To: Professor Fitzpatrick

From: Justin Siewierski

Date: 12/18/20
RE: Research and Recommendations for the Connecticut Department of Transportation

The Connecticut Department of Transportation has not received the funding needed to function
properly, resulting in poor infrastructure reports over the last 10 years. As one of the worst
infrastructure systems in the country, Connecticut has done its best to maintain and preserve its
transportation system. Several projects have been successful in relation to the DOT’s goals and
standards, but from an organizational standpoint, more could be done to promote its success.
After extensive research, I believe that the Connecticut Department of Transportation has done
an adequate job operating with a tight budget, but major improvements must be done to solve its
infrastructure problems.
Executive Summary
The Department of Transportation is structured to preserve, manage, and develop the state of
Connecticut’s transportation system. Its eight performance goals are to provide safe and secure
travel, reduce congestion and maximize throughput, preserve and maintain our transportation
infrastructure, provide mobility choice, connectivity and accessibility, improve efficiency and
reliability, preserve and protect the environment, support economic growth, and to strive for
organizational excellence (DOT). Above all else, the provision of safe and secure travel is the
DOT’s number one priority.
The Connecticut Department of Transportation relies on a handful of stakeholders to ensure that
its goals are met. State representatives and policymakers are its number one primary stakeholder.
To ensure that that funding is granted, projects are passed, and legislative support is granted, the
DOT relies heavily on the state’s government. Specifically, the state’s governor holds significant
weight, as his or her administration has the ability to allow or deny significant projects from
taking form.
Additionally, the state relies heavily upon its townships and cities. Town boards are often useful
tools in state government performance. Town selectmen are also pivotal when implementing new
state-backed projects. For example, during the CTFastrak project un the early 2000’s, the
Department of Transportation needed several cities’ commitment in order for the project to run
efficiently. As its original plan was to include the Newington, the town board voted not to be a
part of the project. Instead, CTFastrak got full support from neighboring New Britain, and was
able to be completed.
Individual citizens of Connecticut are also classified as stakeholders, but they would be listed as
secondary stakeholders. This is primarily because despite support or skepticism shown toward
CTDOT projects, citizens of the state cannot determine the status of a proposal as quickly as a
town board or state policymakers. Their views on particular issues, however, are important
enough for them to be categorized as stakeholders.

Figure 1

Figure 1 shows the Connecticut Department of Transportation organizational structure. This

structure is more of a matrix design, where project-based members of the DOT are categorized
into different pools. However, it also resembles a more hybrid approach; for example, legal
services are pooled separately, and the agency legal director reports directly to the Deputy
Commissioner of Transportation instead of the Commissioner of Transportation. The vastness of
the Department of Transportation requires a high level of unique requirements and “checks and
balances,” resulting in multiple organizational structure types.

