Legitalk:

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I wanna convene our public hearing for commerce committee. I wanna welcome the members of the committee as we continue to work, towards the sessions agenda. It's, I think we've got a relatively light lift on the day today, but certainly heavy topics to consider. We'll be working during the course of the session on a number of these issues. We'll be taking testimony from, I believe I've convinced our department of economic community development to talk towards the issue on brownfield remediation, which is, toxic soil is near and dear to my heart, emotionally, not not physically. And, a couple of the other issues I know that we have people coming in to speak, so I'll turn it over to my, co chair. And Good

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Somebody How's that? Good afternoon, all. And, welcome, this being our first, as I think you may have said, public hearing. And our next one, will be on the '20, fourth. And so yes, I'd love to proceed and hear from our our speakers today. Thank you, Mr. Chew.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Okay. I believe that takes us, from the remarks of the chairs and ranking. Thank you all. Our first speaker up today on on the bills for review is, Senator Sujata.

[Sen. Sujata Gadkar-Wilcox]: Yeah. On on Zoom.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Yes. Yes. They're correcting me on that I've used the first name, Senator Sujata. So Sujata Gadkar Wilcox. Please go ahead.

[Sen. Sujata Gadkar-Wilcox]: Thank you so much. Honorable Chairs Senator Hartley and Representative Messkers, ranking members for Senator Martin and Representative Anishkovich, Vice Chair Senator Rahman and Representative Kitt, and distinguished members of the Commerce Committee. I'm here to provide my strong support for Senate Bill one-three, an act establishing the Connecticut India Trade Commission, an act which strengthens the bridge between Connecticut and India. And I'd just like to put in a special thank you to Senator Hartley for her assistance and support in putting this in. I speak before you today not just as a Senator from the 22nd District, but as the child of Indian immigrants and the first Indian senator ever to serve in this storied body. I'm aware that my presence here before this committee and in fact in the Senate is a testament to the changing face of Connecticut. And opportunities for state exchange and global collaboration have been opened up recently with the many changes to federal aid relations. We should be able to step into that gap and with policies that could that that lead with the strengths we bring as a state. The arc of history, as I say, does not bend on its own. It's bent by the hands of those willing to look for new opportunity and bring about new possibilities. Today, we have that opportunity to do the work by passing bill one three three. Senate bill one three three is more than just a trade policy. It's a recognition of deep cultural, educational, social, and business ties with The United States and India. In fact, many of the democratic principles in the Indian constitution were informed by The US constitution. India and The US share a long friendship, a straight history, and most importantly, a deep connection through immigration and cultural exchange. In fact, one year before Indian independence, President Harry Truman signed the Fulbright Act, which enabled the exchange of students, faculty members, teachers, and researchers building collaborative partnerships that paid off for years to come. I received a Fulbright Award to study institutional law in a comparative context, looking at both the Indian and U. S. Constitutions. And that act enabled me countless opportunities for continued educational dialogue, and it alone established years of robust cultural exchange and unusual unders between nations. The Indian community in Connecticut is one of the most vibrant demographics in our state, with nearly 70,000, 68,000, a little over 68 South Asians of Indian origin. The second largest Indian Indians are the second largest foreign born population in Connecticut and proportionally among the states in The United States, the seventh highest population of Indian residents in the entire United States. So the Connecticut India Trade Commission will create new avenues for Indian companies to be able to choose Connecticut as their American home, to be able to have new collaboration. We have an abundance of shared opportunities in sectors like aerospace, manufacturing, biotechnology, and green energy. Unique opportunities for educational exchange as well considering the quality and number of colleges and universities throughout Connecticut. By establishing a formal commission, ensure that these exchanges are not left to chance, but are nurtured by dedicated body of arts from our higher education institutions, chambers of commerce, and the Indian American community itself. Other benefits of the Connecticut India Trade Commission, the ability to actively promote investment in commerce between Connecticut and India, has mutual interest through collaborative state level action to facilitate partners between our world class universities and India's leading academic institution to establish mutual support for manufacturing, trade, building a long term infrastructure that addresses contemporary, cultural, and market demands in both regions. By supporting Senate Bill 133, we're signaling that Connecticut is open for meaningful, collaborative enterprise. And I urge that you I urge my colleagues to support this historic step going forward. Thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to speak today.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you very much for your testimony. I think it's notable to have you in our assembly as a senator. So Senator Gattro Wilcox, I wanna thank you for your testimony. I'm a proponent, I think you spoke eloquently towards the bill. I personally don't have questions, but I'll defer to my co chair first if you have any questions.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you, mister chair. And thank you, Senator Gerhard Wilcox, for, bringing this concept, before us. And, it it's particularly interesting to note that, on a national level now for a number of years, there have not been, trade agreements that have been established. And so what has happened in the, interim is that many states have initiated trade commissions, in order to, strengthen relationships, foreign relationships, both in terms of commerce, R and D, higher education, and the like. And so our conversation today about a potential Connecticut Indian Trade, Commission is, a continuation of what this committee has, been pursuing, about, strengthening our relationships, growing our economy, and, investing in, in diversity. So, thank you for bringing this to us, and we look forward to, its evolution. Thanks very much. And thank you, mister chair.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: You're welcome. Any questions from the committee? Thank you very much. Do we have any of the committee members online with questions?

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: I'll make one more comment

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: if I can. Okay. Go ahead.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: And, just to make one more comment, for the purposes of my committee and this proposal, as well as another one that is on our agenda today, is that our our challenge is to how we construct and and staff and man, such an initiative. So that's going to be, the issue that we're gonna be wrestling with. I don't think it's conceptually about the trade commission, but more doing what we would have to do, to do it properly. Thank thank you, mister chair.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you very much. Next up, to maintain, concurrence, it'll be senator James or senator James Maroney. Since I managed to do it wrong the first time, I wanna be Barry Pessue. Do we have senator Maroney available?

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: He said he's gonna be here in twelve weeks coming in person.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Okay. I'm expecting him to come in person. We'll be going back to him. Next up, we have, Matthew Pugliese from DECD, the deputy commissioner. And I believe we also have, Binu Chandi from DECD, executive director, office of community development.

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: Good morning, Representative Messkers and Senator Hartley, Representative Anishkovich, and Commerce, Committee, members. Appreciate you having DCD here today. We have submitted, written testimony. I'll spare you all from rereading that into the record. Would like to start with just making sure that we're all on the same page in terms of what brownfields are. So, brownfields are abandoned, underutilized, blighted properties, that have environmental contamination. And that prevents them from easily being sites that are redeveloped and reused. And the DCD brownfield redevelopment, grant program is all about putting these sites back into productive use. And I wanna thank the commerce committee, over the last many bienniums, you have continued to advocate for the Brownfield program and put more funds towards, DECD to administer through this through the Brownfield program. And we have done a very good job at doing that. We have been able to, in each year, get all of those dollars out the door, as we'll speak to when you ask questions. We have a very healthy pipeline of projects that come in through that program. And brownfields are They are sites that no two look the same, no two are dealing with the exact same problem, but they exist in all 169 municipalities throughout the state. And they provide different challenging opportunities. And it's a great place for the state and municipal government and private enterprise to partner together to find ways to put these sites back into productive use. The goal is to to facilitate redevelopment at these sites so that we see sites that already have infrastructure, already are oftentimes located at key intersections and locations throughout a municipality back onto the tax roll with productive end use and also eliminating public health concerns at the same time. So it's both economic development and public health benefits that come through this program. So we'd be very happy to answer any questions and go into greater detail on the program.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: So this has been a particular interest for myself and the co chair and our ranking members. For those specific reasons in commerce is our mandate is economic development and growing the state's economy. And we have a number of abandoned or sideline properties that need remediation. I'm concerned and that's why I I wanted you come in to speak. I'm concerned given the heroic efforts led by my co chair, Senator Hartley, on the Transfer Act that we're going to be in a position to look at a number of properties that that previously weren't available for development or hadn't been certified or worked on, that the demands for Brownfield funding are going to far exceed our ability to provide them. So I guess my framework from Brownfields with your in conversation with you, when I first came on board with Commerce, where we were dealing about $50,000,000 a year or biennium, 25,000,000 a year. I think then we up to $235,000,000 biennium up to 70 and currently we're at 40 per biennium or 80,000,000 in total. Can you go through and explain it to both the committee and to the public? So the scope of Brownfield remediation that currently, the funding sources, I assume there's some money that is either earmarked or dedicated at at Deep as well, but I'm not aware of what the what the size is. And I know that some money comes through with community, either community block development grants or CIF funding, but I assume that that's not dedicated and is more arbitrary. So I wanna look at the constant sources and get your review on that first. That would be my first question.

