AI-generated transcript of Medford Housing Authority 10-20-22

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Meeting is called to order at 4.31 PM. Roll call, please.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Commissioner Genvilla.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Here.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Commissioner Foley.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Here.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Commissioner Holin. Here. Commissioner Lister. Here. Commissioner Luongo. Here. Thank you.

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands,

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Approval of meetings are held on September 21st, 2022.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Madam Chair, if I may, before we begin the meeting, the business aspect of the meeting, could we have a moment of silence for Steve Dattaro?

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Thank you.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Thank you.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Okay again approval of minutes item A regular meetings held on September 21st 2022. I'll make a motion. All in favor, please? Aye. Thank you. Item B, executive session held on September 21st, 2022.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Questions on move approval? Second.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: All in favor? Aye. Thank you. All right. We move to financial.

[MCM00001419_SPEAKER_00]: You have the agency-wide operating statements in your packet. Basically what they show is the first 11 months of our fiscal year, or actually 11 months into our fiscal year, we would be adding $2.8 billion to our reserves. So the agency's running on the expectations that we laid out when we developed this budget last year. So if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Madam Chairman, if I may?

[Unidentified]: Yeah.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Michael, what is that, $12 million in reserve? Yes, close to $13 million. Thank you.

[MCM00001419_SPEAKER_00]: You're welcome. Do you need a motion to approve these? Yes. Do we normally? Yes. I'll make that motion.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Can I get a second, please? I'll second. Thank you. And now we move to the budget.

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: Can we ask all in favor?

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: All in favor, I'm sorry. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Sorry. Hi, Teresa. Hello, how are you? Good, thank you.

[SPEAKER_00]: So are we all ready to jump into the budget? Yes, we are.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Madam Chair, if I may again, on page 17, That has to do with salaries of everybody. Did we just approve that? No, I think that's what Teresa is going to talk about.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: That's what Teresa is going to talk about.

[MCM00001419_SPEAKER_00]: Okay, alright, thank you. So the first item is the Watlin Court State Budget. Theresa may want to elaborate on that.

[SPEAKER_00]: If it's okay, I think I'm just going to kind of give you an overview of the budget and we'll talk and then we can talk about maybe the different programs as we go through. Is that okay? Yeah. Can you hear? Is it all right if I like bring it here? Yeah, come closer.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Can everybody move a little closer because I'm deaf.

[SPEAKER_00]: Okay, I'm going to come a little closer and I'll speak louder. Okay, well hello everyone. How are you? Good, good. So, as you heard our financial situation as we're entering into our new fiscal year. of 2023. We're going in a little bit unusual. We ha we had to do some adjustments to it by you know we've got like this building as its own project now as you might have seen on the agency wide budget and so we had to kind of go through that whole process of looking at you know the costs we worked with Cambridge and that as to what we thought might be happening with this building and removing those from our regular AMP one that we have and so in putting the budget together those were just some things that we have to consider. You know, from a funding perspective, our new year looks pretty good for our projects. The federal program, the AMPS, that are excluding this particular project, we're looking at, over the last couple days, we've had some interesting information. Part of the federal program, the thing we're most concerned is what's going to happen to our subsidy. And we get inflation factors, increases in our spending per unit amounts that are public housing is funded. And so there's two components. There's one that is a per unit amount for everything but utilities and then we get our utilities. And so we just found out that the inflation factor that is going to be applied to our utilities is over 20 percent. A 20 percent inflation factor on our utilities. So we were curious. We weren't sure because lots of times on the federal there When they're doing funding, they're usually running 18 months behind, a year to 18 months behind. We were actually quite thrilled to hear that they were going to be doing that to the funding. The only issue that we have is that they then prefaced it by, oh, but by the way, We're gonna give you this 20% inflation factor, but the proration, like how much of the actual pot of money, might not be 100%, okay? It's not usually, it's usually around the high 90s. This year it's gonna be, we're expecting it to be about 104%, which is ending 22, okay, December 22. But then they said, okay, we're going to do this inflation factor on your utilities and everything, but they may fund us at 95 percent or 90 percent. We don't have any idea about that. I built our budget on 98, because at the time that You know, and it could be that good, you know, it just, it varies. So we'll see, you know, and if it's really, we find something to be very different from what the budget is, we'll come back to the board with a revision and looking at that sort of thing. So that's on our federal public housing. Then the new, the Salt and Stall LSC, that program, you know, we're seeing a large increase in revenue because this program is going to be project-based vouchers. And we're looking at project-based vouchers at over $2,000 a month. rent that we're going to get either from people or we're going to get from Section 8, okay? So that's a very significant increase. It's probably almost three-fold of the regular, you know, revenue that we were getting before. So you're going to see a very large increase in that particular line item. Then on the Section 8 program, what we're looking at there, you know, Section 8 is going well. From both the funding perspective from HUD and our leasing, our admin fees this year were funded at about 90% and we've been at like 80, you know, 84% for the last couple years. So that's positive. Also the landlord money, it's another budget, has been funded well this year by the government. So hopefully We're going to see increased funding in that, and we did get seven new vouchers this year. So that part, and then of course we're going to have the new project-based vouchers here as well. So we earn, just so you know, vouchers are here, so that's additional vouchers on our housing choice voucher program. the two hundred vouchers we're going to get for this building that also represents two hundred units of admin fee on the section eight program so it's kind of a it's a win for us. Teresa can you just speak to the amount of increase that would be just for that for the just roughly oh I don't know if I can tell you exactly well just roughly roughly it's probably if you take two hundred well if you do it by how much would we get

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: for administering one voucher.

[SPEAKER_00]: For one voucher, we're going to get, based on a 90% proration, we're going to get about $98 a unit. $98 a unit per month. Per month.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Per month. So let's say $100. Times 12. Times 12. So it's $1,200 times $200. Yes, that's right.