Assessment
The Connecticut Department of Transportation allows the general public to view and interpret
each one of its current projects on its website. Overall, it allows anyone access to what projects
have been granted permission to begin, ongoing projects, and projects nearing completion.
Additionally, the agency is completely transparent about its current budget numbers, the number
of dollars being used for various projects, and its yearly expenditure numbers for infrastructure
repair and equipment upkeep. Although these projects are public knowledge, the DOT website
does not give any indications to the timeline of these projects, or the status in which various
projects are at.
A positive example of this can be seen during the progress announcements given on the I-91
Charter Oak Bridge Projects. The I-91 Charter Oak Bridge Project, which grants access to route
5/15 access to 91 southbound will be open a year ahead of schedule. In June of 2019, the project
was not passed, but the DOT broke ground, with completion set for June of 2021 (DOT/I-91).
However, not all projects have been successful, nor have they been completed efficiently. The
project on Route 9 in Middletown, which called for the removal of traffic lights and an ease-of-
access offramp onto Main Street, was originally set to begin in 2016. Ground break on the
project didn’t begin until October of this year and is not set for completion until early spring.
Safe and secure travel cannot be confirmed without an efficient transportation infrastructure. In
2017, Connecticut’s transportation system ranked 37th in the country, earning a D+ in the
American Society of Civil Engineers annual report card (U.S. News). Additionally, 42% of
businesses and industry associations indicated that high traffic volumes and congestions on roads
hamper or limit the growth of their markets, and approximately 15% have considered relocating
due to these concerns (ASCE).
However, recent initiatives from the DOT within its organizational structure have helped
revitalize its infrastructure. The Bureau of Transportation implemented its Transportation Asset
Management Group in 2019, with the goal of every subcategory of infrastructure to meet federal
mandates. The American Society of Civil Engineers gave Connecticut’s roadway system a D+ in
its report card, reporting that over 10% of major roads are overpopulated and in need of
restructuring (ASCE). However, in the last two years, the DOT has reported the maintenance and
improvement on over 300 lane-miles, moving 75% of its major highway conditions from ‘fair’ to
‘good’ (DOT).
Two other goals for the Department of Transportation are to provide mobility choice and reduce
congestion. One of its biggest incentives in the last 15 years was the CTFastrak project, which
did more harm to the DOT than it did good. Not only has the DOT lost money each year from
the project, but it also had to go through a complete rebranding process before the initial launch
in March of 2015. CTFastrak was intended to reduce congestion along I-84, but it was
concluded that the project didn’t affect the traffic numbers during peak hours (Hartford Courant).
The project did provide an alternate mobility choice, and although that was not its primary
intention, allowed for Connecticut citizens to seek an alternate route of transportation.
Recommendations
Many projects that the Department of Transportation have passed have taken longer than
expected. Many cases, like the Route-9 Middletown expansion project, have been delayed due to
insufficient funding. However, projects like the I-95 Charter Oak Bridge were completed early
with no clear explanation. The DOT has done an adequate job in the past two years fixing its
primary infrastructure problems, such as multi-lane highways, but there seems to be little
direction determining what projects are deemed most important. This agency needs to have a
more clear and concise path to the timeline of their projects, and the best way to do this is to
make sure each project is financially ready before groundwork can begin. The two
recommendations I have for the Department of Transportation is to create a third Deputy
Commissioner position primarily in charge of the agency’s finance team, and to focus funding on
modernizing its infrastructure. This will allow the DOT to overhaul its current infrastructure and
preserve the state’s businesses and industry associations while being able to financially support
each project they start.
1. Creating a Third Deputy Commissioner Position
The current organizational chart shows two Deputy Commissioners reporting to the
Commissioner of Transportation. Garrett Eucalitto is currently the Deputy Commissioner of
Transportation, and oversees the bureaus of finance & administration, public transportation,
policy & planning, legal services, and human resources. I recommend that if the agency’s biggest
challenge is allocating funds to the proper projects to ensure that all goals are met, a third Deputy
Commissioner should oversee the Bureau of Finance. This would relieve Eucalitto of this bureau
and will require these two D.C.s to work together to ensure finances, planning, and legal services
are still working together.
Additionally, this third Deputy Commissioner could oversee additional services from the
agency’s other D.C., Mark Rolfe. Rolfe oversees the bureaus of highway operation and
engineering & construction, as well as information technologies and labor relations. The new
position could also oversee labor relations, giving Rolfe one less area to oversee.
2. Focus Funding on Infrastructure
Allowing for a more prominent focus on infrastructure will need an organizational adjustment,
and I do not believe this can be done quickly unless a third D.C. is implemented. However, if
step one is not applied, the best alternative will be to add two positions; one new position in
capital services, and one in budget. With a current yearly budget of 7.4 billion dollars, adding a
new position to each team will allow for project allocation dollars to get approved at a faster rate.
Once policy & planning and legal services approve, projects like Route-9 Middletown are being
stalled due to inefficient funding.
Adding two more positions will also make determining which project is more important easier.
As Middletown has suspected construction to begin for the past three years, East Hartford was
getting its exit expansion on the Charter Oak Bridge quicker than expected. The growth of the
DOT organizational chart will allow for project timeliness to be more accurate, and will help
solidify issues within the bureau of finance & administration.
 Works Cited

Connecticut Department of Transportation. “91 Charter Oak Bridge.” I-91 Charter Oak Bridge
Project, Connecticut Department of Transportation, 2019, www.i-
91charteroakbridge.com/en/announcements/87-what-s-happening-now.

Connecticut Department of Transportation. “Connecticut Department of Transportation.”

CT.gov, Connecticut Department of Transportation, portal.ct.gov/dot.

Connecticut Department of Transportation. “Performance Measures.” CT.gov, CTDOT, 2020,

portal.ct.gov/DOT/Performance-Measures/Performance-Measures.

Kauffman, Matthew, and Don Stacom. “To State, Busway Goal Of Easing Rush-Hour Traffic
Not So Critical Now.” Courant.com, Hartford Courant, 12 Dec. 2018,
www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-busway-congestion-numbers-20150913-
story.html.

U.S. News & World Report. “These U.S. States Have the Best Infrastructure.” U.S. News &
World Report, U.S. News & World Report, 2018,
www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/infrastructure.