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: Alright. Thank you very much representative. I'm I'm joined by Bienu Chandi. She's the newly appointed executive director of our office of community development. We've merged our office of brownfield remediation and our community development, all of our capital grant programs together to try to find some internal efficiencies. But Binu has been running the brownfield program excellently over the last many years, and she has these details right at the top. So

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: Thank you, Matt. Thank you for the question. Excellent question. And I want to echo Matt's gratitude and appreciation for your support of the Brownfields program. Yes, our main program, you know, you've authorized 80,000,000 for fiscal year twenty six and twenty seven. That's the Brownfield program. And we have four sub programs under the larger Brownfield program. One can apply for Brownfield grants, loans, assessment only grant, and planning program. Apart from that, you alluded to the deep program. That's the urban sites remedial action program. We do utilize The US wrap in collaboration with deep for projects that don't fit the program parameters of the DCD Brownfield program. And the authorized funding, I may not be right on that. We can get back to you. It's, I think, 20,000,000 for fiscal year, 20,000,000 each for fiscal years '26 and '27. And as you said, the CIF program is also available for some brownfield projects that need more than the 6,000,000 max that we can provide to projects under the brownfield program. So what we do at DCD is we look at what the need is for a project and we layer these different funding programs based on eligibility and the size of the project.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: So my second question, probably at some level more delicate because it's always we always deal on, with you with yourselves coming as agents of the executive office with a proposed budget. So the question is a little more pointed. So I'd like to know what the, your application process, when it's open, when it closes, what the demand look like for the twenty sixth year or this twenty sixth fiscal year and the twenty seventh year. How much has been demanded? How much is how much have you would qualify and you've turned down, and how much is in the queue? Because I assume with money on the table, you could have 500,000,000 of applications and 300,000,000 has credibility or substance to it or 200,000,000. So I didn't know what the gross applications look like. What do you think has merit? What can you attend to? And what do you think the unmet demand looks like?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: So the last round that we had, we received $54,000,000 in application requests. We received 24 applications. The previous two rounds were also similar volume of application requests. We do have a competitive funding process. We score the projects, and we also look at shovel readiness. So projects that meet the threshold criteria and some minimum scoring requirements, we, we put them on a firm award list or a conditional commitment award. So after last round, last round, we, gave out, 28 point, 2,000,000 for 16 projects, and we also gave out conditional commitments for approximately 16,900,000.0. So we are 100% committed whatever money was allocated by the bond commission, which is 30,000,000 of the 40,000,000 authorized by the legislature for this fiscal year. We are almost fully with the firm awards and the conditional commitments.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: If my math's right, your overall at 44,000,000.

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: That's right. We with conditional commitments from this last round and the previous round, we are up to about 47,000,000. And the balance authorization that we have is about 47,500,000.0.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: From delays in prior years authorizations? Yes. Okay.

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: Yeah.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: So the demand is coming in. Mhmm. It's exceeding your funding. It's a question of this cash flow demand from the projects that you haven't fully allocated the funding because you're waiting for the bonding, you're waiting for the projects to get shovel ready. Is that

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: Exactly.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Is that right?

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: Right. I mean, we provide the conditional commitment to projects that are really strong, but maybe have one or two other dominoes that need to fall for it to be able to press go. And so by providing the conditional commitment, the the municipality and the developer don't have to come back through the formal application process. But once they get the planning and zoning approval or once the the sale is finally executed, whatever, you know, couple of bullet points need to be knocked out to for DCDA to be able to prep press go. That conditional commitment can come back at any time. So it we're making it more business friendly that when they're ready to go, when they've met the, parameters that, Banu and the office have outlined, then they're able to come back outside of the normal process. And that's why we have to have a balance between what we award that are hard projects that were ready to go today and the projects that might come back tomorrow and say we're ready to go.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: And I don't wanna anticipate further conversations of the overall agency requests, but I think we were talking about potential increase in the size of the award, the individual award going forward.

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: It's been increased from 4,000,000 to 6,000,000.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Right. And that I'm assuming that should increase the number of larger scaled demands that come through the system. And I'm wondering if if you had to anticipate, you where do you think your backlog of book books go or where do you think your backlog of demand goes? I mean, are you looking at sixty, eighty? You know, right now you're at somewhere around the a 44 to fifty fifty four million of demand. You didn't quite classify to me, was it 54,000,000?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: 54,000,000 in total as.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: And and 47 were meritorious? Is that the way I should go? Or was it by order of scaling, you could only accommodate the 47?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: No. 47 is from this round and previous rounds. For this particular round, if we just look at this particular round, we gave 16 projects for 28,200,000.0. Mhmm. And out of that 28,200,000.0, four of the 16 projects were, conditional commitment con con con conversions from previous rounds. That was about 12,800,000.0. Then we also gave soft con conditional commitments for 17,000,000.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Yeah. I I guess I'm not being clear. I'm sorry to interrupt. I'm not being clear, I think, of my question. My understanding is the overall demand was somewhere around $5,454,000,000.

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: Yeah.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: So my question is without specific Mhmm. Criticism of projects, were they all meritorious and it was just a lack of funding? Or was this the the the would you have awarded all 54 with the right allocation of funding or was there a problem with with some of those applications? I'm trying to establish what real demand is.

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: So out of that 54,000,000, I'm trying to do the math quickly, about $3,335,000,000 were projects that we decided were meritorious and should go forward. The others were not even shovel ready, they may have come to us. We are placing a lot of emphasis on clean up and redevelopment project, come to us with a full package so there may have been some applications that were just for cleanup and that didn't meet the minimum score for that particular round. So the demand for this last round, even though we received $54,000,000 in, application, request, about 33,000,000 was what we, said met that minimum scoring criteria.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: And that 33 of how much of that was awarded temporary or or conditional?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: Out of that, you know, 16.9 was conditional commitments and 16 was firm awards.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: So about 32 out of 37? Yes. Yeah. So at the very least, you're 5,000,000 short on a funding basis at least. You know, I'm trying to figure out where we go and look for awards for future years for demand. And I'm hearing there's an unsatisfied demand for brownfields. And I think fundamentally, as a state, getting tax getting properties back on the tax rolls, whether they be brownfields or grayfields for housing, for for, oh, for offices, for mining, or for office space, workspace, I think it's super important. So I'm trying to get a scope idea of where we think we need to go.

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: And we can provide all the numbers from the last several rounds in terms of what the hard commitment, the conditional commitment and what the application is. So that way the committee can view it. The other thing I'd like to highlight for everybody is that we also have a planning and assessment grants that we do through the through the competitive round. And that allows us to continually to develop a pipeline of projects so that when a community has a site and they they know that it needs to be cleaned up, but they don't have a developer or an end use necessarily, you know, target or, identified at that point, it allows them to get resources to be able to go through the right processes to answer those questions and really bring forward a shovel ready project. So even in around where we might not do a lot of dollars towards hard cost cleanup projects, we might be doing 10 or 11 planning projects. The last round that we announced in December was very planning heavy, which means that down the line in about a year to a year and a half, we will have a lot of shovel ready projects that come forward from that. And and that goes back, you know, multiple years in terms of project pipeline development.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: So in layman's terms, you're telling me you're out there doing the research, doing the planning, doing the programming. That's gonna lead to a significant increase you you would anticipate in demand.

