Commerce Committee

JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT

Bill No.:

HB-6290

Title:

AN ACT CONCERNING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS FOR CERTAIN AEROSPACE AND DEFENSE PLANTS.

Vote Date:

2/24/2011

Vote Action:

Joint Favorable

PH Date:

2/15/2011

File No.:

SPONSORS OF BILL:

Commerce Committee

REASONS FOR BILL:

The bill makes technical changes to the 2010 act extending economic assistance to municipalities hurt by major aerospace or defense plant closings affecting 800 or more employees.

PA 10-162 extended targeted-area economic development benefits to other communities hurt by major aerospace or defense plant closings. The benefits include the enterprise zone property tax abatements and corporation business tax credits.

RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:

None

NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:

Representative Mary G. Fritz, Ninetieth Assembly District

Rep. Fritz testified in support of the bill stating “Last year legislation was passed in both houses as an amendment which addressed the closing of the Pratt and Whitney plants in Cheshire. The amendment followed the language of a prior bill which created a defense plant zone for Stratford because of Sikorsky.” Rep. Fritz added “Unfortunately, we forgot to remove the year 1998 from the amendment which was the year of the Stratford problem. This proposal is clearly technical in nature, it removes 1998, and nothing else needs to change.

Gerald L. Sitko, Economic Development Coordinator of the Town of Cheshire

Mr. Sitko testified in support of the bill stating “This bill was in response to a request from the Cheshire Town Council and Economic Development Commission because we were faced with the loss of a major taxpayer, Pratt & Whitney, which is located in a 294,000 square foot building on 50 acres. The issue of having a Defense Zone in Cheshire is important to us since this plant closing will result in a substantial loss of local and regional manufacturing employment and tax revenue.” Mr. Sitko concluded by stating “The Defense Zone will help Cheshire mitigate the effects of losing a major manufacturer. In effect, it would help us to attract new business development in our effort to put the Pratt & Whitney facility back to productive use.”

NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:

None

Reported by: George Harlamon

Date: February 28, 2011