Transportation Committee
JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT
Bill No.: HB-6484
AN ACT CONCERNING RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE DEPARTMENT OF
Title: TRANSPORTATION.
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:
Rep. Mitch Bolinsky, 106th Dist.
REASONS FOR BILL:
To implement the recommendations of the Department of Transportationin aggregate:
reflect national best practices for legislation pertaining to Connecticut's public roadways and
the safety of those who use them, increase efficiency measures by removing obsolete or
unused programs and initiatives, streamline contracting, and update legislation pertaining to
Connecticut's railways.
RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:
STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
The state of Connecticut DOT presented and submitted testimony in support of this bill. The
testimony begins with an overview of the legislative language, elaborating upon each section
and offering justification for its inclusion. A summary of the aforementioned is as follows: 1.
"increase[ing] the minimum value requiring SPRB approval from values exceeding $5,000
to values exceeding $10,000 of real property"; 2. "clarify[ing] and strengthen[ing] language
regarding overweight vehicle travel across bridges or structures posted for a restricted weight
by amending three sections of statute"; 3. "shift[ing] the annual submittal date for consultants
seeking to do business with the Department from November 15th to October 15th; and (2)
chang[ing] the frequency of consultant evaluations by the Department from every six months
to once a year"; 4. "requir[ing] the use of consultants to support our use of alternative
contracting project delivery methods (e.g. construction-manager-at-risk and design-build)"; 5.
"remov[ing] the three-month waiting period before a complete taxi application can be noticed
for a hearing"; 6. Streamlin[ing] the revocation process of stagnant livery permits and will
assist the Departments Regulatory and Compliance unit expediently revoke livery permits
that have been stagnant, by removing the hearing component from the process"; 7.
"streamlin[ing] the application process and remove barriers to enter the HHG industry by (1)
removing the hearing requirement for new HHG applications; and (2) removing the traffic and
roadway criteria from the HHG certificate requirement"; 8. "clarify[ing] that smoking is
prohibited on both enclosed and non-enclosed rail platforms and bus shelters"; 9. "modify[ing]
Special Act 91-32 language for use of an active public railroad crossing on Portland Street in
Middletown from emergency vehicles and pedestrian traffic only, to all vehicle and pedestrian
traffic"; 10. "authoriz[ing] a state contracting agency to audit the records of a contractor or any
subcontractor related to its performance under any negotiated contract or subcontract and
establish[ing] a three-year record retention period for contractors and subcontractors under
negotiated contracts"; 11. "requir[ing] all passengers in a motor vehicle to wear seatbelts";
and 12. "streamlin[ing] and moderniz[ing] two existing sign programs into one combined
program - the Specific Service Sign program - following MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices) federal standards." The text concludes by noting that these
recommendations will also incentive automated driving system adoption in Connecticut by
way of abiding by national best practices.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:
Jennifer Homendy, Board Member of the National Transportation Safety Board
Jennifer Homendy presented and submitted testimony in support of sections 16 and 17. The
testimony offers background on the NTSB's history and operations, then offers statistics
pertaining to the risk of unrestrained passengers and the benefits which would come by
implanting back-seat seatbelt laws. The text concludes with the following: "The NTSB
believes that a significant number of lives can be saved, and injuries prevented if Connecticut
closes the loophole in its occupant restraint law. The NTSB therefore strongly supports
expanding the current seat belt use law to cover all seating positions in all vehicles. This
lifesaving measure will improve safety for the people of Connecticut."
Rep. Mary Mushinsky, 85th Assembly District of Connecticut
Representative Mary Mushinsky presented and submitted testimony in support of an
amendment to this bill. The testimony states as follows: "This proposal would allow residents
who are pulled over for an expired motor vehicle registration to pay the renewal through their
cellphone rather than have their vehicle towed away. This proposed amendment is necessary
because Department of Motor Vehicles no longer sends reminders of motor vehicle
registration expiration by mail, and constituents busy with work and home responsibilities
have missed the deadline for renewal." The text then concludes with an anecdote of a
constituent, which was the impetus for the aforementioned amendment.
