As session nears end, airport authority bill has strong backing

May 26, 2011

By Keith M. Phaneuf

With less than two weeks remaining in the 2011 General Assembly session, key lawmakers and officials in Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's administration are optimistic about the prospects for creating a new quasi-public authority to operate Bradley International and the state's five smaller airports.

A bill pending on the Senate calendar would create a new nine-member Connecticut Airport Authority composed of public- and private-sector representatives to replace the existing Bradley Board of Directors.

Unlike the existing board, a largely advisory panel that guided the state Department of Transportation in the administration of Bradley, the new authority will be empowered to hire staff, retain consultants, procure goods and services and enter into contracts, issue bonds and otherwise borrow funds, and apply for federal and state assistance.

"The DOT does a good job, most of the time, building and maintaining roads," said Sen. Gary D. LeBeau, D-East Hartford, co-chairman of the Commerce Committee. "But they don't do as good of a job running the business side of the airport."

LeBeau's House counterpart, Rep. Jeffrey Berger, D-Waterbury, said the authority legislation could be a very effective complement to a statute enacted last year establishing an economic development zone, extending municipal property tax exeptions and state corporation tax credits to certain businesses around Bradley.

During last fall's campaign, Malloy repeatedly said  that Connecticut was not using its airports--both Bradley and the smaller facilities in Killingly, Groton, Hartford, Oxford and Windham--to their full economic potential.

"We view, particularly Bradley, but the other airports as well as a huge asset to the state," the governor's commissioner of Economic and Community Development, Catherine H. Smith, said Wednesday, adding that the administration believes there is potential to grow both commercial and personal travel at all airports.

"The airport and airline industry is extremely competitive and extremely volatile," Connecticut Business and Industry Association associate counsel Eric Brown, the business lobby's transportation specialist, said Wednesday, adding that fuel prices and demand for extra flights to new or existing locations are among the most rapidly changing aspects of the business.

The authority bill "is one of a variety of proposals we've supported in recent years to make Bradley better able to act and respond like a business," Brown said.

The authority's members would be appointed by the governor and top legislative leaders and approved by the full legislature.

The authority's private-sector appointees would have to be business leaders with expertise in financial planning, budgeting, marketing, master or strategic planning or transportation management.

The panel also would include the commissioners of the state Departments of Transportation and Economic and Community Development, as well as a representative of one of the smaller, state-owned general aviation airports and a member of the Bradley community advisory board.

The authority legislation, which originated in the Commerce Committee, has enjoyed strong bipartisan support to date. The commerce panel, which approved it unanimously, is one of six committees to endorse the measure. The last one, the Appropriations Committee, voted 53-1 in favor of the bill on May 23.

A few Republicans in the Democrat-controlled House and Senate have questioned how unionized DOT employees assigned to work at Bradley would be dealt with if the airport is turned over to a quasi-public authority.

Rep. Pamela Sawyer, R-Bolton, an advocate of the authority plan for Bradley, said she it should be made clear now whether these workers would be reassigned, or whether the authority would be compelled to provide state wages and benefits to all Bradley workers.

Berger said those questions likely would be resolved after any authority legislation is enacted, but said he believes it could be resolved with amicable discussions between the administration, legislature, airport representatives and state employee unions. "It's our intent to protect unionized members of the DOT," he said. "There's no intent to look at this bill as a privatizing tool."

Sawyer also said that while she believes the current oversight system for Bradley "has held it back from becoming a true economic engine," she doesn't believe a quasi-public authority is needed to run the smaller airports. "They really have a different, separate mission."

Please login or register to post comments

Not a member of The Connecticut Mirror yet?

Be a part of The Connecticut Mirror community, comment on stories, receive e-mail news updates and more!

Comments

Throwing good money after

Throwing good money after bad....once again. Sell the airport! No, instead Hartford-on-Steroids creates yet another fat commission. Isn't this one of those descriptions of "crazy"....?

This is another expansion of

This is another expansion of state government pure and simple. It's the creation of a mini Port Authority or MTA. Every employee will be unionized with union wage scales, union bargaining rights, union pensions and union benefits. Every construction project will require Davis Bacon prevailing wage restrictions. The result will be more carriers pulling out of Bradley due to the high cost of doing business. We all know what the MTA is doing to Connecticut commuters. They pay subway and train mechanics close to a half million per year to repair train cars.

Read More

1. You don't want to combine

1. You don't want to combine unprofitable noncommercial airports with Bradley (BDL).
2. You don't want to put State Commissioners on Board of any BDL entity as it will only politicize decisions.
3. It would be far better to privatize BDL than operate it as a Port Authority (using state employees, unions, etc. just leads to costly work rules which airlines shy away from).
4. Given the points above and those from other people commenting put together an Request for Proposals and put it out for bidding, the selection to be made by a non political entity which has no

Read More

I am so happy to read of the

I am so happy to read of the progress of this bill. I hope it will be passed and Gov. Malloy signs it soon. The airport is a terrific asset for the state, and should be managed as such.

The previous posters favor selling the airport, which would be extremely short sighted. This is an asset for the state, and should be managed as such.

Just for Julie Realists's

Just for Julie Realists's information, the prior comments DO NOT suggest selling Bradley. When you privatize an operation, you merely have a business pay the State to operate the Airport. Moreover, airports funded by the federal government cannot be sold.

A few items I didn't address in my prior comment were use by the Air National Guard, which would have to continue, and the status of Hamilton Standard. State officials should meet with Hamilton's CEO and find out what their ultimate plans are--to stay or leave. Bradley could certainly use the land Hamilton currently owns (a good

Read More

This is an action that has

This is an action that has been needed to be done for so long. BDL has the opportunity for being a prominent and effective airport, but lacks so dearly the proper advertising (though I'll give credit to their recent efforts) and profit oriented goals that make other airports within our Region greater hubs for transfers and final destinations.

While a more private-heavy enterprise holding the reins might be more ideal, this is definitely a step in the right direction for our state and economy.

Connecticut does not need to

Connecticut does not need to be in the airport business.