[SPEAKER_00]: Well, $211 because we're more.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Well, 222 is actually what it's going to be.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yes, exactly. But we're only expecting this year to have about 140 because we've got some under, so we won't be fully utilizing our project-based vouchers all this year. But the budget's built in at $140,000 as being the average that we would have, you know, that we'll be earning fees on. I think it's something like $300,000 and some thousand of additional dollars. I have it on another form. And so that's... 266,000 probably.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: Is that what... 222 units times 1,200? Is that what it is?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yes, but that's per month. Yes, per month that we earn. I've got to calculate 140 units

[SPEAKER_00]: x $100 x 12 is what we're looking at. Actually x 9 because we don't become project based until January. So it's kind of, you know, I worked it out. But that's, you know, that's what we're looking at.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: And that's in addition to the increased rent that we would be collecting otherwise.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yeah, then on this particular building itself, then we get that whole rental income of the Section 8 voucher.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Which roughly, in estimation, initially was approximately $1,000 more per unit per month.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yeah, and it's actually even more than that now. So then what we were getting under the regular subsidy thing, our regular subsidy. You know, looking at this building when we get it all done in the next couple of years and everything, you know, it's going to be, you know, the program, the building's going to have. you know, it'll be able to operate well. It will have good money to operate and, you know, it's going to be funded well. So I think we should be in a good place. So our key, you know, it'll be, we want to hang on to it as authority, you know, so we manage it and can utilize those dollars for the property and, you know, overall. So it's going to, it's, you know, Hopefully everything goes as planned and everything is going to be a very good win-win for the Housing Authority when it comes to that. So on the Section 8 program, the big key thing is not only the additional 140 this year, but it'll end up being 200 vouchers, but also that the fact that our admin fees are being funded at a higher proration. And we expect to see that again next year. So that's all good. So it's all very good. That's kind of our federal properties. Then on the state side of things, our waffling court, where we got from DHCD, we got a 9% cap increase. That's non-utility cap that we have. And so we saw a 9% increase on that, which for us, Sorry, one second. That represents an additional 60, almost $62,000 in our state budget, okay, of new money that we have available, you know, to cover the rising costs of everything, not only everything with maintenance and everything. And then under the state, one of the things we were fortunate is that our utilities are dollar for dollar paid. So if they go up 20%, they get paid. So on the federal, they have a maximum that they're going to fund. But seeing that inflation factor that they said they're going to give us on the federal, hopefully I know they say 40%, 60% increases in utilities, but we got to hope that it doesn't. That just seems almost unconscionable, but let's hope it doesn't go there. So the state, we're looking at a 9% cap, and then as I mentioned before, They also are dollar-for-dollar funding of your utilities. So that's the state. Our other two smaller state programs are 689 and our MRVP. I mean, those stay fairly consistent. We do have an increase in our 689 rent that we get each year, and then the MRVP program is just kind of stable. We have 15, and we have approximately 10 leased up, so I prepared the budget conservatively at 10 units. Our central office, We that's being funded, you know, the one thing that with this building, not only do we get a management fee for these units, but then on the section eight side, we, we are able to take up to 20% of the admin fee that we earn. to go into the central office. So those new vouchers with new fees also represents additional money into our central office. So that's all very positive things. So all these things have repercussions that have become, that are all positive as it comes, you know, looking at the Housing Authority and looking at our budget. So from a revenue side of things, that's what we're looking at in our new budget, our 2023. It's all very favorable. We're still, you know, not exactly sure what the funding proration on the feds are going to be and things like that, but let's, you know, keep our fingers crossed that it's nothing too, you know. dramatic. The funding through HUD has continued to go up each year and our capital fund dollars and things so, you know, so far we haven't, they haven't, just like in the state we've been fortunate that both sides of the government, state and federal, have not, are not reducing housing funding at this point. So let's hope we've got another year ahead of us of good. So then when it comes to putting the budget together, we involve everybody, as many directors and that, in the authority to give us their wish lists and talk about staffing and things like that. That's kind of our first step. Jeff, do you want to say something about this? Sure. Because it's pretty much his game plan along with other people about what we did this year.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah, the way that we do this is we start sometime in June. if not a little bit sooner than that in May. And as Theresa said, we have the departments indicate to us from both the personnel point of view and from extraordinary maintenance and replacement of equipment as far as what it is that we're going to do. The lion's share of that on the personnel side deals with both maintenance and administration as far as what they think is necessary. The lion's share as far as the equipment and the work to be done is both maintenance and modernization. And so even though the modernization is not included in this, there is some work that we would do within the context of the budget for items that wouldn't necessarily be of a large dollar value in comparison to the capital budget that we have. And over the years, Steve Dattaro has been very, very active in this area. This year, for example, there was a request for a number of vehicles in the budget, so we've included that. It's a balance. It's a balance. We may not have gotten two vehicles, we may have gotten one vehicle and a Ventrax snow removal equipment, things such as that. The authority does very, very well with its snow removal. Even though we had a request for additional Ventrax, we have more of a priority in maintenance, but more of a priority in replacing two of the three white vans that we have. in the budget, we will have that. We also have specific items that we would be doing at the various sites that we'll be undertaking, where it may be smaller projects that we would undertake, whether it be some paving or repairing of sidewalks and stairs and things such as that. And then there's adequate funding that is placed in there for contract services, in particular painting, cleaning of apartments and things such as that. So when that is put together, what happens is we prioritize that list sometime. Teresa, I'm going to guess that's usually sometime in August. We get that list to Teresa and to Michael. We've already met with Michael as far as maintenance and Gabe, and in particular maintenance and modernization. And then they come up with, they have that wish list. The last few years it's been in the vicinity of $1.4 million in requests. We give that to Teresa usually in a prioritized manner Teresa takes out this big pair of scissors And usually cuts it to about 50% of that so I don't I didn't look to see what the number was this year, but I

