
whereas public infrastructure lending can account for existing externalities to the larger
community. We have a current dismal state of infrastructure with innumerable external costs
for citizens which the bill will address.
Sal Luciano, President, Connecticut AFL-CIO: The added safeguards in SB 150 will help
prevent the state and taxpayers from incurring significant unintended costs and mishaps. He
supports the bill but recommends adding representation to the Board of Directors to those
who are closest to the work the Connecticut Infrastructure Authority seeks to amplify. This
would mean the board of directors would have representatives appointed by each labor
organization, not the Governor. Overall, they believe the bill could be helpful in moving
projects forward by securing additional federal funding.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:
Al Carbone, Manager of Connecticut State Government Relations, AVANGRID/UIL
Holdings Corporation: Does not support some of the language because it casts doubt on
regulated utilities pre-existing legal rights to distribute and transmit electricity. The bill, as
presently constructed, gives the Authority the same ability that state law already authorizes
UI and other regulated utilities to do. AVANGRID/UIL Holdings Corporation does not support
the bill until the bill is clarified by deleting broad terms and providing detail to the specific
energy-related infrastructure the Authority seeks to fund/own.
American Council of Engineering Companies: Proposal is a duplicative to the
Department of Transportations already established legislative authority. Creating a new
authority would cause confusion and overlap funding sources with the CTDOT, which relies
on this funding for their own states infrastructure program. The best use of the transportation
funding is not diverting it away from the Special Transportation Fund to support this new
authority. The focus needs to be in helping relieve the project deficits that already exist and
brining in additional revenue streams to the fund.
Chris Edge, Director, Department of Economic Development: The creation of the
Connecticut Infrastructure Authority can be a good thing if the role and oversight is clear. If
this bill is passed, he would like the role to include looking closely at the large amount of
property that the State of Connecticut owns, particularly in urban centers. He wants the
Authority to consider selling state assets and keeping state agencies in place under leases.
Vincent Pace, Assistant General Counsel, Eversource Energy: Eversource does not
support S.B. No. 150 as currently drafted and urges clarifying the bill in a manner that makes
it consistent with the existing rights granted to regulated electric utility companies under
federal and state law.
Reported by: Kyle Del Balso / Dawn Marzik Date: 3/24/2021
Page 3 of 3 SB-150


Statutes affected:
Committee Bill: 1-124, 1-125
BA Joint Favorable: 1-124, 1-125
File No. 106: 1-124, 1-125