OFFICE OF FISCAL ANALYSIS
Legislative Office Building, Room 5200
Hartford, CT 06106 (860) 240-0200
http://www.cga.ct.gov/ofa
EMERGENCY CERTIFICATION
HB-6690
AN ACT AUTHORIZING AND ADJUSTING BONDS OF THE STATE
FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, TRANSPORTATION AND OTHER
PURPOSES, ESTABLISHING THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT
FUND 2030 BOARD, AUTHORIZING STATE GRANT
COMMITMENTS FOR SCHOOL BUILDING PROJECTS AND
MAKING REVISIONS TO THE SCHOOL BUILDING PR OJECT
STATUTES.
Primary Analyst: EMG 6/9/21
Contributing Analyst(s):
Reviewer: MM
OFA Fiscal Note
State Impact:
Agency Affected Fund-Effect FY 22 $ FY 23 $
Treasurer, Debt Serv. GF - Cost See Below See Below
Treasurer, Debt Serv. TF - Cost See Below See Below
Note: GF=General Fund; TF=Transportation Fund
Municipal Impact:
Municipalities Effect FY 22 $ FY 23 $
Various Municipalities See Below See Below See Below
All Municipalities Revenue
Gain
See Below See Below
Explanation
BONDING
Table 1 below summarizes the increases and reductions made to
General Obligation (GO) bonds, Special Tax Obligation (STO) bonds,
and Clean Water Fund (CWF) revenue bonds in FY 22 and FY 23.
Table 1: FY 22 and FY 23 Increases and Reductions to GO, STO, and
CWF Bond Authorizations (in millions) 2021HB-06690-R00-FN.DOCX Page 2 of 8
Description FY 22 $ FY 23 $
General Obligation (GO) Bonds
New Authorizations 1,819.4 1,646.3
Changes to Prior Authorizations 57.1 48.0
Reductions to Current Authorizations (143.6) -
NET TOTAL GO BONDS 1,732.8 1,694.3
Special Tax Obligation (STO) Bonds
NET TOTAL STO BONDS 836.9 929.6
Clean Water Fund (CWF) Revenue Bonds
NET TOTAL CWF BONDS 281.0 237.0
Table 2 indicates the eventual total General Fund fiscal impact of the
bill, through debt service, if all bonds authorized by the bill are
allocated by the State Bond Commission and issued by the Office of
the State Treasurer. If new authorizations are fully allocated when
effective, there would be a cost to the General Fund for debt service of
approximately, $86.6 million in FY 23. The remaining debt service costs
identified in Table 2 would be repaid after the biennium.
Table 2: Net GO Bond Authorizations and Estimated Total Debt
Service Cost (in millions)
Fiscal Year
Authorized
Authorization Amount $
Total Estimated Debt
Service Cost
1 $
2022 1,732.8 2,444.5
2023 1,694.3 2,390.1
TOTAL 3,427.1 4,834.6
1
Debt service estimates based on market rates and repaid over 20 year terms.
Table 3 indicates the eventual total Special Transportation Fund
(STF) fiscal impact of the bill, through debt service, if all Special Tax
Obligation (STO) bonds authorized by the bill are allocated by the
State Bond Commission and issued by the Office of the State Treasurer. 2021HB-06690-R00-FN.DOCX Page 3 of 8
If new STO authorizations are fully allocated, there would be an
annual cost to the STF for debt service of approximately $67.2 million
from bonds authorized in FY 22 and $74.6 million from funds
authorized in FY 23. Total debt service costs for STO bond
authorizations are identified in Table 3, most of which would be repaid
after the biennium.
Table 3: STO Bond Authorizations and Estimated Debt Service Cost
for the Infrastructure Improvement Program (in millions)
Fiscal Year
Authorized
Authorization Amount $
Total Estimated Debt
Service Cost
1 $
2022 836.9 1,343.1
2023 929.6 1,491.9
TOTAL 1,766.5 2,835.0
1
Debt service estimates based on market rates and repaid over 20 year terms.
Clean Water Fund Revenue Bonds
Clean Water Fund Revenue bonds are issued and repaid using the
resources of the Clean Water Fund. These bonds are not expected to
have an impact on appropriated funds.
Municipal Impact of Bonding Provisions
To the extent authorized bonds are allocated by the State Bond
Commission, the bill will result in a collective municipal revenue gain
of at least $181 million in each of FY 22 and FY 23, including revenue
from three programs (Local Capital Improvement Program (LoCIP) -
$30 million each year, Town Aid Road (TAR) - $60 million each year,
and Grants for Municipal Purposes - $91 million each year). New
authorizations for multiple other bond programs, including programs
regarding school construction, urban development projects, and
drinking water programs, will also result in additional revenue gain to
various municipalities.
Table 4 identifies GO bond authorizations effective in FY 24 through 2021HB-06690-R00-FN.DOCX Page 4 of 8
FY 27
Table 4: Net GO Bond Authorizations FY 24 – FY 27
Out Years Authorization
$ FY 24 FY 25 FY 26 FY 27
Crumbling Foundations 25,000,000 25,000,000 25,000,000
Community Investment
Fund 2030* 175,000,000 175,000,000 175,000,000 175,000,000
CTNext 23,500,000 13,500,000 13,500,000
Baby Bonds 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000
CT Port Authority Non-
Deepwater Ports 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000
UConn Research 14,489,200 9,220,000 4,201,600
Additionally, $250 million of GO bond funds per year are
conditionally authorized for FY 28 through FY 32 for the Community
Investment Fund 2030. $50 million of GO bond funds per year are
authorized through FY 34.
Sections of the bill related to the Community Investment Fund 2030
direct funds of the state's Economic Action Plan, expected to be
financed using federal monies, to various types of projects specified in
the bill.