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: It'll lead to a a steady stream, I think, at at at the very least in terms of demand.

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: Okay. And and just to add, even the projects that we are not funding or we didn't didn't don't think that, met that minimum scoring, criteria, those projects are also, at some point, will become real, you know, economic development projects, community development projects.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: So most of the scoring issues related to shovel ready?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: Shovel readiness and, you know

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: So that would be reflective in the report would be helpful. I'd like to know what what is potentially demand once it's shovel ready. I wanna understand that the pipeline is properly funded both from developmental Yeah. To the bonding. And my my sense is you've managed every time we increase it, you managed to empty my wallet, and I mean that in a constructive way because you're moving projects forward. So I'm I'm questioning whether we've reached the right saturation point, and that's my that'll be the the question we have to determine from from the prerogative of the legislature.

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: If I can add one of the to your your initial question, representative, talking about what what the increase in the the total amount might do to the pipeline and how quickly we allocate those funds in each round. One of the things that we do have to keep an eye on, and we're not really sure how it's gonna make a change, is with the release based clean up, standards that we passed last session. They do have clean up standards that apply to brownfield properties. And so specifically, when you think about the, the managed multi family housing provision and also the urban fill provision and those new cleanup standards, those are areas that when we talked with developers, in the the two years in advance of, the release based standards being passed. Those are two of the areas that developers talked about the most significant savings on brownfield projects that would convert sites to housing. And so the whole goal of us moving to the release based system is to decrease those costs. So right now, as as is the development community and municipalities are adapting to the new standards. That's something we're gonna have to watch to see how that drives projects. If if we're seeing everything stay the same or if we're seeing some sort of, downward trend in terms of the requests.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Were you suggesting that it could decrease the cost per remediation?

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: Correct.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: But the converse of that is the ease and the fluidity may increase the numeric number. The demand may go up significantly.

[Anurag Parthasarathy (Student, Trumbull High School)]: Yes.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: That's the thing we have to monitor.

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: More more sites could be in play because it's easier to move those forwards, but some of the costs that the state would be putting dollars towards might diminish.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Okay. Thank you. Any questions from my, co chair?

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank thank you, mister chair. Thanks for being with us, and congratulations, Banu, and much deserved. I hope they're not gonna stretch you too much. Got go back bench. Yeah. No. I, I I just wanna, first of all, give, Matt, yourself, and the department a big shout out with regards to having finished up, our work, we think, on the Transfer Act. You know, great, great progress that took, in no small terms, twenty five years. So, yes, we we are trying to anticipate now how this all plays out, and, of course, we don't know. It's much too early, on that. But I would just ask you if you have any commentary. Also, we had this whole conversation about, you know, the vertical build in in the definition of the Brownfields program. Have is has that is it too early to see how that is playing out?

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: I I think it is a little bit early to see what the real impact is. I We're still We've been communicating with our partners, the municipalities, you know, very consistently after last legislative session about the changes that we achieved in Connecticut that we achieved in Connecticut last year. But it still takes time for people to really internalize that and understand it and start to apply it to the projects that they already had in the pipeline. So I think it'd be a little premature for us to comment.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Yeah. Okay. And and so as you could understand from, you know, the colloquy from representative Messers, we're very concerned about making sure that we have the bandwidth now to go forward having laid all of the policy in place. So that we wanna stay very close to. And how many rounds do we do a year on brownfields? Two rounds. Two rounds. And they're typically, what, The fall and

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Yeah.

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: We announce in the first round of the year. We announce in January, February and make award announcements in May, June.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: May, June.

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: And the second round, July, August, and November, December. For the awards. So we're trying to be, you know, regular on those announcements. Yeah. And I

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: know, you know, we're talking about a lot of numbers. I'm just curious. What is the number the amount, the dollar amount of private money that's leveraged by the Brownfields program? Because I know that

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Mhmm.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: It just has continued to escalate, and I think it's a it's a pretty stunning indictment not indictment, but affirmation

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: of the program. Yeah. So the average leverage, if you look at DC dollar to the other dollars, it's one to 13 for this last round, the private investment was one to 13 and other dollars was one to 15.

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: And and so that's every dollar of Brownfield grant funds leveraging $15 of non Brownfield grant funds.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: What's the difference between private and non Brownfields?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: The non d series, you know, it could be Department of Housing, dollars, all the public dollars, federal dollars, tax credit, everything included.

[Sen. Sujata Gadkar-Wilcox]: Okay.

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: But if you only look at private investment, this last round was one to 12.57. Yeah.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: A a great number for people to understand. And there was a reference to the the Grayfields program now. Is that a different tranche of money?

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: Yes. The Grayfields program is a different tranche of money as we are working right now to stand that program up. We're looking to to model it on what works with the brownfield program. So we wanna have planning and assessment grants from municipalities to be able to do the studies and, get buy in from the, you know, the local taxpayers, but also the development partners and make sure they're bringing shovel ready projects for it. So we're gonna have that same sort of planning and assessment versus a hard cost project program. And then we also made very clear, that the Grayfields program is not going to be duplicative on the Brownfields program. So we're not looking to fund a site that could get Brownfield money and get Grayfield money. It needs to be one or the other.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: And what's the timetable for that?

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: DCD is, looking to, by the end of this fiscal year, stand up, the assessment and planning grants for municipalities. And we're working to put a RFP out right now for a consultant to help us structure a loan and grant in Sorry. To structure the the loan and grant and tax credit incentives that we could use in the right mix to make sure that we're, that we're getting that same sort of leverage that we have in the Brownfields program.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: So we're talking July? Yes. So July, the RFPs will be on the street for the municipalities?

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: So by by July, the RFP Yeah. The notice of funding for a municipal grant round will be open.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Okay. Because that's something that I think we've probably all been very anxious about trying to get our get involved in our communities as you drive through every single city, and then, you know, second tier cities as well, you see the effects of post pandemic changes in work patterns, and the dormant real estate, which it's kind of like a time a ticking time bomb. So this could not be more important. And and I, once again, wanna take my hat off to the department, on the on this initiative, So important, so needed. Could you just comment for us about your working relationship with the Brownfields task force?

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: Sure. So we have the Brownfields working group that is co chaired by Gary O'Connor and Anne Catino. And we meet with them regularly to identify issues within the kind of the Brownfields subject matter and and bring those forward. It was that working group that was really instrumental last year in identifying some of the issues that we fixed in our brownfields bill. Trying to clarify the cleanup and the abatement portion in in statute very clearly versus vertical development so that we could make the the appropriate determinations on how a project is phased and moved forward and where where public funding goes into that project and where public funding stays separate on that project. Really provide clarity with the Department of Labor in terms of any determinations on wage rates on the project. And that that predictability and certainty, is what development needs to move forward. And so the Brownfield Working Group was really instrumental in in working with Binu in our office and looking at the the actual projects that had come to the agency for for several years and stopped being just a one off, but showed a pattern that, needed a legislative fix. So we we appreciate the working group there. DCD is also involved in the release based working group two point o. We will be a co chair that working group is going to be looking specifically at how the release based cleanup regulations are being implemented and where we are encountering challenges that might need fixes in not next biennium, but I guess in the biennium after that. As well as, you know, working towards a more, direct solutions to how transfer act properties might be able to get unstuck. The legislation that passed last year does have a bridge out of the transfer act, but brownfield projects, transfer act projects, no two are the same. So that bridge isn't going to apply to every single project. And so we really wanna work through the the legal and the developmental, liability complications that come with those so we can find, an instrument that's gonna affect as many as possible.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you so much for Yeah. That that update, and also, I wanna recognize, the presence of DECD, in the capacity of co chairing, two point o on, the, Transfer Act working group. And while we're on that subject, we talked a lot about who the members of that working group would be, and I've yet to see the formal list of working group members. And if you could share that with us, we'd be very grateful.