[SPEAKER_00]: $871,000. That's about the vicinity that we've been in.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: So what it is is it's a game plan for us moving forward insofar as we look to see what it is. We didn't fund this year and we will fund that. There are times though, there are times in the past where there have been items that were funded in the budget But they weren't procured for whatever reason, availability or- Just time. Just time and not a level of importance. And what I've told maintenance is that, in particular, that if an item is on there two years in a row and it's not procured, it's not going on in the third year. It's not going on because if it wasn't necessary enough or important enough to be purchased in year one and then not in year two, it's not going to make it in year three. So it doesn't even make it to Teresa. But Steve and John have been very judicious in their requests. And they have to justify those requests. As I have to justify them to you, they have to justify them to me. And I can tell you that $1.4 million worth of requests are all justified. It's just a matter of that which is prioritized. And this year, as Teresa alluded to, she painted a very rosy picture of the funds that we're going to have. She's the numbers person. She's more optimistic than I am. I'm not as familiar with the numbers as Teresa is, even though I am aware of them. But as a director, I'm a little bit more cautious in my estimating what it is that we're going forward, and I rely upon our excellent finance advisors between Teresa and Michael. But I still want to see what's going to happen when this building pulls away from the authority and goes online in the way that we're doing so. Therese has highlighted some aspects that are advantageous to us, increased subsidy, increased utility expenses, increased subsidy that we would get. In addition to that, it's the increased number of units by 22 all paint a positive picture. And the one thing that Teresa didn't touch upon is the fact that, yes, financially we may be positioned very well. At the same time, we're going to have a brand new building. We're going to have a brand new building. So the fact that we're positioned financially very well is advantageous to the authority. But the fact that we're going to have a new building is advantageous to the residents who live here.

[SPEAKER_00]: The other piece I wanted you to talk about was the salaries. Organizationally, some of the decisions that we made this year for positions we may have added and things along those lines, because we spend a lot of time working on that and making sure. just one comment you know with this building because it's going to be like a tax credit property and everything it takes a different skill set when it comes to property managers and tenant rent collection you know calculations and all those sort of things so one of the positions we've put in the budget is a new property manager that is got expertise and knowledge on working with a tax credit project like this is.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Thank you, Teresa. I thought you wanted me to address the process.

[SPEAKER_00]: That was fine too.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: All right, so what we've done in the budget as far as position-wise is concerned is that we've held the position's somewhat consistent. You'll see on page 17 that we have the director of resident services. That position's presently vacant because the board had authorized through the hiring of Sandra, who's no longer, Sandra Roniger, who's no longer the consultant to the authority. Sandra has taken over those responsibilities while also maintaining responsibilities partially for the family self-sufficiency program. As you come down this list, you'll see, let's see, the project coordinator is vacant. That individual has since left employment, actually is now working at DHCD. We will be looking to and are looking to fill that, excuse me, Principal Gluck, she has retired, but she does come in and work for us on a part-time basis, two days a week. Going on to the next page, page 18, you'll see that we have the senior housing manager, three managers. And then the property manager position that Teresa just highlighted. The significance there is that we need to bring in someone with a higher skill set to be able to manage low income housing tax credits. The concern there is that we're going to have to be responsive to investors and to the syndicator as far as things such as rent certifications, recertifications, and the management of the property. As we go down, you'll see that Administrative Assistant Resident Services part-time is 18 hours. It's Barbara Fleming. who was the director of resident services. She's helping us with that. We have a vacancy in the line item number 23 there, where Betsy Figueroa has left, and we're looking for an individual in that position. The Ross Grant coordinator is Lisa Tonello. She is no longer working on a full-time basis, but you'll see two lines down. she's going to be working on a part-time basis for us. As we go through the leased housing department, that was an area last year where we had some significant issues insofar as a number of those positions were vacant. And we have relatively new, almost an entirety of new individuals in that area. And the administrative assistant position in leased housing, we did have an individual in that position and she left for other employment. So that we're advertising for that. Overall, what we looked to do was to mirror what we did and to some extent to mirror what we did on the board approved with maintenance of 4.5% increase.

[SPEAKER_00]: For admin? For admin, yes. And then there were a few positions in admin that you know, we're looking to have, you know, quality in some of the lower positions, clerks or things like that, bringing them up a little bit. So a few people got more than the 4.5, but... And that was primarily folks who were getting paid under $50,000. That's right.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: And what we discussed was the emphasis that we wanted to place on these salaries, the lowest salaries to bring them up. So you'll see those folks that were getting paid under $50,000 will have a higher percentage Now, the vacant positions we didn't increase. We kept those at a 3% increase. But otherwise, they ranged anywhere from over 4.5 to sometimes up to around 10%. And it was primarily in the area of, like I said, those lower salaries. And we wanted to try to address that in particular at this point in time. Some of the positions were amended. For example, John Madour, his went up 10%, just over 10%. Well worth it. John, as of Monday, is the new Director of Maintenance. He'll be taking Steve's position. When we advertised for this assistant position, It will be less than what John was making this past year. So that will not be, the new individual would not come in at that same level. There were a few other adjustments that we made based upon, quite frankly, I'll be honest with you, positions that I want to make sure they're competitive with other housing authorities. And what I said to Teresa and to Michael is that there are some folks that we can't afford to lose. And during the pandemic, in particular with the management staff, they felt the need to carry on and to work diligently, oftentimes more. If you come in here at 6 o'clock at night, you'll see a good number of the management folks still here. If you come in at, prior to 7 o'clock in the morning, oftentimes in the 5 o'clock hour, certainly in the 6 o'clock hour, you would see, in the AM, you would see John and Steve here. Just a side note on that, Steve was even working on Sunday, this past Sunday. So they're very, very dedicated. Theresa, is there anything you want to add to that?

[SPEAKER_00]: No, just that, you know, kind of overall, I just wanted to understand, you know, and then looking as this building is coming on and what it is that we think we're going to be needing, and I think that's, you know, just As things are changing, we're continuously looking at positions and things like that that we're going to need. Can I just make two comments?

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Sure. Obviously, I work in the industry, and retaining staff is impossible right now. Hiring staff is very difficult. I'm very supportive of making salaries that are competitive and that will ensure that, you know, this place is not constantly trying to hire and fill positions because people are jumping ship to go to the next town over because they might get 5k more. So if we can afford it, 100%, we should be doing it. And then the other comment I have so I was just wondering if you could speak to so DHCD released their budget guidelines and they say you could do a 5% for salary and I'm just wondering what the flexibility is here because that's such a minor role in our budget and like what other flexibility we may have.