State of Connecticut Judicial Branch, External Affairs Division
The State of Connecticut Judicial Branch presented and submitted testimony in support of an
amendment to this bill. The testimony states as follows: "We would like to request a technical
change in Section 3 (b) of the bill. In line 45, we suggest replacing the word infraction with
violation because infractions cannot exceed $90."
Joy Avallone, General Counsel of the Insurance Association of Connecticut (IAC)Joy
Avallone presented and submitted testimony in support of sections 16 and 17. The testimony
referenced statistics from both the Center for Disease Control and the National Conference of
State Legislatures to support their following proposal: "the inclusion of an additional
Page 2 of 5 HB-6484
amendment to allow evidence relating to a party's seat belt nonuse and failure to comply with
the state's seat belt law [should] be introduced into evidence for the purpose of mitigating
damages in a civil action, provided the party introducing such evidence has pleaded such
noncompliance as an affirmative defense." The testimony goes on to support sections 16 and
17.
Chuck Bell, Programs Director at Advocacy Consumer Reports
Chuck Bell presented and submitted testimony in support of sections 8, 9, 16, and 17, stating:
"Unrestrained passengers are at higher risk of injury or death, no matter where they are in the
vehicle, and are also more likely to become a projectile and injure others. Connecticuts front
seatbelt law has saved many lives, and we encourage legislators to build on this success and
enact a mandatory rear seatbelt law." The testimony proceeds to justify their position by
referencing a series of statistics pertaining to automobile deathsspecifically, those that
were caused by individuals not wearing seatbelts while seated in the backseat. Cited
agencies and associations are as follows: the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA), Consumer Reports, and the Governors Highway Safety Association.
Kevin Borrup; DrPH, JD, MPA, Executive Director of the Injury Prevention Center at
Connecticut Childrens Medical Center
Kevin Borrup presented and submitted testimony in support of section 16. The testimony
provides background for the Connecticut Children's Medical Center and their work, then
states the following: "Each year about 300 people die on Connecticuts roadways, many of
them are unrestrained passengers of all ages. Requiring every person seated in a motor
vehicle to be appropriately restrained is a commonsense solution to save lives." The text
concludes with an explanation as to why it is dangerous to be seated in the backseat of a
vehicle without a seatbelt.
Matthew Cassavechia, Director of Emergency Medical Services
Matthew Cassavechia presented and submitted testimony in support of sections 16 and 17.
The testimony notes that "unrestrained passengers are at higher risk of injury or death," then
notes the lives saved by the law which requires seat belts for front-seat riders.
Connecticut Hospital Association
The Connecticut Hospital Association presented and submitted testimony in support of
sections 16 and 17. The testimony begins by noting that the recenvt COVID-19 pandemic
"confirm[ed] the value of strong hospitals in Connecticuts public health infrastructure and
economy and reinforces the need for a strong partnership between the state and hospitals."
The test then references the risk associated with "unrestrained passengers," and notes that
"all too often, caregivers in hospital emergency departments and trauma centers are called
on to treat patients injured in both minor and serious traffic accidents. HB 6484 would align
Connecticut statute with the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions guidelines for
passenger safety, which recommends that seat belts be worn by every person in the vehicle,
on every trip."
Alec Slatky, Director of Public and Government Affairs for AAA Northeast
Page 3 of 5 HB-6484
Alec Slatky presented and submitted testimony in support of sections 16 and 17 "on behalf of
both AAA clubs in Connecticut, AAA Northeast and the AAA Allied Group, which collectively
represent over a million members statewide." The testimony references the lives that seatbelt
laws have hitherto saved, then states as follows: "But Connecticut, once a leader in occupant
protection, has fallen behind. Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia require that all
back-seat passengers buckle up; in Connecticut, only those under 16 years old must do so."
The text concludes by offering statistics from various studies pertaining to the danger of being
an unrestrained passenger, and by offering an anecdote as to how an unrestrained individual
may become a projectile (if involved in a collision).
Daniel Freess, M.D., Past President & Legislative Chair of the Connecticut College of
Emergency Physicians
Daniel Freess presented and submitted testimony in support of the bill. The testimony
references the mortality rate of unrestrained passengers as "4 to 5 times higher," then states
as follows: "While we appreciate the personal autonomy allowed by the current law, we feel
that the proposed change conveys a significant public health benefit both to individuals and
society as a whole."