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: We can do that.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Yeah. Thank you. Thank you very much. And, you know, I just will draw a parallel here with our conversation about Transfer Act and how we recognized not initially, I will admit when, this whole conversation came to this committee, we kept saying, no. That's not our lane. But, it very clearly was demonstrated the economic impact of this act, which was an environmental hazardous act, on the state's economy. And hence, we put together this very strong working group, and relation, and we've, you know, many miles have gone. I will say that it is also very clear that this conversation about energy is very similar to the conversation we had about transfer Act, where energy is bedrock, foundational into the state economy. So while, clearly, it is all about energy and technology, it also about the state's economy, and, we look forward to continuing that conversation, certainly this session. So, thank you, very much for being with us and for all the work. Oh, I do have one last question. Benu, you talked about the you know, we've got the 40,000,000 and then you've got the four programs, but there there was a $20,000,000 pot. Is that a DECD or is that The US wrap?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: That is a US wrap program. It's the monies allocated to the deep. Yeah. But how the program works is the the CD makes recommendations for projects. So there are good projects that come in a competitive round or if you're aware of a good project in a distressed municipality. The program is only for a distressed municipality projects. We will recommend to deep. And if deep agrees, they put a request to the bond commission. So the primary difference is that is for distressed municipalities. Yes. But very similar to the overall program. It is very similar. So we try to reserve those, back funding for much larger, you know, former industrial site type of projects.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: So is there federal money there?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: No federal money. It is But it's called US rep? Yeah. It is called urban sites remedial action program. Oh, okay.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Alright. And what is the recapitalization of that tranche?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: It depends upon the, you know, authorized legislative authorizations. And and do we do that biannually?

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Or By biennium. Yes. And has it been a a baseline 20,000,000 each biennium?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: The last biennium, we got maybe $55,000,000 each fiscal year, but we were able to spend down whatever was authorized. And so this biennium deep received, I believe, twenty and twenty for fiscal year 2627. And is it one of the criteria is that it has to be a formally industrial site? Yeah. Mostly, you know, large factory, very significant issues. So we reserve that funding for projects that don't fit the brownfield program funding criteria, which is mostly, you know, projects that are shovel ready to have a reuse redevelopment project.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: And and do you is it like the Brownfields program typically draw that entire allocation down?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: We we strive to do that. Last biennium, we were very successful in drawing down the full amount, and that is our goal by the end of fiscal year twenty seven to draw down the full amount. Okay.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you very much. Thank you, mister chair.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: I believe senator Miller is online and has a question.

[Sen. Patricia Billie Miller]: Yes. Thank you, mister chair. And I hope I'm not out of order. I'm chair of the bond commission, the and, I'm the senate chair. And so I've always been curious how you've spent down, the fundings that we authorized. And so my question I'm listening to you. This seems like there's a need for for for more funding, and I don't wanna put you on the spot. And if you can send me that information, I would appreciate it. I'll be interested in knowing how many requests, the number of requests that you have that you can't fund and you can assist. Is it possible to get us that information, get the committee that information?

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: Sure. We can share the pipeline of, requests that we've had over the last several rounds in terms of what was requested and what was conditional commitments and what were hard cost commitments.

[Sen. Patricia Billie Miller]: Thank you, Matt. Because there seems like just listen to the conversation. It seems like there is a need, a greater need than what we are able to and I'm not gonna what we're funding. And so, I know some communities like Waterbury, Bridgeport that had industrial sites do need remediation and, Brownfield remediation. And even some I have a housing development here where SIF suggested that they go to, have brownfield remediation. So I really appreciate that information because I think it's very important to make sure that you're funded so that you can do the work that we need to do to clean up these sites. Thank you, madam chair.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you, senator Miller. I think, echoing the comments you get from from from from the chairs on terms of support for the, remediation. Do you have any questions from,

[Rep. Joe Aniskovich (House Ranking Member, Commerce Committee)]: a ranking representative Anishkovich? Thank you, mister chair. Can you just speak to So like when the announcement goes out that the grant funding is available, and knowing that there's thousands thousands of these properties all over the state, how do we get out that message to the municipalities to know that some of this funding is available?

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: So we've, create you know, built up a really good, contact list. So the Brownfield Office pushes out that information to the municipalities. We push it out to the councils of government. We put it out to the brownfield land banks. All of those are eligible entities. We also have developers and development partners that are on our list, you know, our contact list as well. And then we also share it, you know, through the agencies LinkedIn. And I I can tell you that, you know, when I when I repost what the new in the office put out on my LinkedIn page separate than the DCD page, I just see all of the different, parties, municipalities, CCM, cost, etcetera, that are sharing that information. So it it definitely is getting a lot of visibility.

[Rep. Joe Aniskovich (House Ranking Member, Commerce Committee)]: Good. Thank you for that information because

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: it's important, obviously, to know that once this information does get out and it gets out to all the responsible parties that when we're asking for funding and increasing for funding for these projects, that we make sure we have some accurate information. And I would just add, representative, we had a meeting last, I think it was last week with EPOC, the environmental professionals of Connecticut. And we we were not talking about our brownfield program specifically, but in the conversation, it came up, you know, how much that they appreciate, how much of a of a national standard they were talking about the Connecticut program being. And so it's also great that the environmental professionals that are doing that work with the developers and with the municipalities, they're very well aware of Binu and her team and the work that we do at DCD that, the legislature makes possible.

[Rep. Joe Aniskovich (House Ranking Member, Commerce Committee)]: Great. Thank you for that information.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Are there any further questions? Representative Centinella.

[Rep. Centinella (first name unknown)]: Thank you. So I'm wondering, do you have any statistics that, demonstrate what the property value looks like on the other side of the development? So you take a blighted property that is not producing for a whole host of reasons, make this investment. On the other end, there is a completely remediated property that is now contributing. Do you have statistics on the Delta and what this money is actually doing to contribute to local communities and getting these properties back on the tax rolls?

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: Yeah. There must be data available, but we don't, have it. When we, we do request potential applicants to give us what they think will be the appraised value post development. So we ask them what is your appraised value now. It it usually is a minus something number. And then what is your price value?

[Rep. Centinella (first name unknown)]: Well, I think it would be really helpful for us over time to kind of put these statistics together because, you know, listening Mhmm. To the conversation, this is all very well and good. Right? We're doing really good things to help remediate these properties. But to be able to show that this is not all just money out. Right? The the trajectory is to eliminate some of the burden that these properties are causing on local communities and the whole host of other activity that comes from this, to be able to demonstrate that there's a real end benefit to local taxpayers, local communities, and so on and so forth, I think it just adds a different context to what this money actually does beyond just we're we're remediating a brownfield. And I think if we could start putting that together, it would be a really nice button on this story, because I think it's a really good story that we should all be able to tell. So if we can work on that, that would be great.

[Binu Chandy (Executive Director, Office of Community Development, DECD)]: Yeah. Agreed. That's a really good metric to show the success of the program. Agreed.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you very much. I might suggest it might be as easy as going through the awards, and we have these curious people with the felt garters in every town called tax assessors. And if we give them the addresses of the projects and ask them for the assessed valuations of those properties now, we might be able to get it right from the assessor's offices and that might might be able to automate it versus going back to a developer who's since disappeared from from the face of the earth. Right? The way they incorporate and and dis incorporate the project. You go to the assessor's office, if you got a a zip code and an address, he'll tell you if it's a productive property and what the what the assessed valuation is. I don't know. I think I think that that'll get us to that question, so I think best way. Any other questions from the group? Thank you very much for coming and testifying. And again, I will echo my co chairs, thanks for the work you do. You were so helpful when we were wrestling through the SHPO issue for the exact same thing to get economic decisions done successfully. And you've done a bang up job so far, so I appreciate all of your support, your work, for the exec Even though it's for the executive, we appreciate it here in the legislature. Thank you.