[SPEAKER_00]: And with DHCD it's a 5% line item can go up 5% so we can do different things as we want and you are correct we We don't, you know, it doesn't, it doesn't affect us, it doesn't limit us, let's put it that way, because we did get some other increases and with the central office and everything. So, we just have to make sure that the state budget, that that, the line item between not including, well, the executive director doesn't go there anyways because they go directly to the central office. that we just have to make sure that that line item didn't go up more than 5% on our state budgets, and we do that, and it's very easily done, and we just keep an eye on that. And they don't look at the federal stuff? They don't look at the federal stuff. Now, in fact, sometimes that's an out that they use, saying, well, if you want to do more, just dump it on the federal. We don't have to dump. I don't like doing that. It works out that we're able to do because we do have so few state units that I can charge the appropriate people to the programs and still be the way I'm allocating, the way we allocate the rest of the salaries. It's all legit. We're not dumping, if we use that word, on the federal program or anything like that. So, it actually works out for us. I mean, unfortunately, they're still holding us hostage on the budgets. You know, this will be year six that we will be sitting.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: We're working on that.

[SPEAKER_00]: We're working on it.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: We had a meeting with them on that.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yeah, but they haven't come back with anything.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: We're hopeful.

[SPEAKER_00]: Okay. We're still waiting.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: It doesn't seem to be slowing us down. No, no.

[SPEAKER_00]: We're going to keep going.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: We're just going to keep going. Just so you'll know, though, that the administrative portion of our programs are 90, just under 96% of our budget. So the state's oversight of that is very limited. I think it's like 95.6. And the state, the administrative costs, at least through the years, I looked at it at this budget, is in the vicinity of about 4.4%. And the difficulty that we've had and that the industry has is that the state oftentimes tries to oversee not only the state portion, but the federal portion. And let's throw into that the fact that this building is going to be in an LLC. Is the state going to have an ability to oversee what we do with the LLC? The answer is no. And they have forwarded us or have authorized us with 15 million for walk lane. And I think in part is because not only do they see the good project, but they see the advantage in having MedFit not be there. I'm trying to be diplomatic.

[SPEAKER_00]: And so, you know, salaries are a big part of our budget, so I wanted to make sure, you know, we went over and you could see that part. You know, the rest of the budget we kind of put together. We have our employee benefits. Our retirement this year, I think, went up something like 5%, which is not horrendous. I've seen 14 to 15% increases in some retirement bills. So not too bad, and, you know, We're still, you know, it's always kind of interesting for an authority our size and looking at the number of employees. I mean, we're still at, our payroll as it relates to benefits is like 44 percent, and that's pretty low in this industry. The industry is usually 50 to 55 percent, and so our, you know, we still, retain a pretty decent percentage of our employee benefits as a total of salaries. So, and then, you know, when it comes to maintenance contracts and supplies and things, you know, we're looking at how we're spending this year. We did build in knowing that the cost of everything is going up. So, you know, we worked on building and putting that together. And so, you know, it's just kind of like putting the jigsaw puzzle together and we put all the pieces in. You know, when we got done before non-routine expenses, as you can see on the second page of the budget, it looks like the second page. that before non-routine expenses.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Trisha, is there a page number on the bottom?

[SPEAKER_00]: Well, I don't have the packet. So I think it's going to be like maybe page 16, if your salaries were 17. I'm thinking 16.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Salaries were page 17.

[SPEAKER_00]: Page 18. Page 19. Hold it up again. Page 16. It looks like it. Page 16. I would say it's probably page 16, the second page of the agency-wide budget. You can see, like, Right down at this first bit, before we go into extraordinary maintenance, we're looking at an overall budget surplus of $2.2 million, which is a lot. I mean, 1.4 of that is salt and stalk because this is going, you know, with the increase in the rent. But, you know, all of our other, the Section 8 program is going to be making $300,000. and you know even our state property before non-routine and that is looking at making $64,000. So when we put everything together that we wanted you know we can afford in our operations you know what we're what we're going to do and then from there as Jeff talked about before is then we went in and I think the last page probably I don't know but the last page in your package would be the non-routine expenses After the maintenance labor, I think, there's going to be a list. Extraordinary maintenance, I think. Yep, that's it. And you can see after we went through and dissected apart and prioritized and decided which, you know, to be honest, some of the work orders, some of the things is what can we actually really get to this year with everything else that we've got going on. So you can see the first part of the non-routine. Those are extraordinary maintenance projects that we have going on and all different types of things from tree trimming to asphalt and different exterior gate repairs, just different things that have been identified. We do have one line of $100,000 for unexpected things, so we always like to put a pot of money in there. Yeah, I think is everybody okay with this? Okay. And then you can see we always have stoves and refrigerators and things along those lines. And then the large pieces of equipment is where we're looking for a couple pickup trucks. We're looking at three vans. And then some floor cleaners.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: More than likely those three vans will be brought down to two vans.

[SPEAKER_00]: Will be brought down, okay.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: That's what my anticipation is. And that's an update. That's an update compared to what it was. We spent an awful lot of time going through this, and this is fluid. It's fluid now, even at this point. It's what our best effort is, and we may come back with a budget revision, whether it be for items within this area or whether it be for positions and things such as that. I know Michael and I have talked about this, but Teresa, Michael, and I, along with the staff, we spent a good amount of time, as I said, this is October. We started this in June. In fact, I know maintenance begins collecting thoughts even prior to that.

