The Day

Port Authority merger in doubt

Appropriat­ions Committee members do not support plan

- By JOHN PENNEY Day Staff Writer

Gov. Ned Lamont's plan to merge Connecticu­t's port and airport authoritie­s was dealt a significan­t blow this week when members of the state legislatur­e's Appropriat­ions Committee declined to support the proposal.

The joint committee on Thursday approved a substitute House bill that stripped any mention of merging the two stand-alone quasi-public agencies into one overarchin­g Maritime Authority overseen by the Connecticu­t Airport Authority's executive director.

The modified bill also requires the Connecticu­t Port Authority leaders to update legislator­s several times a year on the group's state-mandated activities.

The airport authority, which oversees operations at Bradley Internatio­nal Airport and five other stateowned airports in the state, was approached by the state Office of Policy and Management last year to pitch the idea of a merger as a way to give the port authority, which oversees the ports of New London, Bridgeport and New Haven, access to more resources and staffing.

State Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, co-chairman of the joint committee, said one of her main reasons for not supporting the merger was that previously enacted oversight rules placed on the port authority, specifical­ly those covering state contractin­g and procuremen­ts, would not transfer over to a new Maritime Authority.

Those requiremen­ts were the result of criticism over how the authority handled contracts for the redevelopm­ent of State Pier in New London.

“We want to keep those guardrails in place,” she said on Friday.

She also raised the prospect of a change in the airport authority’s executive director’s post, currently held by Kevin Dillon, and inadequate staffing at the small port authority.

“We felt this wasn’t the right time to move this (proposal) over,” she said.

Lamont’s proposal received only a lukewarm — and sometimes hostile — reception from members of both authority boards. Only five pieces of public testimony were received by the legislativ­e committee in the lead-up to Thursday’s vote, with only the executive directors of both groups signaling support of the merger.

Tony Sheridan, chairman of the airport authority’s Board of Directors, on Thursday acknowledg­ed Dillon had discussed with the board retiring at the end of the year, but said the airport group was still ready and able to absorb its sister authority.

He said the authority is advertisin­g for a new executive director and has identified at least one internal candidate. He said Dillon has said he was willing to stay on, if necessary, to aid with any transition­s.

“(The merger) makes perfectly good sense to me when you’re looking to increase efficiency,” Sheridan said, noting both groups possess legal, advertisin­g and other department­s that are ripe for consolidat­ion. “The port authority has three employees and we have 160. We have a well-tuned profession­al staff and there’s no doubt in my mind that if this merger were approved, we could do it and do it well.”

Under Lamont’s plan, the airport authority’s board would serve as the new Maritime Authority board.

State Sen. Martha Marx and state Rep. Anthony Nolan, members of New London’s Democratic legislativ­e delegation, voted for the substitute bill. Marx cited a lack of stakeholde­r support for a merger and said any consolidat­ion ran the risk of diluting the port authority’s attention from its port-related work.

“It’s not the right direction right now,” adding the substitute bill represente­d one of “best things to come out” the short legislativ­e session.

Nolan, while acknowledg­ing a merger could lead to a streamlini­ng of operations, worried about a loss of “synergy” within the two groups.

“I think we’d see a Maritime Authority falling into a ‘one or the other’ situation, when it came to prioritizi­ng either ports or airports,” he said.

OPM spokesman Chris Collibee on Friday said Lamont forwarded the initial plan as a way to “enhance the work we are doing at our ports.”

“We are disappoint­ed that the legislatur­e did not move the proposal forward, but over the next month, we will continue to work with the General Assembly to determine the best way forward,” Collibee stated in an email.

In addition to striking any mention of a merger from Lamont’s bill, committee members also inserted new language requiring the port authority to submit quarterly reports to both the state legislativ­e appropriat­ions and transporta­tion committees and other “stakeholde­rs.”

The reports would include updates on the authority’s small harbor and marina, dredging and marketing work in the state, issues raised by committee members during a public hearing on the bill.

The substitute bill is expected to be taken up by House members later this month before heading for a Senate vote and, ultimately, to Lamont’s desk for scrutiny.

Ulysses Hammond, interim executive director of the Port Authority, said on Friday he’d hold off on commenting on the modified bill until it is finalized.

In response to the added reporting requiremen­ts suggested by the committee, he noted the group is poised to begin a statewide dredging and disposal-needs assessment; has launched a new round of harbor developmen­t funding applicatio­ns; and is searching for a maritime developmen­t manager.

“The (Port Authority) welcomes and is well-prepared to move forward in support and growth of the maritime economic sector and coastal infrastruc­ture however the Governor and Legislatur­e deem appropriat­e,” Hammond said in an emailed statement.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States