[Matthew Pugliese (Deputy Commissioner, DECD)]: Thank you very much.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: I believe now I, bring forward a senator. I could start with senator James as they called the last senator by the first name, but senator Maroney, please come up.

[Sen. James Maroney]: I, thank you very much. Chairs Hartley and Messkers, vice chairs Raman and Kit, and ranking members Martin and Aniskovich, and esteemed members of the Commerce Committee. My name is James Moroney. I'm the state senator from the 14th District, which encompasses Milford, Orange, West Haven with my good friend, representative Heffernan over there and and Woodbridge. I'm I appreciate the opportunity to submit my testimony and to testify in full support of senate bill one thirty two, an act establishing the Connecticut, Germany trade commission. I wanna thank the Commerce Committee, for raising this bill. I will be submitting my written testimony. I haven't, submitted it yet, but I'm just going to summarize some of what what you will see in that written testimony. This past November, I was honored to be able to attend a an exchange a legislative exchange trip in in Germany. And in preparation, for that, I did I was doing research on our economic ties. And I had known that Germany was one of our top five, companies for export. We export annually over $2,000,000,000, of services to Germany. I think it's approximately 17% of all of our exports, to foreign countries. But what I didn't realize was that Germany was also tops in direct foreign investment in Connecticut. There are over a 100, companies that are owned, and they support between 12,014 jobs, in in, in Connecticut. And we already have a number of established partnerships, with Germany. Advanced CT hosted trade mission there in 2024. Governor Lamont, visited, Germany. And we have at Yukon, there is a Eurotech. There are Eurotech and Eurobiz majors. So, the Eurotech is a German and engineering major. The Eurobiz is a German, and business, major. But this I see as an opportunity for us to, deepen that relationship and to establish a direct relationship between the legislature, and Germany as well. Similar to what this committee did when they created the Irish, Trade Commission modeled off of that, it would be an effort at trying to, further deepen our ties with with the hopes of improving our relationships and increasing direct investment. I would just make a few suggestions for appointments to the Trade Commission, the opportunity to speak with the German consulate general in Boston, consul general Sonia Kravitch, and she had made some recommendations of other people who may be on this committee. So we are fortunate in Connecticut to have an honorary consul, Jan Sutherland, who represents who's a liaison between Germany and Connecticut and Rhode Island, are her areas. Her name is Jan Sutherland, and she'll be submitting submitting written testimonies. So I would recommend we include that honorary consul general as a member of our trade commission. Also, there is a chamber of commerce, the New York German Chamber of Commerce, which covers Connecticut. So we do reference a Chamber of Commerce, but we may want to include, them as as one of the appointments as well as, since we do have those programs, the EuroBiz and EuroTech, programs at Yukon, I would recommend, perhaps we include the co directors of that program as a member of this trade commission. Professor, Anka Finger is one of the co directors of the program, and she will be I believe she signed up to testify later, or if not, she will be submitting, written testimony. And finally, Advanced CT. When you go to the Advanced CT, website, they do have a page dedicated to the Connecticut, Germany relationship, and I believe they do have someone who's in a liaison, for that area. So I think represent, having a representative from advanced CT on that, commission would also be a good idea. So with that, I thank you for raising the bill. I thank you for the work you did in creating the Irish, trade commission. And I look forward to working with you, to hopefully create a German trade commission.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you, Senator Moroney. I think, welcome your testimony and support here today. I'll just make it. I don't know if I have a question or an observation. I think the challenge we'll face in commerce is the staffing and support and ancillary work to make sure we have a functioning trade commission. And the secondary piece of that is, you know, I'll make a land grab in commerce where we raise the bill that I'm hoping that it gives rise to legislative action that would be in to my mind, generally through the through the commerce committee because it's in the interest of fostering further further business between Germany and Connecticut. I think the challenge we'll face is will be those issues of staffing the administrative support, depending on how I guess the word be constructive or aggressive, both in a positive way, that the meetings are held and the activities involved that. I'm finding that I'm a member of the Irish Trade Commission claiming some ancestry, but also basically for my role on commerce. And it's pretty robust group and we're just beginning to dig in for what I think will be very ambitious agenda. And we'll have to have that conversation and, you know, you welcome your input here because we'll have to have the conversation of of the administrative support from the legislature, the house and the senate, in terms of, you know, clerks or assistance and website and emails and room meeting rooms, etcetera, so we can host the the activities. I appreciate. I appreciate all your thoughts. I don't know that I have a question, but if you wanna comment on that, I appreciate it.

[Sen. James Maroney]: No. Thank you. I look forward to, working with you to try to come up with, some ideas that we can facilitate, the the meetings if we do establish that, commission and looking, you know, at at perhaps having some outside groups as cochair, who may be able to provide some support. And then back to the Irish Trade Commission, if there are any openings, the members of the Irish club in my town frequently reach out and ask if they can get appointed to that trade commission. So

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: I'll definitely we'll take it under consideration. Thank you, Senator Hartley.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you, mister chair. And thank you, Senator Maroney, for bringing this, forward to the committee. And I will note that we already have some very robust, testimony that's been, filed here with the committee clerk, which is, all in support and also very explicit about, the importance and the benefit that this would bring to our state. Senator Marley, do you know are there any other such trade commissions in other states that exist already? I mean, if when we did the Irish Trade Commission, for example, we had the New Jersey model, which had been, you know, pretty well established.

[Sen. James Maroney]: That that's an excellent question. I'm not aware of any, but I will get back to you. I know there are German trade chamber of commerce is throughout, the the country Yeah. And they split up the the various states. But I'm not aware of any trade commissions, but I will check on that and get back

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: to you. Well, you know, that would be helpful. And Germany has been a very important partner to this state, and you point out the number of employees, you know, in life sciences and manufacturing, and we have talked a lot, actually, about their manufacturing protocol and model. So it would be very interesting to, you know, have that more at hand and and, you know, talk and work with them. And also to further scale this relationship and view the fact that there have not been trade relation trade agreements that have been established with, you know, international companies in quite a long time. And we noted earlier because we did have testimony on the proposal for an Indian Trade Commission that states have gone off on their own to form these relationships in view of the void that exists and has existed for some time. So this is a a very interesting proposal, and, yeah, we'll have to work through the, you know, the the actual logistics of, you know, standing up, an operation that is gonna work and sustain itself. Right. So thanks very much. Yeah. We look forward to your written testimony to share with the members who maybe couldn't be with us today, and and for the suggestions here with regard to, putting together that, that actual membership. So thanks.

[Sen. James Maroney]: Thank you very much. I look forward to working with you.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: You know I'll go back one one last time just as a question. Were you speaking from your notes? Because I'm hoping because you were detailed on the suggested appointments or is that from memory?

[Sen. James Maroney]: They're in my notes.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Perfect. Because I was worried that I would have had to recreate all of them. Yeah. So thank you. I was worried about the appointments. This this I mean, we'll definitely take them in. I won't guarantee, but I'll take them all into consideration. So thank you very much.

[Sen. James Maroney]: Thank you.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Any further questions? Thank you very much, Senator.

[Sen. James Maroney]: Thank you.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Next up, we have Paul Amarone.