[SPEAKER_00]: So this is what we came down to after the total wish list, which is agreement between what we can do, what we really need, and so we're looking at a total of, you know, it's not a bad non-routine budget of $871,000, so not bad. And when everything is you know, said and done, you know, so some of the programs, some of the amps, you know, are losing money, but that's okay. We have really good reserves and they can afford to do that, you know, we can afford to actually do the different things that we're doing. A couple things that I want to talk about when we're looking at our reserves, this is the bottom of page 18, no 16, sorry, 16, is that in building Salt and Stalk, we have agreed to obligate or commit like a million eight of the reserves of our AMP-1 reserves to the actual development and redevelopment of this project. So you can see on the first column down here that this AMP1, at the end of this year, we expect to have a little over $5 million, and then we're going to be giving 1.8, which is what we identified as this program's reserves, okay? And it might end up being a little bit more, but we're still going to be in, you know, AMP1 is still going to be fine. And then we're expecting to lose a little money, and we're still going to have $3 million, and I would guarantee it's going to be a little better than that when we get done.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: So... Theresa, if I can just clarify, what's going to happen, this building is no longer going to be an airport.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yeah, it's not. That's right.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: It's going to be separated out. So the remainder of that is basically the share that those other units would otherwise have.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yeah, the $3 million is what's left in AMP 1.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: And we have other sites in AMP 1.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yes, right. We have, yeah. It's the remaining 282 units that are in AMP 1. It used to be 482. So yeah, so that's, you know, it's pulling out this building and then budgeting. And so we've agreed to contribute this $1.8 million to the redevelopment, so out of our reserves. But it's still, you know, we're careful about this. We're still going to be able to, you know, still going to leave our program in our AMP1 for the remaining properties that are here. We're going to still leave us in good shape, you know, and have money to work with. So, you know, that's what we're going to be doing. So, you know, so when everything was said and done, I mean, including Salt and Staldin, it distorts things a little bit because it does make so much money that, you know, we're pretty much, if you took this building out, we're pretty much break-even, if you want to say, and that's including $800,000 worth of non-routine expenses. So, I think, you know, we're We, I think we've really accomplished everything we wanted to and still are going to be in good shape. We got the staffing that we needed. I do think, you know, we will probably come back with a revision just because there's certain things like office space we may have to rent and things like that. We didn't build that in because we honestly are not sure what this is going to cost us. But we're going to be looking at that, you know, that we may be doing that in mid-year that we have to move out. And just as this building continues, when we actually really close and we find out what the total costs are, just looking at that. And then also, we're still getting our hands around what it means for us to become cohort our MTW that we are because it's not completely clear what that all means to us and so we're still working through that because that could have some implications in what we do in the budget and all that too.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: positive implications.

[SPEAKER_00]: Positive, yes.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: We're approaching it conservatively.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yes, exactly. So I just didn't know if anybody had any questions about any overall, you know, the budgets, you know, any particular program, any line item or anything like that that we might have? to my behalf or anything I didn't talk about.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: I have more of a comment than a question, but is 33 positions posted on here? Yes. but there's actually 34 because you have 23 twice.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yeah, I noticed that too. My numbering, we must have added something to my numbering. I'll just, you know, I'll double check that in the schedule and make sure. Nothing gets by you. I saw it too, but I didn't want to call it out until after. And I saw it too when I was looking here. I was like, 23, 23. Yeah, I see that.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: The assistant director who's going to, John Madour? Yes. Now do you have, is there somebody in the pipeline to replace him internally? Not yet, not yet. So that's going to be, you're going to... We're going to advertise that.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: There may be folks who work here who might be interested. There may be people outside who might be interested. So we're going to open that up, just like we did with John. The difficulty with that position is when we created that, Melissa, I think you remember this because I know we discussed it. It took a number of, actually over a year, I think, maybe even closer to two, to hire John. And John came to us with experience at the Boston Housing Authority. In fact, John ran Bromley Heath, which had 880 units of apartments. And he came here, and our whole portfolio for public housing is less than that 880. And he was responsible for the entirety of the maintenance operation there. So we were fortunate.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: Yeah, and I know you said you're not going to post at his pay, but if it's in the budget already, why wouldn't you post at his pay, hoping to get somebody at that level?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: We'll have a range. We'll have a range, and that upward range would be where John would be. But John was exceptional. He'd been here for four years. And like I said earlier, and it proved to be correct, unfortunately, I didn't feel like we could afford to lose John. And so that's why I had increased the salary. I think that we would probably, fall, be able to get a very good candidate for less than that 92. But I have the ability to go that high.

[SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, but at least you have your range.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah, exactly. And the way I look at it is that I'm not necessarily concerned with this amount because Teresa and Michael have have reviewed this, and it does fit within the budget. But if I have someone here who's here for the next four, five, six years, I don't want that salary to increase to the point where it's higher than what would be out in the market, significantly higher than in the market. I want to be competitive, but I don't need to necessarily set the ceiling.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: Okay. Good. That looks good, sir. Thank you.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Is there anyone else that has any comments?

[MCM00001419_SPEAKER_00]: No, no.

[SPEAKER_00]: Mike's done a lot of work on this. Lots of information. He's been fantastic. So just make sure. Nothing I missed that you would want to add?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Not at all. If I can just add one thing, and that is you'll see in the maintenance budget, and this was in the contract on page 21, you'll see that we have the two custodian positions that are budgeted in there. And based upon... Yes, we have two.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yes, we have two custodians. Two custodians. Yes, and yes, two custodians.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: Attending coordinator of labor mechanics. So all four of those spots that say open, are those, they don't have a name on them, so are those all positions you're trying to fill right now?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: The tenant coordinator is a position that we hold for us to have folks assist going in and out of units during the construction. So we have a number of a pool of individuals who fit that. Insofar as the other open position, the 60-40, we're holding that open at the moment.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yeah, we didn't fund it because we needed an extra lead.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yes. Yeah, we have an extra lead. We had an open lead mechanic and Stephen Burkholzer is going to be promoted to a lead mechanic. And Teresa, I know I had discussions with Steve relative to Christopher Makara. also becoming a lead, but he is listed here as a labor mechanic. So that both of those individuals at Steve's recommendation were going to be promoted based upon the approval of the budget. So I'm going to recommend that we come back with a to amend this at some point in time, but with the full knowledge that both of those individuals, based on Steve's recommendation, would be lead mechanics. And what happened there was that the 160-40 will be eliminated and Christopher will go to the, that's what it is, that's why it's open now that I think of it, Paul. Chris will become a lead mechanic, the increase will be relatively small, it'll be about $2 an hour, and that will be eliminating his position.