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION
The amendment approves new priority list projects of $637.7 million
in total project costs including $392.9 million in state grant
commitments for school construction projects. Changes to projects
previously approved have a net impact of a $111.4 million increase to
expected state payments or reimbursements. Adjustments to current
statutory requirements regarding various school construction-related
provisions represent a potential increase to state payments and
reimbursements of up to $221.5 million. New or increased state
reimbursements represent potential revenue gain for the specified
municipalities and potential costs to the state. 2021HB-06690-R00-FN.DOCX Page 5 of 8
The grants-in-aid will be financed through the issuance of General
Obligation (GO) bonds in future fiscal years.
Section 113 approves new or increased grants worth $504 million in
state grant commitments for school construction projects, which
represents potential revenue gain for the specified municipalities.
Section 114 adds new requirements regarding inclusion of water
bottle filling stations in school buildings in specified circumstances. To
the extent these changes alter the total cost of future projects, the
altered cost would be shared between municipalities and the state at
the appropriate reimbursement ratio.
Section 115 requires the Department of Administrative Services to
report on current and pending projects within the Technical Education
and Career System and has no fiscal impact.
Section 116 waives various audit requirements and associated
project costs owed to the state from Hamden. It precludes a cost to
Hamden and a revenue gain to the state of approximately $6 million.
Section 117 increases allowable total costs for the Chamberlain
Elementary School project, previously approved in PA 20-8, from $50
million to $75 million, resulting in a potential cost increase to the state
and potential revenue gain to New Britain of $23.75 million, along with
a potential cost to New Britain of $1.25 million.
Section 118 adds a Holmes Elementary School construction project
to the school construction project priority list, conditional upon New
Britain filing an application for the project prior to October 1, 2023. To
the extent the project is approved and moves forward, there is a
potential cost to the state and potential revenue gain to New Britain of
$52.25 million, along with a potential cost to New Britain of $2.75
million.
Section 119 adds a Jefferson Elementary School construction project
to the school construction project priority list, conditional upon New
Britain filing an application for the project prior to October 1, 2025. To 2021HB-06690-R00-FN.DOCX Page 6 of 8
the extent the project is approved and moves forward, there is a
potential cost to the state and potential revenue gain to New Britain of
$52.25 million, along with a potential cost to New Britain of $2.75
million.
Section 120 makes various changes to the composition of potential
school building committees for projects at Holmes Elementary School
and Jefferson Elementary School in New Britain, and is not anticipated
to have a fiscal impact.
Section 121 changes the school construction reimbursement increase
for potential regional school projects involving Ansonia and Derby
from 10 percentage points under current law to 20 points. To the extent
a regional school district is formed and projects are pursued within 10
years of establishment, there will be a proportional increase to
reimbursement costs to the state and decrease in costs to the regional
school district.
Section 122 increases the allowable reimbursement rate for a school
construction project in Windham from 79.64% to 95%. To the extent
construction begins within one year of the effective date of the section,
there is a potential cost to the state and potential revenue gain to
Windham of approximately $17.25 million.
Section 123 waives certain administrative requirements of a
previously approved project and is not anticipated to result in a fiscal
impact.
Section 124 waives state standard space specifications and a
statutory requirement to withhold 11 percent of potential project
reimbursements to municipalities subject to project closure and final
audit, and replaces that requirement with a 5 percent holdback for a
new construction project at Washington Elementary School in West
Haven. To the extent this makes otherwise ineligible costs eligible for
state reimbursement, there would be a potential cost increase to the
state and potential revenue gain to West Haven. However, there is not
anticipated to be a net change in total project costs or reimbursements 2021HB-06690-R00-FN.DOCX Page 7 of 8
regarding the audit holdback portion of any increased costs after the
audit process is concluded and reimbursements are no longer held
back.
Section 125 waives a statutory requirement to withhold 11 percent
of potential project reimbursements to municipalities subject to project
closure and final audit, and replaces that requirement with a 5 percent
holdback for the West Haven High School Project in West Haven. To
the extent eligible project costs are incurred, there would be a
temporary potential cost increase to the state and potential revenue
gain to West Haven. However, there is not anticipated to be a net
change in total project costs or reimbursements after the audit process
is concluded and reimbursements are no longer held back.
Section 126 adds a project at the E.C. Goodwin Technical High
School with cost of not more than $40 million to the priority list if such
project application is filed prior to October 1, 2022. To the extent the
project application is filed and the project moves forward, there would
be a cost to the state of up to $40 million.
Section 127 increases the allowable reimbursement rate for a school
construction project in Torrington from 62.86% to 85%. There is a
potential cost to the state and potential revenue gain to Torrington of
approximately $35.3 million.
Section 128 waives various audit requirements and associated
project costs owed to the state from Hartford. To the extent audited
projects changed allowable costs or reimbursements, it precludes a cost
to Hartford and a revenue gain to the state.
The Out Years
To the extent that bonds are allocated and issued, debt service
payments may extend up to 20 years from the time, and under of the
terms, of issuance.
The ongoing fiscal impact of school construction project
reimbursements identified above will continue into the future subject 2021HB-06690-R00-FN.DOCX Page 8 of 8
to project completion, successful municipal application for
reimbursement, and the costs of borrowing.
The preceding Fiscal Impact statement is prepared for the benefit of the members of the General Assembly,
solely for the purposes of information, summarization and explanation and does not represent the intent of the
General Assembly or either chamber thereof for any purpose. In general, fiscal impacts are based upon a variety
of informational sources, including the analyst’s professional knowledge. Whenever applicable, agency data is
consulted as part of the analysis, however final products do not necessarily reflect an assessment from any
specific department.