It was a little over a year ago that Gov. Ned Lamont, meeting with The Day's Editorial Board, let slip the shocking news that the cost of renovations of New London's State Pier, originally estimated at $93 million before soaring to $157 million, was already past the $200 million mark and climbing.

The governor dropped this bombshell at the same time he was telling New London to stop its opposition to permits for the project, even without cutting the city in on his deal, which had no new host community payments for the tax-free, state-controlled property.

Lamont and his pals at utilities Eversource/Ørsted, for whom Lamont is building the pier, assuming every cent in cost overruns, finally did give New London a host community deal, on the eve of hearings in which New London was going to object and gum up the works.

Lamont knew last year, even before the board of the Connecticut Port Authority did, that the costs were skyrocketing over $200 million. It took a few more weeks before the official, new estimate, $235 million, was released, and that was pledged as a final — promise, promise, no more overruns — number.

But there are clear suggestions that costs are going to go a lot higher, and while an agenda had not been posted by Friday afternoon, it appears a special meeting of the port authority Tuesday might at least include some discussion of what the number — a guaranteed maximum price, in the jargon — is now floating up to.

Of course Gov. Lamont — who runs the port authority as his own giant subsidy gifting machine for friends at the rich utilities — must know exactly what the price is now soaring to, just as he did a year ago, before the new number was officially announced.

After all, the governor personally owns all these staggering overruns.

At the time the deal was announced in 2020, then with a price tag that the governor promised wasn't going to go beyond the latest estimate of $157 million, the project was being run by now former deputy budget chief Kosta Diamantis.

It was the governor's great confidence in Diamantis that gave him faith the estimates would not exceed the promised $157 million, he said at the announcement.

Two years later, the price is very likely roaring past the last official estimate of $235 million, which the governor and everyone else said when it was made was the last, final, highest possible cost.

And of course Diamantis, who the governor promised was going to bring the project in at cost, has retired amid Lamont administration scandals and is the subject of a federal criminal investigation into Connecticut school building and the insanely expensive pier project.

Oops. Looks like Gov. Lamont placed his no-more-overruns bet on the wrong guy, bad judgment that is going to cost generations of Connecticut taxpayers many tens of millions of borrowed dollars.

It's important to note here that the port authority has become a sham agency that is now just run as a subsidy-granting machine by the governor.

Five seats on the board have remained vacant, some through much of the port authority scandals, not filled by the governor or his protectors, Democratic legislative leaders. Five board members, apparently safe votes, have served beyond the end of their terms, not replaced with new appointees.

Eight other board members are ex-officio members, four of them state employees in the Lamont Administration.

It would be almost comical if it were not so troubling that John Johnson, a board member who has now served some nine months past his term expiration, continues to participate in meetings about the pier project, even though the Connecticut Office of State Ethics has found he shouldn't routinely vote on the matter since he has a personal financial conflict of interest.

That's just another ethical lapse for the governor to shrug off. After all, this is an agency that has consistently rewarded friends, family members and insiders. Why stop now?

The state is run by members of his party, who don't object.

I agree with port authority critic Kevin Blacker, who believes, and writes often in email blasts to state lawmakers, who don't seem to care, that the public won't be told exactly how obscene the final pier price will be until the rush to fill in the 7 acres between the two existing piers is done.

When that's finished, it would be harder to turn back.

Indeed, with a price discussion possibly on the agenda for Tuesday, it looks like the filling of the waters of the harbor between the existing piers is almost done.

Port Authority Chairman David Kooris, suggesting in a February board meeting that there would likely be disclosures of the new price in March, hinted at continuing cost spirals.

One reason Kooris gave for rising costs was delays caused by challenges to the environmental permits. But that is a poor excuse, considering that the permits were likely to be challenged back when Kooris and the port authority insisted $235 million was the absolute final cost, with ample contingencies built in.

Tune in to Tuesday's meeting to hear Kooris explain the newest cost estimates, or, as I may hear it, how the dog ate his homework.

Better yet, if you see the governor before then, ask him how much it is all costing. I'm sure he knows exactly.

Ask him, too, why the state is borrowing all this money for rich utilities that don't need it.

This is the opinion of David Collins.

d.collins@theday.com