[SPEAKER_00]: We're going to trade one of our 6040s for a lead mechanic, and it costs us about $6,000 to do that. So that's what we're going to do.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: And again, with the same philosophy going forward is that we felt, both maintenance and myself, we felt that these were two individuals who do an excellent job and we didn't want to, we don't want to end up losing them. We don't get, we don't have any issues with the union because of their seniority. And we took that into consideration also.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Madam Chairman, if I may. Plummer's position is open. Two painting positions vacant. And you've lost a lot of people in the last three or four years, is that right?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: I think comparatively speaking, Michael, as far as the number of employees we have, we've not lost a good number. I don't know what the percentage is.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: You haven't had much of a turnover in the office?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: We have had turnover in certain positions, but overall, I think the I think the staff has been somewhat constant, but there has been turnover, no question about it. The pandemic has hurt us, but we've had a number of folks who've retired. That has occurred. You mentioned the plumber, that position we've been trying to fill. I have an interview tomorrow, now that we can, as the board voted, and approved the new contract, which said now we can look at journeymen, not just masters. And I know I've spoken to some of the commissioners here about that. Like I said, I have an interview tomorrow. It's the first interview I have in a plumber's position in almost two years. Michael left almost three years ago. It'll be three years in January. We haven't been able to fill that. The painting positions that are budgeted there, that are open, We've not filled those since one of our maintenance, excuse me, since our painter left four years ago. We've kept those open. And we've kept them open because we would have to negotiate with the union to take them off. So we keep them in, but we have the opportunity not to fill those if we so desire.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Placeholders.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: It's the same thing with Steve Burkholz's promotion. He is going to a lead mechanic position that's been vacant since I've been here. It's been open, I'll put it that way, not vacant, open.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Once you take a position out, it's really hard to put it back on.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Exactly, exactly. So it doesn't mean that we need to fill it. Yeah, it's not funded right, exactly.

[SPEAKER_00]: And I think we've determined that, to a certain extent, painting, that the contracting has been

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Well, the contract has been doing it.

[SPEAKER_00]: We were able to get painters.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: But also in the last contract, the issue there was that the maintenance staff did not want to do painting. And in the last contract, we negotiated that they would get a dollar and a half more per hour for every hour that they painted. And they do a minimal amount of painting, but what it was previously was they'd only do 24 inches. If they had to patch something, they'd only paint 24 inches. That's what they did before. Now they'll paint the whole wall. So we've made some great strides in that, and as I mentioned to the board previously, when we talked about the union contract, this year's negotiations were the best that I've seen in the last 10 years. In the last 10 years, even to the extent, as I indicated to the board, that they were willing to tack on another year. so that we're not just a year out, we're two years out. But Michael, no, in answer to your question, yeah, we have had some turnover. Last year, I should say this year, during the winter, we had, and it's extraordinary that we were able to get through with it, but we had an occasion where all four of our leased housing coordinators left, left, and they left in large part because of their own health. and they left with having nothing to do with the authority, unfortunately. And we ended up being able to, with the assistance of Jennifer and our Director of Management and the Lease Housing Director, Samara, along with bringing in folks from other housing authorities who worked with us at night at times, we still have Kathy Melpus, who is a previous employee. She came back and helped us out. Linda DiProfio, who used to be the director of leased housing in Somerville, comes in a couple of days a week to assist, even to this point. So the pandemic has been very tough. It's all hands on deck, to be quite frank. And as I said earlier, you come in here at nighttime at six o'clock, seven o'clock, I left at 9.30 the other day. Barbara left early the other night. She left at 7.00. And when she left, there was still staff here. There was still staff. So, you know, I would love not to have to do that, but, you know, we end up having to, like I said, it's all hands on deck. And as Theresa indicated, you know, Michael, what time do you get here in the morning, Michael? 6.30. 6.30 in the morning. 6.30 in the morning, so it's really a dedicated staff.

[SPEAKER_00]: It's better traffic from Bridger. He could have said 5.30, we wouldn't have checked up on him.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: He would have been here tomorrow morning.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: He leaves at 5.30. I have to echo what Teresa is saying is the fact that they do an excellent job of making sure that everything is down to the penny. And what I like to see is that HUD looks at what it is that we submit, knowing full well that these two folks are very experienced. And in Michael's instance, also the same as Teresa, but in Michael's instance, they know him not only from here, but they know him from another authority. They're thought of very highly and we're fortunate to have both of them on our team. And you've heard me say this before, we've got a very strong team and we took a hit. And it's going to take something. You can see my voice breaks. It's going to take something for us to get over that. We will. John is here first thing in the morning. When I say first thing in the morning, he's probably driving in at the same time Michael is, if not earlier. I came in at 6.30 on Monday, and the place was entirely unlocked. All the lights were on. John had already been here by that time, but we'll get the job done. And where we're going right now, I wish, and I meant to do this if I can pull it up on here before we leave. I will read to you at least one of the comments I got. from the architect who was designing this building and the compliments that he paid to Steve just to, you know, was right on about what a valuable asset he was to them when they were designing this. And he ended it by saying that he hoped to be able to carry through Michael's, excuse me, carry through Steve's work and what he put into the design here. So, Steve will live on with us.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I was a little disappointed when I seen the death notice that they didn't put in the employee of the Metropolitan County.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah, we were too, Michael. And I think what happened, having been through this myself recently, is that the person who wrote that up said, well, tell us something about him. and they said, well, he was direct and he was hardworking and he was a great father, but they never, it would have been his wife and someone else. And, you know, when Barbara and I met with her the day after, as I said, and I've talked with her and Michael and I are going to meet with her next week. Legitimately, she was very upset and I would have hoped that the funeral home would have pulled that information out. We're going to be represented At the funeral, a good number of the staff has indicated that they're going to go to the wake. And I'm going to allow anyone at the authority who wants to go to go on Monday to the funeral. And we'll have someone working in the reception area. But short of that, if the rest of the staff wants to go to that, they certainly can and I've encouraged them to do so. The maintenance personnel are going to wash all the red trucks and they're gonna put that in the funeral procession, each one of them. Steve was an excellent worker and he was a good friend. And Michael, I remember you when I was appointed as the ED back in May, May 10th of 2017, I remember it. You were talking so highly of Steve Dattaro during that interview process, and Steve was in the audience afterwards. I don't know if you remember what I did. I didn't go up and I thanked the board collectively. I only shook everyone's hand after I'd gone over to Steve, and I shook Steve's hand and I said, you and I are going to be best friends. And we were. We were.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Is that you?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah, there it is.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I think I mentioned it last time. Can you send me a bouquet of flowers?