[Paul Amerone (Senior Policy Director, Job Growth & Manufacturing, CBIA)]: Good afternoon, Senator Hartley, Representative Messker, Senator Martin, Representative Anishkovich, and members of the Commerce Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Paul Amerone, and I'm a senior policy director of job growth and manufacturing at the Connecticut Business and Industry Association. I am here today to offer recommendations on multiple bills before the committee. And I've also provided, written testimony with, more details for reference for the committee. First, on Senate Bill 131, an act concerning manufacturing. Connecticut's R and D tax credit is a valuable tool, but it does not reflect how modern businesses are structured. More than 97% of Connecticut businesses employ fewer than 500 people, and roughly 90% have fewer than 20 employees. Many of these businesses operate as LLCs, S corporations, and sole proprietorships. These pass through entities dominate start up and early stage ecosystems especially in manufacturing, biotech, and software. Yet, they are excluded from fully utilizing the R and D tax credit. R and D includes everything from developing new products, improving manufacturing processes, building and testing prototypes, and enhancing energy efficiency. Allowing pass through entities to claim a 6% credit on qualifying R and D expenditures would align tax policy with today's economy, improve cash flow for small manufacturers, and make Connecticut more competitive with regional and national competitors. Moving on to House Bill 5,145, an act concerning the Department of Economic and Community Development. We recommend establishing a small business AI grant fund modeled after the existing manufacturing innovation fund. Artificial intelligence is transforming every sector of the economy, but small and mid sized businesses often lack the resources to adopt these tools responsibly and effectively. This fund should be administered by DECD, guided by a public private board, structured as a non lapsing fund, and include performance reporting to ensure accountability and effectiveness. Navigating grants, regulatory requirements, and state programs. A centralized point of contact would help improve access, reduce frustration, and increase the return on taxpayer funded initiatives. Third, on Senate Bill 132 and Senate Bill 133, CBIA strongly supports establishing trade commissions with Germany and India. Just last year, Connecticut exported approximately $17,400,000,000 in goods and imported roughly $22,700,000,000 in goods. Expanding strategic trade relationships notably during a time of a rapidly changing economy and the uncertainty of tariffs will help manufacturers grow, diversify markets, and remain competitive globally. And finally, on House Bill 5,146, an act concerning brownfield remediation, Connecticut currently has more than 800 registered brownfield sites spanning more than 4,200 acres. Brownfield programs have successfully leveraged multiple dollars as noted in earlier testimony in private investment for every $1 of state funding. Most recently, the General Assembly included $40,000,000 annually in fiscal year twenty six and fiscal year twenty seven in state bond authorizations for brownfield remediation through deep. These investments create construction jobs, permanent employment, expanded tax basis for our municipalities and state, and revitalized communities, notably in underserved and underutilized towns and cities throughout Connecticut. In closing, these proposals modernize our innovation policy, strengthen small businesses, expand global trade relationships, and return vacant properties to productive use. Thank you for your time and I look forward to working with the committee on these recommendations moving forward.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you very much for your testimony, Paul. I think I've heard most of these suggestions or we've spoken about them. So I I firmly embrace where you're coming from. I think that's very good. I think the only slight addition I would bring to this is, when you talk about the interaction, with, DECD concierge service, etcetera, and I just wanna encourage this. I wanna bring this to you as you walk around the building to the various committees. One of the one of the I think the problems that I see in your suggestion is the concierge service to do introduction, walk through, connect people with the services of the small businesses. I think the other issue that I would like you to focus on is that the feedback loop with those conscientious services or introductory include a response to process. Because what I find is, whether we whether we do a concierge service there or whether I'm the advocate at the in the executive office for a larger industry or a problem, is that many times we fix, the issue and don't fix the process. So I wanna be a strong proponent that we think about we wanna make Ultimately, the goal of making of creating a concierge service is that it dissolves eventually because the service and the process becomes so transparent that we don't need an intermediary. And I fully agree that we need the intermediary. Question is how do we how do we grease the wheels so that it's no longer an essential function. Right? How do we make that one stop shopping easier? So that's that would be my one observation on your on your on your commentary that I find that in process here that needs work. So I appreciate your your suggestion. Any other questions?

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you, mister chair. Thanks for being with us, Paul, and for, all of the advocacy, on so many subjects. But I I just wanted to ask about something in your testimony on the Brownfields remediation bill. You talked about the city of Hartford as leading the way with Brownfield sites. Have you kind of done a geo map in terms of where our brownfield programs are, and who are what's the top 10%? Is it all the big cities? I mean, are we getting it's very important, obviously, and we saw this with the Transfer Act in terms of the number of properties that basically were in the smallest of communities, to our our major, Connecticut metropolitan areas.

[Paul Amerone (Senior Policy Director, Job Growth & Manufacturing, CBIA)]: Yeah. So you're correct. The majority of the brownfield sites are in what you would consider cities. You look at seventy, eighty years ago when manufacturing was a booming sector. The industrial, even going back to the industrial revolution, cities like Waterbury, Bridgeport, New Haven, Hartford, really hubs for business and industry. So, I mean, you could take a quick drive in any city and you could see those blighted properties, that are just sitting there with really no purpose. So I think if we we look at a map of the state, you would see areas in New Haven, Hartford, Bridgeport, Waterbury as some of the top ones, and then some of the less populated cities coming in right after.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Yeah. That's what I was surmising. And then with regard to our conversation on the R and D tax credits, and we've talked about this very often. It's almost counterintuitive. This is the These are the small employers who don't have the ability, for the r and d, but yet, it's their lifeblood as opposed to the big guys who, have those that capacity. How do we compare with other states with regard to, this program?

[Paul Amerone (Senior Policy Director, Job Growth & Manufacturing, CBIA)]: Yeah. So, I was just actually having this conversation earlier. It's kinda mixed in the region. So Massachusetts and New York do not, extend down to, pass through entities for, r and d tax credit, but Rhode Island and New Hampshire do. So see it as an opportunity for Connecticut to not necessarily take the lead

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: and be a first of its kind,

[Paul Amerone (Senior Policy Director, Job Growth & Manufacturing, CBIA)]: but, to fall in just make our business and economic environment more competitive for small businesses and for start up businesses that are looking to invest in research and development of their facilities, of their machinery, and any sort of operations that can help move their their operations forward.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: And and so the underlining, conversation, why we haven't and others have not, extended to these paths through entities is because it's viewed as being a personal benefit. That's the how do we get past that? How do we demonstrate that it's not?

[Paul Amerone (Senior Policy Director, Job Growth & Manufacturing, CBIA)]: Yeah. Well, you know, CBIA, we have hundreds of manufacturing members. A lot of them are pass through entities. And I believe we heard testimony, maybe you wouldn't consider it testimony, but a couple weeks ago at the forum, from one of our our members, It's a stigma that it's kind of like this big corporate thing that the business owner is gonna take it and write it off for themselves. I think when we hopefully have a hearing, in this committee and other committees on R and D tax credits, being extended to pass through entities. We will have business owners of these manufacturing facilities that we speak of, come and talk about the operations and the, different R and D opportunities that they have, but they can't do because they simply can't afford it because it's a very capital intensive sector. So, there is certainly that stigma that it's this personal business greed. But these are small, a lot of family owned and startup companies, some that have been in the state for hundreds of years. And those kinds of companies are really the lifeblood to enhancing our defense sector, to being the supply chain for our defense sector. And I think when we have hearings specifically on the R and D tax credit expansion to pass through entities. I think you'll hear from some of those business owners, on what exact programs and upgrades they plan to utilize with, the R and D tax credits.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you, Paul. We look forward to having this conversation.

[Paul Amerone (Senior Policy Director, Job Growth & Manufacturing, CBIA)]: Excellent. Thank you so much.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Any other questions? Thank you very much, Paul. Next up, we have remote Veneta Balia from Balia. Venita, if you're still on, you'll need to unmute.

