State Grant Helps Glastonbury Company Relocate to Hartford’s Colt Complex

by Categorized: Uncategorized Date:

A state economic development grant that helped Glastonbury transportation compliance company relocate to the Colt complex in Hartford will be announced later today by the governor.

The South Armory of Colt complex in Hartford. (Kenneth R. Gosselin /

A source familiar with the announcement told me this morning that the grant will pay for a portion of the $2 million needed to prepare 17,000 square feet in the South Armory and parking for Foley Carrier Services.

The company relocated from Glastonbury to Colt last week, bringing about 110 employees to the city and has plans for more hiring, the source said.

The size of the grant from the state Department of Economic and Community Development couldn’t immediately be determined, but the source estimated that it may be as much as 25 percent.

A spokesman for Gov. Dannel P. Malloy declined to comment.

Foley was acquired by Andover, Mass.-based BirdDog Co, in 2010 and advises shippers and other product carriers on how to meet federal transportation guidelines on safety and other regulations. Foley also provides drug and alcohol testing

At the time of the acquisition, Foley had about 17,000 customers nationwide.

For more photos of the Colt Complex:

The Buildings Of Colt Gateway

Colt Armory Complex Through The Years

An Artistic Look At The Colt Armory Complex



The Courant is using Facebook comments on stories. To comment on articles, sign into Facebook and enter your comment in the field below. Comments will appear in your Facebook News Feed unless you choose otherwise. To report spam or abuse, click the X next to the comment. For guidelines on commenting, click here.

17 thoughts on “State Grant Helps Glastonbury Company Relocate to Hartford’s Colt Complex

  1. Follow Me?

    1. Republican Hartford, capital of Republican Connecticut, becomes growing, vibrant city in the 19th and 20th Centuries and draws innovators from around the globe.

    2. Democrats take over in both Hartford and Connecticut.

    3. Democratic Hartford raises taxes, raises spending, loses edge, and loses business and innovators which leave for low-tax, low-spending environments… like Republican Glastonbury.

    4. Democratic Connecticut decides, we must help Democratic Hartford, and offers large sums of money to move businesses from Republican Glastonbury to Democratic Hartford.

    5. Taxpayers in Republican Glastonbury (and other Republican towns around the state) pick up said tab for said large sums.

    Follow me?

  2. Gerrymander

    Insofar as Glastonbury residents voted for Democratic candidates Obama/Biden, Chris Murphy, Joe Courtney, John Larson, Steve Cassano and Joe Diminico over their Republican opponents (source: Town of Glastonbury website,, I do not follow your claim that Glastonbury is a Republican town.

  3. Follow Me?

    Oh, I don’t know, maybe the maximum Republican majorities on the Town Council, Board of Education, etc.? Or the election of Prasad Srinivasan to the General Assembly (source: common sense)?

    Isn’t it funny that a town with Republican majorities on the Town Council and school board has a well-run town and top-notch schools?

  4. Gerrymander

    West Hartford’s Town Council has members from both parties but a Democratic majority, and the town’s schools are also top notch. Anticipating that you will point to the town’s property taxes, I will see you the mill rate, and raise you a much more vibrant town center. Plus, West Hartford Center’s retail and office occupancy rates and property values are the highest in the metro area.

    1. mike

      Top notch West Hartford Schools? Don’t drink the kool aid and simply repeat what you hear. What do we get for the average $10k property tax bill? A few good restaurants that you can’t ever make a reservation at? Leaf pick up? No, took that away but taxes went up….

  5. admiralbrown

    I am unable to follow the logic here. The state is giving a grant to a private company to move from one town to another. The state is in a budget crisis and yet there is money to pay moving costs and do site work for a private company. And the company moving is owned by an out of state company, at least the state of Connecticut isn’t helping to move the company out of state.

    1. HermanfromHartford

      They will probably just sublease space when work is done to other ccompanies, could be a real estate play here or some other kickback.

  6. Gerrymander

    The common theme here really seems to be the wealth of town residents. Both West Hartford and Glastonbury have their fair share of wealthy residents, and much of the variation in school quality within these towns is itself related to variation in home prices. All else being equal, West Hartford residents pay more to live in school districts that have elementary schools with higher average CMT scores. So, while West Hartford has a good and well-earned public school reputation in general, its northern (read: wealthier) residents send their kids to schools with higher scores than their southern neighbors.

    Rather than patting themselves on the back for living in a town with a given political affiliation, those who are happy with their schools should realize they owe much of their satisfaction to being able to buy into a city/town (or more specifically, a school district) with high test scores. But then again, that reality must be the ideal for a Republican like “Follow me,” to whom the notion of buying education like it’s a commodity is likely very attractive.

  7. Joe

    Can someone explain to me why the State would pay to relocate a firm from Glastonbury to Hartford? What a waste of money!

  8. Follow Me?

    Gerrymander, you fail to realize that Hartford’s failings are of its own choosing.

    This company is only moving to Hartford because the State has made it cheaper to do so. If jobs move to Hartford when business costs drop, shouldn’t Hartford continue to cut business costs?

    This isn’t hard to figure out. Glastonbury, and the rest of Connecticut, are paying to subsidize Hartford’s colossal failures. Why can’t the 168 other towns complain about this?

  9. DR

    You know Hartford is a bad place to have a business and a less than desirable place to do business when the state has to PAY nearby companies just to move there.

    Why don’t focus on making Hartford and CT a more desirable place to do business, rather than paying companies to move 10 miles?

    Plus, I feel bad for the workers. One day they are working in nice, safe and enjoyable Glastonbury and now they will have to commute into a dirty city, surrounded by ghetto.

  10. mike

    Ignorrance abounds as usual on here. I dont know why I bother… but The cost of doing business in Hartford is elevated due to an archaic tax law created by the legislature many years ago. This law lowers the valuations of properties, supposedly as a benefit to the capitolcause the state uses many services and the infrastructure. It however has backfired because the state stopped subsidizing the city at a porportionate level, so the city had to make up the difference over the years. this is why Hartford mil rates are nearly double those of surrounding towns (property taxes paid are actually fairly low) but the mil rate bing super high means a business owning a vehicle, or office equipment gets hammered by that milrate. this has driven cost up. Also, glastonbury would be nothing without the industry and business of Hartfrd. Taking that a step further, We concentrate our necessary but unpleasent services in Hartford so that Glastonbury can be “nicer” think about shelters, jails, sewage treatment etc… so lets not worry about the state making this happen. after all, the company sought out assistance from the state… they wanted to move from Glastonbury to the Colt building. The Colt building that is part of the amazing legacy of Hartfords industrial past. The colt building that is working its way towards becoming a national park, and also economic vibrancy. this is one of several companies renting there to go along with many apartments, and a considerable private investment to go with the public support.

Comments are closed.