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: Yes. I have a very large collection of money. It's up to anybody if they would like to do that, but there is, we'll get flowers, edible oranges, and then whatever's left over, we'll... If anything's left over, will we give that to his wife? We will. We'll come up with a plan of something to do to help her going forward.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Thank you.

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: Thank you.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: I can't tell you how valuable Steve was, seriously. I did reach out to all of you and to probably at least another 12 folks that were in my cell phone that I knew that Steve was close to. We've had, I can't tell you how many times I've been stopped by the residents. Yesterday, I went down to LaPrea before I left. I had a resident call me over as I was exiting, and I came up to the car and expressed the concern. I came back 20 minutes later, and I pulled into my spot, and I couldn't walk across because someone had blocked the roadway. It was another resident telling me what they thought of Steve. And Barbara was kind enough to post this at all the sites. I've gotten emails from the residents relative to their their concern and how much it was that they liked Steve.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I got two or three calls to him over the weekend.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah, I'm sure. I think some of the calls you got, Michael, might have been the same people that were calling me.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: I know the mayor called me and told me that Tuesday night at the city council meeting, this Tuesday coming up, they're going to do a moment of silence thing.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah. One of the residents told me that they had spoken to the mayor and the mayor had indicated that. I was happy to hear that. Yeah. If you bear with me well you can continue on I'm gonna I'm looking for that that email that came in.

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: So do you need to go through each resolution? Individually for the state budgets you need the first three items A, B, and C need a separate vote. Federal votes can be voted on

[SPEAKER_00]: Barbara, do you want Losa to read them out or do we just kind of make a motion to approve?

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: Just for the state ones you should read out separately. Okay.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: And the others it would be a resolution from the first number to the last number.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: All right. Resolution, yeah.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Would you like me to do it? If you don't mind. Resolution number 2021-044, consideration of requests of the executive director to approve the Medford Housing Authority original Wackling Court 400-1 state budget for the fiscal year 10-122 to September 30th, 23, as submitted with this agenda and subsequent submission to the Department of Housing and Community Development for review and approval.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I move approval. Second.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: All in favor?

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Aye.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Resolution number 2021-045 consideration of requests of the executive director to approve the Medford Housing Authority original chapter 689 state budget for the fiscal year 10-1-22 to 9-30-23 as submitted with this agenda and subsequent submission to the Department of Housing and Community Development for review and approval.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Move to approval. Second.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: All in favor? Resolution number 2021-046 consideration of request of the executive director to approve the Medford Housing Authority original MRVP state budget for the fiscal year 10-1-22 to 9-30-23 as submitted with this agenda and subsequent submission to the Department of Housing and Community Development for review and approval. Resolutions number 2021-047, resolution number 2021-048, resolution number 2021-049 are all requested the executive director to approve original AMP number 1, AMP number 2, and AMP number 3 operating budget for MA 015-003-13-SS submitted with this agenda for fiscal year 10-1-22 to September 30th, 23 and chair signature on HUD form 52574 indicating board certification.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Move approval. Second.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Oh, should I have done COCC in that one as well?

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: These are all together. 47 to 52 is all one vote.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Can we amend that vote to include resolution 58? No, 58 is the write-offs.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Oh, OK. I'm sorry.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Amend that vote to be resolutions number 2021-047, 048, 049, 050, 051, and 052. Thank you.

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: So the motion was made by Commissioner Luongo. Do I have a second?

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: I'll second.

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: All in favor?

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: Aye.

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: Before you all leave, I just want to make sure that you all do sign these state budget forms, okay? Okay. Thank you.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: All right, moving on. Resolution J, resolution number 2021-058. consideration of request by executive director to authorize the write-off of collection losses for vacated rent to be incorporated in the federal and state operating statement for fiscal year ending September 30, 2022 in the amount of $13,082.45 and $4,596 for the federal and state program respectively.

[MCM00001419_SPEAKER_00]: So what you have here in front of you is every year we review our tenants accounts receivable and the tenants or former tenants that have vacated we identify those and bring those before the Board of Commissioners to have these amounts officially written off. By voting to write these off it does not prevent us from collecting these funds. Sometimes know somebody one of these tenants or former tenants is you know applying for credit or something to that effect this would show up on the report and in order to rectify that they would have to pay us the total balance and I've had a few instances in Brockton where a tenant former tenant has had to pay a sizable write-off from years before in order to purchase a house of some sort, because that write-off was on their credit report. So even by voting to write these off, we can still collect the funds.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Can I get a motion for?

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: So moved.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Second.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: All in favor? Oh, roll call, please. No? Yes?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yes, yes.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Even if it's a write-off, yeah.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Commissioner Genvilla?

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Yes.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Commissioner Foley?

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Yes.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Commissioner Holin? Yes. Commissioner Lister? Yes. Commissioner Luongo? Yes. Thank you.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: I move to executive report.