[Venita Balia]: Thank you, sir. Good afternoon, honorable members of the Connecticut General Assembly Commerce Committee. Firstly, I wanna thank you for your work to grow Connecticut's economy. Secondly, I thank you for the opportunity to offer my thoughts. I respectfully submit this testimony in strong support of Senate Bill number 133, which proposes the establishment of the Connecticut India Commission. The creation of this commission represents a strategic and forward looking initiative designed to create meaningful engagement with the state's Indian and broader South Asian communities. I've submitted written testimony, but as a member of the Indian diaspora, I care enough about this topic that I wanted to make a few points in public testimony. I have been told that there are 32 Asian American communities here in Connecticut, including Indian and South Asian communities. From physicians and engineers to small business owners, educators, researchers, and public servants, this vibrant dynamic and rapidly growing community contributes meaningfully to our state's economic vitality, cultural richness, and civic life. Today, we have an opportunity to strengthen that contribution through the creation of a Connecticut India commission. The purpose of such a commission is straightforward and powerful. To serve as an advisory body to the Connecticut legislature, ensuring that policy decisions are informed by expertise, lived experience, and strategic foresight. Across The United States, states such as New Jersey and Illinois have recognized the value of structured engagement with their Indian American communities. These states have established formal mechanisms to cultivate trade, cultural exchange, and educational partnerships with India, one of the world's fastest growing major economies and a critical global partner. Connecticut should not lag behind in positioning itself strategically. Yes. This would require an investment of resources, but it is strategically valuable. A Connecticut India commission would be composed of members representing diverse professional and disciplinary backgrounds, trade and investment, higher education, technology, healthcare, cultural institution, social services, and government affairs. This multidisciplinary composition is essential. It ensures that recommendations are not narrowly framed, but instead reflect both international economic priorities and those lived realities of Connecticut residents. At its core, the commission would provide informed non partisan guidance. It would advise the legislature on trade opportunities, foreign direct investment, academic partnerships, workforce development, and cultural diplomacy. It would also serve as a conduit for community concerns, those 32 communities, whether related to small business development, professional mobility, student engagement, or civic participation. Importantly, institutionalizing disengagement matters. Informal consultation is valuable, but formal advisory structures create accountability, continuity, and transparency. They allow expertise within the diaspora to be systemically leveraged for the benefit of the state. This is not about representation only. It is about strategic and smart governance. Connecticut stands at the intersection of advanced manufacturing, biosciences, financial services, and higher education. India's expanding economy presents complementary opportunities across these sectors. By establishing the commission, we send a clear message. Connecticut is prepared to engage globally while remaining deeply attentive to the communities we that call our state home. In summary, the Connecticut India Commission would enhance our legislative insight and economic opportunity. It would affirm our commitment to inclusive representation. It positions Connecticut not only as a state that values diversity, but one that strategically partners with it. This is not merely symbolic. It is pragmatic, forward looking, and aligned with Connecticut's long term interests. Thank you very much for allowing me to speak.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: One, thank you for staying on for, not that long a a meeting. God knows we've had longer. But thank you for your contribution, for your thoughtful presentation and your advocacy. I think you can hear echoes, I unfortunately, I think mine less eloquently, but echoes of your thoughts in in our willingness to consider this and to raise this subject. So I appreciate your your commentary. Are there any questions for the speaker?

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you, mister chair, and thank you, Venita for being with us, and for your very, complete, testimony in support of this proposal. Can you just, for the committee's edification, tell us you mentioned that you were a member of the Indian diaspora. What is the role exactly that you have in that committee?

[Venita Balia]: Well, it's actually a way that we describe the the great immigration from India, or I should say immigration from India, immigration to The US. I came here as a young child and I continue to have a foot in both cultures. And I'm very proud of working within different groups to enhance the exposure and the representation and the resonance of those cultures across boundaries.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Well, thank you. I have now been educated about this. Appreciate it. And, look forward to having a continuation of this, concept. Thank you.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you very much. With no further questions, I believe next up we have Rohan Raghupathi. Did I get that right? Good.

[Rohan Rigupati (Student, Trumbull High School)]: Good afternoon, Senator Hartley, Representative Messkers, and members of the Commerce Committee. My name is Rohan Rigupati. I'm a junior at Trumbull High School, and I'm here in support of raise bill 133, establishing the Connecticut India Trade Commission. Even though I'm not an economist, I am an Indian American student who has grown up watching how global trade quietly affects everyday life in Connecticut. Near my home, families regularly shop at stores like Patel Brothers and Bark Bazaar. And to some people, they may just look like specialty grocery stores, but to me, my family, and my community, their connections to a culture and nation that we left long ago. Every few weeks, new shipments arrive from overseas, such as rice, lentils, spices, cooking oils, and products that have traveled thousands of miles just to sit on the shelves of Connecticut. And over the past few years, I've noticed a shift in pricing and how my parents have talked about it at the dinner table. I've noticed how store employees have quietly mentioned that products can't be imported into their stores due to cost of shipping them overseas. And these shifts aren't just global and they affect thousands of families in Connecticut. And it's not just grocery stores. For example, across Connecticut, Indian American entrepreneurs run hotels, franchises, medical offices, IT consulting firms, and engineering companies. They hire Connecticut residents, pay Connecticut taxes, and at the same time maintain a working relationship with India. Trade between Connecticut and India is already happening. It's real, it's local, and it affects families and small businesses. That's exactly why this bill matters so much. It has an impact far wider reaching than just some simple grocery stores. By facilitating more structured trade with India, not only will said specialty goods be cheaper and have a wider array of products as well, but we'll also be able to get more products for a cheaper price. This bill provides a structured and practical way to coordinate trade with the world's fastest growing economy, supporting local businesses, increasing economic opportunity, and helping this great state take steps in the global economy. Thank you.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you very much for coming to speak. I appreciate you taking the time out of your day for your strong advocacy. And I think you the commentary was reasoned and thoughtful, so I really appreciate that. So as a note personal note, were you born here or born in in India? I was born here. I lived in Shelton for five years and then moved to Trumbull. Okay. Well, I'm very glad to see you here in front of us and supporting the bill. Are there any questions from the from my vice chair?

[Rep. Sarah Keitt (House Vice Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Ryan, thank you for coming. It's more of a comment. I just wanna thank you for taking your time out today to come speak to us and to become involved in exerting your civic responsibility by making your voice heard here. And if I'm not mistaken, you're part of the We the People team, correct?

[Rohan Rigupati (Student, Trumbull High School)]: No. I'm applying for it right now. Okay. I'm a junior, so hopefully next year.

[Rep. Sarah Keitt (House Vice Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Well then I look forward to seeing you next year at We the People, and thank you for being here.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: And is the last and what year are you in now? I'm a junior. Okay. Well, I wish you the best of success this year and, survival in the first semester of your senior year as you apply for college. I know what a delightful experience that is, so I wanna wish the best of luck. I think our next, if there's no other questions, our next speaker is Anivarth Partha Sawati. I hope I'm close.

[Anurag Parthasarathy (Student, Trumbull High School)]: Yeah. Alright. Good afternoon, Senator Hartley, representative Meskers, and distinguished members of the commerce Commerce Committee. My name is Anurag Parthasarathy. I'm a high school senior from Trumbull High School and I just went through my first semester of senior year and I like to say I survived through it. But perhaps most importantly, I'm a Connecticut resident of Indian origin. And today, I'm here to speak in strong support of the Connecticut Indian Trade Commission, which has raised bill number one thirty three. Connecticut and India already share robust economic connections that demonstrate the potential of this trade relationship with major Indian companies like Infosys and Tata Consultancy Services already having a prominent presence within Connecticut. And even last year, Governor Lamont led a Connecticut delegation on a week long economic mission to India, where they visited Bengaluru, Mumbai, and my home city of Chennai and Tamil Nadu to meet with industrial leaders and ultimately deepen their business ties between Connecticut and India. And this this delegation featured participation in things like Venture Clash India and the signing of a memorandum between the between Connecticut and the government of Tamil Nadu to expand cooperation in key technology sectors. And I'd like to think that Connecticut's socioeconomic ties with India are equally as significant, with Indian born residents making up one of the largest foreign born populations in our state. And India is currently the number one country of foreign students studying for higher education in Connecticut. And this has only led to an increase in Indian led small businesses in Connecticut. And I believe that this trade commission between Connecticut and India would only catalyze their growth. And as a Connecticut resident of Indian origin, I have been lucky enough to be a part of the wonderful Indian American community here in Connecticut. And consequently, I have witnessed firsthand how exactly our state benefits from the contributions of Indian led businesses and professionals. Growing up, I watched local businesses in my community thrive thanks to their connections with India, and stronger trade ties, I believe, could multiply these opportunities for jobs, innovation, and cultural exchange within Connecticut and India. And these stories and companies are clear indicators of just the sheer potential between this economic relationship between Connecticut and India and some that I believe can only be explored further. And a Connecticut India Trade Commission would help Connecticut businesses tap into one of the fastest growing global markets and while also encouraging Indian companies to strengthen and grow their presence here. With that said, I respectfully urge the committee to support this bill and invest in a structured way to unlock the full economic potential of Connecticut's partnership with India. Thank you for this thank you for your attention to this matter, and I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: One, I'm thrilled to see that you've gotten over the hurdle in what I assume was the application process and now just waiting. I think your comments about the contribution of the Indian American diaspora, the Indian American population that settled in The United States and the contributions is well documented. Personal experience, I I can't think of the amount of support and friends I've met within the Indian community and the tremendous contribution they bring to our society. So I think there's a lot to be doing going forward. I look forward to seeing what we can do. Is there a particular focus You you spoke in very broad terms. Are there any specific focuses or recommendations you would make for the committee of one particular item or two items? Narrowing your focus? You're very expensive. It's helpful. Do you have a particular, ax to grind as they say?

