Transportation Committee
JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT
Bill No.: SB-920
Title: AN ACT CONCERNING PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS.
Vote Date: 3/24/2021
Vote Action: Joint Favorable Substitute
PH Date: 3/3/2021
File No.:
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:
Transportation Committee
REASONS FOR BILL:
This bill expands previous legislation and opens extra avenues for a potential public private
partnership to be approved, which may be necessary given the lack of accepted P3's
throughout the duration of previous statute. This bill allows the Department of Transportation
to seek more creative ways of funding projects while maintaining DOTs existing ability to
seek out potential public private partnerships.
RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:
Joseph Giulietti, Commissioner, DOT
The Public-Private Partnership (P3) language which passed in 2011 was seen as an
opportunity for the State to work with private entities to pursue state projects. Since 2011, the
State has been unsuccessful in taking advantage of such agreements due to restrictive
requirements, including inflexible payment terms. The bill amends the current P3 statutes to
enhance the States ability to utilize P3 agreements in designing, developing, financing,
constructing, operating, and maintaining projects.
The bill broadens the definition of the types of projects eligible for a P3, eliminates the
requirement that the State portion of a P3 not exceed 25% of the cost of the project, and
allows availability payments, which can be an attractive financing and project payment
mechanism for projects which, for reasons related to policy, public perception and/or
profitability are not feasible for advisable under a user-fee based concession.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:
Wyatt Bosworth, Assistant Counsel, CBIA: "The changes to the P3 statute offered in this
bill will better incentivize public-private creativity, efficiency, innovation, and capital to address
the states immense infrastructure needs. Additionally, it will unlock enhanced assistance
from the federal government, such as the Federal Highway Administrations Center for
Innovative Finance Support, to finance projects, transfer delivery risks, and get Connecticut
residents to work."
Keith R. Brothers, Business Manager/Secretary Treasurer, CT Laborers' District
Council: " We support this careful recrafting the Public Partnership legislation (sections 4-
255, 4-256, 4-259 and 4- 261). It provides greater flexibility in how this legislation may be
applied and by its new language ensures that a proposed project must be found by the
Governor to result in job creation and economic growth."
Connecticut Construction Industries Association: "CCIA supports the amendments in
this bill that greatly improve the application, effectiveness, and administration of the state
Public Private Partnership (P3) statutes."
Christopher Fryxell, President, Associated Builders & Contractors, CT Chapter:
Supportive of the legislation, but suggests amendments to require public input and the
removal of certain language that they feel adds nothing to the meaning of the statute.
Joseph Toner, President, Greater Hartford-New Britain Building & Construction Trades
Council: Supportive of provision in the legislation that would provide wage protection for
workers. Supports change that would provide oversight to PPP's through the State
Contracting Standards Board.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:
Carl Chisem, President, Connecticut Employees Union Independent, SEIU Local 511:
Concerned that this legislation would lift previously established regulations and open the PPP
process to "corruption".
Lawrence Fox, Chair, State Contracting Standards Board: Opposes the provisions of:
"The elimination of the cost-benefit-analysis provided under C.G.S Sec. 4e-16 and, more
importantly, the business case justification for any public-private partnership, the expansion
of public-private partnerships to any endeavor by the State, and the elimination of the 50-year
duration of a public-private partnership to allow for never ending agreement."
David Glidden, Executive Director, CSEA SEIU Local 2001: Opposes how the legislation
"seeks to strip out from current law all of the existing limits, transparency, and due diligence
relating to the state's use of P3's" in their understanding.
Shar Habibi, Research and Policy Director, In the Public Interest: "My organization has
long studied public-private partnerships (P3s) and examined numerous contracts and deals
from around the country. We have found that many of these deals present significant risks to
the state and the public, including loss of public control of the asset, financial and budgetary
Page 2 of 3 SB-920
risks, decreased affordability and accessibility, overly rosy projections that dont materialize,
and the loss of transparency and accountability."
Sal Luciano, President, CT AFL-CIO: Opposed to language that would lessen regulations
and requirements for P3's.
Travis Woodward, President, CSEA SEIU Local 2001 P-4 bargaining unit: Opposed to
language that would lessen regulations as well as potential transparency issues.
Stacey Zimmerman, Representative, SEIU CT: Has concerns that this legislation would
lead to inefficiency and corruption regarding P3's.
Reported by: Justin Kaiser Date: 3/30/2021
Page 3 of 3 SB-920


Statutes affected:
Raised Bill: 4-255, 4-256, 4-259, 4-261
TRA Joint Favorable Substitute: 4-255, 4-256
File No. 423: 4-255, 4-256
APP Joint Favorable: 4-255, 4-256
Public Act No. 21-99: 4-255, 4-256, 4-257, 4-258, 4-259, 4-260, 4-261, 4-262, 4-263