East Hartford mayor and counsel press case for Port East Side infrastructure district; lawmakers ask about public control and tax sharing

East Hartford’s mayor and project legal counsel testified in support of House Bill 7153, which would authorize creation of a Port East Side Infrastructure Improvement District to finance public infrastructure tied to a planned riverfront redevelopment.

Mayor Connor Martin described the Port East Side as a large multiuse riverfront transformation — housing (he cited 1,000 units in developer projections), commercial and entertainment space, a six‑acre greenway and public access improvements — that the town says will bring incremental property tax revenue and enable infrastructure such as roads, utilities, bridges, parking and green space. Under the bill’s structure the district would issue bonds backed by a share of incremental tax revenues generated in the district and would be governed by a board with property‑owner and municipal representation; any tax‑sharing agreement would then be approved by the town council.

Project counsel told the committee the district model is similar to existing infrastructure improvement districts used elsewhere in Connecticut and nationwide: the TIF‑style approach allows private development to fund public infrastructure without raising townwide taxes. Counsel said the developer and property owners within the district would vote to create it after legislative authorization, negotiate a tax‑sharing agreement with the town and carry out bonds and public contracts consistent with state and local law.

Committee members asked about coordination with Riverfront Recapture and adjacent parkland, ownership and long‑term maintenance of new infrastructure (the mayor said maintenance and ownership decisions will be decided publicly through town council processes), and how the district’s governance interacts with municipal control. Witnesses said Riverfront Recapture remains a stakeholder and that the district’s greenway would sit atop the existing levy in places to restore public access to the riverfront.

Lawmakers also asked about who benefits from incremental tax revenue and whether bond issuance and tax‑sharing split would leave the town with sufficient revenue; counsel said the district creates incremental revenue that would not otherwise exist, and any tax‑sharing formula must be approved locally. The bill drew supportive testimony from economic development and public‑finance counsel, who cited comparable Connecticut districts that used tax‑increment bonds to fund major revitalizations; several committee members asked for further detail on projected tax‑sharing and long‑term maintenance commitments before acting.