[Anurag Parthasarathy (Student, Trumbull High School)]: Well, I think one of the the greatest benefits of this trade commission between Connecticut and India would be the access to technology in specific that we get. Because as I mentioned, Infosys and Tata Consultancy Services are two Indian technology companies that have a presence here in Connecticut, and they've been allowing for their IT consulting services to and offering them to Connecticut businesses. And this has only grown the technology businesses of Connecticut. And I think that's something that can definitely be expanded upon with this trade commission.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you very much. Any other questions from the committee?

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you.

[Rep. Sarah Keitt (House Vice Chair, Commerce Committee)]: And I just want to congratulate you for being so engaged in the process, and I'm just so proud of, the trouble kids. So thank you for being here and for sharing your voice.

[Anurag Parthasarathy (Student, Trumbull High School)]: Thank you.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you, mister chair. I yes. I I just wanna echo, my colleague's recognition of your attendance here. And I, very curious. So do you track legislation, or how is it that you are, aware of today's conversation public hearing?

[Anurag Parthasarathy (Student, Trumbull High School)]: Yes. So, I'm I'm the member of the jumbles We the People team, and, Senator Gadcock Wilcox does a lot of help with that and trains us a lot. And I found about this I found out about this bill through her and was very intriguing, that's why I'm here today.

[Sen. Joan Hartley (Senate Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Well, you are a great representative, a lot of energy, and we really wanna kinda capture and scale this. And you are so right about the connections between India and Connecticut, of which more recently have, I think, risen, to to the forefront. So, it's something, that we, all will mutually benefit from, and we're looking to see, you know, how we will go forward with this. But do stay involved and much to be proud of. Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you, sir.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Senator Martin.

[Sen. Henri Martin (Senate Ranking Member, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you, mister chair. Thank you to the both of you that come coming and testifying today. Yeah. I I am smiling because my my daughter and son-in-law live in Trumbull. I have two grandchildren and it's the oldest one is in sixth grade not sixth grade, six years old. And I'm just thinking, you know, in ten years from now or eight years from now, she's gonna be in high school, and she may be here where you guys are sitting, and maybe you guys will be sitting here listening to her testify. So thank you for coming up and, just, just participating. So thank you.

[Anurag Parthasarathy (Student, Trumbull High School)]: That was great. Yeah. Thank you.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Next up, I have, Thomas Abraham, global organization of people of Indian origin, Connecticut chapter. Apparently that person is on on right now. The next up is Anke Finger, professor of German studies. I guess I should start with a Gutentag and, encourage you to testify.

[Prof. Anke Finger (University of Connecticut)]: Good and tag. Thank you very much for having me. Dear, chairwoman, Hartley, mister chairman Meskers, distinguished members of the committee. It's a tough act to follow these wonderful testimonies of students. Hopefully, we'll see you at UConn. My name is Anke Finger, and I'm professor of German studies at the University of Connecticut. I'm the director and co director of two dual degree programs, EuroTeQ, now in its thirty third year, and EuroBiz, its younger twin, already mentioned by Senator Maroney. I testify in strong support of Senate Bill SB 132, an act establishing the Connecticut Germany Trade Commission. I believe the establishment of such a trade commission is an excellent proposal to promote and boost Connecticut's economy, and it is especially important in the current moment. There's also a much welcomed strengthening of ties between Germany and Connecticut, especially the state of Baden Wurttemberg that started in 1989. In my function as director of Eurotech and EuroBiz, I help our students who receive a BS in engineering or b or business and a BA in German studies, so two degrees, to become a potential member of Connecticut's international workforce right out of college. Our graduates emerge with technical mastery, international experience, bilingual communication skills, and cultural fluency, making them uniquely competitive in a global workforce hungry for exactly this type of talent. EuroTeq and EuroBiz are embedded in a strong network of multiple units that support our students' careers from the very first semester. They include the German Consulate General in Boston, also already mentioned, the German American Chamber of Commerce, very strongly represented in New York and privately in Boston, the German embassy in Washington, DC, the German programs in our school, and to top the number of Senator Maroney, the 150 German companies in Connecticut, a list of which I'm happy to share together with an interactive map we're currently building. They welcome our students as interns already long before they graduate. Alums from both dual degrees are now in leadership positions at major international companies, such as MTU, BMW, ABM Paapst, TRUMPF, STOBER, or SAP. And they continue to contribute as mentors to new generations of students. The establishment of a Connecticut Germany Trade Commission will not only promote and boost trade between Connecticut and Germany, it will also send a signal that Connecticut remains a trusted and globally engaged partner even in times of uncertainty. For these reasons, and seconding Senator Maroney, I hope you will support SB 132, an act establishing the Connecticut Germany Trade Commission. I thank you very much for your time.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Thank you very much for your testimony. I think it goes without saying that Germany has provided United States, a incredible workforce over the history of The United States. The influence of Germany, in the eighteen hundreds and whether it be in Texas or Milwaukee or Saint Louis, it's one of the largest population groups in the country. And now with its noted leadership role in core Europe, I think it's important for us to reach out for what they have developed and continue to develop in the way of industrialization and machining and their center in development in core Europe. So I think anything we can do to increase the relationship, I highly would support. Are there any when we think about the trade commission itself, do you have given your background as a professor of German studies, do you have, you said Ramon gave us a fairly robust list. Do you think that that was, in general, comprehensive? Were there any recommendations of other groups we might wanna consider including?

[Prof. Anke Finger (University of Connecticut)]: I would think we would start with, bringing, German companies to the table. I've already had a meeting with Jan Sutherland. I've talked extensively with, a general counsel, doctor Kaibich. We fortunately had a meeting hosted by Henkel, last March, where we invited a whole host of German companies from the area. And, one model we can look at, and maybe Senator Maroney and I can get together to discuss that, is, the Alabama Germany model, for example. They have a very robust relationship, that's connected to Atlanta and the Ministry of Economics in Baden Wurttemberg. So there are numerous models, and we would hopefully want to figure out what's best for Connecticut given its strong representation of the German economy and its connection over thirty years of, strong relationships in higher education and in business.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Well, thank you very much for your testimony. Are there any questions from the committee? Here, none, one, I, my co chair is telling me those are very good recommendations, so I'm taking notes. Sometimes I get coached, so I appreciate that. I I think that concludes our online presentation.

[Prof. Anke Finger (University of Connecticut)]: Thank you very much.

[Rep. Stephen Meskers (House Chair, Commerce Committee)]: Do you have any other speakers who had signed up to speak who are here? Is there any other business before the committee or anyone want to bring anything up to us? Hearing no other a call for the German of the meeting. Seconded. We are.