Julie Peters; CBIS, Executive Director Brain Injury Alliance of Connecticut
Julie Peters presented and submitted testimony in support of sections 16 and 17. The
testimony offers an extensive, bulleted list of statistics pertaining to automobile accidents and
the danger posed to unrestrained passengers, then states as follows: "The facts are clear.
Seatbelts save lives and should be worn by all occupants of a vehicle. [] Brain injuries cant
be cured, and they dont go away. If we can prevent a few more brain injuries in Connecticut
by requiring the use of seatbelts by all occupants of motor vehicles, we will truly be saving
lives."
NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:
Jeffrey Berger, State of Connecticut Propriety Review Board
Jeffrey Berger, accompanied by the Board Director and other Board Members, presented and
submitted testimony in opposition to sections 13a-73, which would "increase the [monetary]
threshold [] from five thousand dollars to ten thousand dollars." The following is a summary
of the bulleted list the review board offered in defense of their opposition: 1. the Board
provides an independent oversight of the proposals from the Department as the legislature
had intended; 2. the average review time taken by the Board per proposal for this timeframe
was about less than 30 calendar days; 3. the impact of the Board review time is negligible
compared to the timeframe the Department takes in processing and getting other approvals;
4. there should not be any fiscal impacts to the Department as it currently submits proposals
for the Board review; 5. The Boards review is very critical during these difficult fiscal times. It
is the goal of the Board to provide an oversight, accountability, transparency, and uniformity
by reviewing proposals from the Department receiving state tax payers funds as directed by
the Legislature.
Parker Rodriguez; Associate General Counsel, Chairman of the Connecticut Railroad
Association
Parker Rodriguez presented and submitted testimony in opposition to section 19. The
testimony states that "there are two provisions which adversely change important policies
Page 4 of 5 HB-6484
established by the General Assembly in the initial legislation, and which CRA believes should
be eliminated." The stated issue pertains to "RB 6484 seek[ing] to amend C.G.S. 12b-237 in
several important respects," which are summarized as follows: 1. "Proposed Section 19(a)(1)
changes the original language describing the track material []" and 2. " Proposed Section
19(b) would impose a new cost upon the freight railroads." The innate details as to how these
instances are detrimental to the railroads are offered alongside proposed amendments which
are designed to combat said detriments.
Jean Cronin, Executive Director of the Connecticut Bus Association
Jean Cronin presented and submitted testimony in opposition to sections 7 and 8. The
testimony references the history of the CBA as well as the legislative laws and restrictions the
association has been obliged to follow throughout their existencethen states as follows:
"Section 7 and 8 of this bill would allow DOT to decide that a company they are contracting
with (CT Transit) does not need to comply with the laws everyone else must abide by in order
to operate a public motor bus in Connecticut. It allows the department to contract with
operators without demonstrating need for the public and without allowing towns and others
the opportunity to comment on public need. As to present owners of these certificates, like
these three bus companies, enacting this legislation would in essence deprive the present
certificate holders of their rights in the certificates without compensating them for the
deprivation."
Dominic Fulco III; Esq. Counsel to Dattco, Inc. and The New Britain Transportation Company
Dominic Fulco III presented and submitted testimony in opposition to sections 7 and 8. The
testimony notes that "the proposed amendments are the Departments latest attempt to
deprive the Companies of their constitutionally protected property rights in their Certificates,
as those rights were found by the Connecticut Supreme Court in one of the lawsuits brought
by the Companies against the Department over their Certificates. Moreover, these proposed
amendments will also deprive any other holders of Certificates of Public Convenience and
Necessity for motor buses of their constitutionally protected property rights. This should not
be sanctioned by this Committee by moving forward with the proposed amendments" then
elaborates in detail, offering their opposition to specific legislative language, statistics and
anecdotes as to how the language is a detriment to companies' constitutionality, and a history
of similar legislative efforts that inevitably failed.
Reported by: Ian Bond Date: 4/6/2021
Page 5 of 5 HB-6484


Statutes affected:
Raised Bill: 14-298a, 54-33m
TRA Joint Favorable Substitute: 14-298a, 54-33m
File No. 432: 14-298a, 54-33m
Public Act No. 21-175: 14-298a, 54-33m, 14-99h