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: Okay.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. I didn't see that. Thank you. Oh, yes. Personal policy.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: In my 30 plus years of working in public housing and representing public housing authorities, I've had two instances where a housing authority has had to deal with a deceased employee. And this is one of them. Michael and I were looking at what the benefits would be for a deceased employee. And we looked at the personnel policy and The sick time buyback is, the way it's written presently, is limited to individuals who retire. The whole purpose of that is that if someone were to go to other employment, they couldn't take a sick leave buyback. I'm recommending that we amend that policy so that it includes deceased individuals will get 20% of their sick time buyback, or their estate will, their heir, and that we incorporate that into the personnel policy beginning effective October 1 of this year.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I have no problem with that. Is that, do other agencies with that in their personnel policy?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: That I haven't investigated. I didn't take the time to do that. I didn't have the time to do that.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I just didn't know if you anecdotally had, that's why it came to you because you had seen it.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: It came to me, honestly it came to me because of this instance and Michael had gone over the figures and I saw what the figures were. I read the area in the personnel policy to make sure there was a citation in there as far as the general laws were concerned which dealt more with retirement in itself as opposed to Excuse me, it dealt more with sick leave than it did with retirement or an individual being deceased. You know, it was a benefit that Steve was actually looking to retire in a relatively short period of time. He would have taken that and it would have been a significant amount. And like I said, this has happened only twice in 30 plus years that I've been involved. And I was involved with a number of housing authorities before I came here. So it's not necessarily something that is a routine occurrence. And I would be coming to the board with that had Steve not passed away because I would have thought it would have been something that we needed to include. And from what I'm aware, and maybe this is an answer, Kaylene, that might help. But as far as I'm aware, there's not anything that would prohibit the housing authority from doing that. And DHCD looks at it, as far as DHCD is concerned, they look at the buyback being at no more than 20%.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I was going to say, where did the 20 come from?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah. That's my understanding of where that's coming from. Michael, you may know that better than I, but that's my understanding, is that 20%. And that personnel policy was developed in conjunction with Michelle Randazzo and Masnaro. So I would anticipate that that is correct.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: So you'd like a motion- Sounds good to me.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah, I'm all for it. To instruct me to amend the personnel policy to include in sick time buyback that deceased employees.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: The 20% of their sick buyback would go to family or- Yes, it would just be where it would say retiree would also include deceased. So retiree right now only gets 20%? Yes.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Oh, I thought they got... They get 100% of vacation. Yeah, right. And that's by law. Yeah.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: And his... Okay, so it's amended to include also and death of employee.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yes, yes, yep. Michael, that's correct, right? That's correct, yes. Okay.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: So can I get a second on that? I'll second it. Who made that?

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I did.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: I made the motion, so you second. All in favor? Aye.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Okay, thank you very much.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Public input, there's no one here. Can I get a motion to close public input?

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Motion to close public input.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: We've got a nice lady sitting over there if she wants to say anything. No, she says too much. That's on tape, Lorena. 63 years. Wow.

[SPEAKER_06]: Do we have a second?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Congratulations.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: She's the best. Yes, second. Second. Okay, thank you. Thank you. All right, executive report now. It's all yours, Jess.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Thank you. Barbara, can you pull that back up? Yes. Since Commissioner Holien is concerned that I may be delaying meetings, I'll have a brief executive director's report. This is from Ben Wilson. Gabe and MAJ team, I am so sorry for your loss of a special colleague and friend. I am sure he will be missed tremendously. I will always remember his noble, straightforward, cut to the chase approach. A force that helped to get the salt install renovation project to this point. I will be trying to hold on to some of Steve's clarity as we go through the upcoming challenges. I was lucky to have worked with Steve for a very short but impressionable time. We'll miss him. Yeah, that is nice. Get it right on the head too. here right on the head.

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: First impressions.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah. When we were first, I've said this a couple of times, but I'll say it again. When we were first looking to how to design this building and coming up with ideas, and I'm not a construction person to the point that I would know the difference between a four-pipe system and a two-pipe system, but Steve was one of the utilities on the roof, and with that, it was gonna be a four-pipe system, and that's what he advocated for. When the design came out, based upon a cost concern, it was a two pipe system. To say the least, Steve was not happy. To say the least, he made everyone aware he was not happy. Unfortunately, and Paul, you know more about these things than I do. But unfortunately, we're at a two pipe system and we weren't able to do a four pipe system, which Steve thought was the best way to do it. If you don't do things the best way to do it, Steve's going to let you know, even though, according to the engineers, the two-pipe system, in addition to some of the other things that were going to do with that, was more than adequate. But it was to the point where NC participated in every one of the design meetings. So I think that's one of the things that the architect is indicating. As far as my report is concerned, I know that the question came up, Mr. Helene, as far as, I believe it was you, Paul, as far as the write-offs and how Michael indicated that there would be some credit reporting there. We're looking through the MTW program to do credit reporting on the residents, but Not for those residents who have left us because we do that when they owe us, but for those residents who are here because the MTW is trying to build a credit rating for folks so they can move on. And so we're going to be reporting to credit bureaus the success of those residents who are in that MTW program. And we have a meeting coming up next week, Jennifer. and Director of Management, and Sandy, the Resident Services Supervisor, with an entity who actually works with other housing authorities to create asset building programs. So I'll keep you appraised of that. Dietz, our architect at Walkman Court, we've met with them and continue to meet with them on multiple occasions, weekly at this point. It'll eventually become once a week. but we had a neighborhood meeting I believe that was after the last board meeting with the abutters. We had two resident meetings and we have within the next two weeks a neighborhood meeting relative to not only the direct abutters but the entire neighborhood. Gabe and I have met with the The city in particular, the Community Preservation Committee chair and the representative from the Community Development Agency. So I know Lohser, you and I spoke about that in particular with the CPC. And I had sent some correspondence to the mayor requesting that there be a home rule petition. which would be advantageous to the Housing Authority where, as far as construction related costs, that as other communities have done, we would waive the right for the sub-bid requirements, but not the right, I mentioned this I believe at the last meeting, not the wage rates. And that would allow the Housing Authority more flexibility in being able to expand the field as far as eligible contractors are concerned. And I will be meeting with the mayor and or her legal advisor on that and requesting that the mayor submit that home rule petition to the City Council for submission to the legislature. And that's something that I'm hopeful will happen fairly, fairly quickly. Michael, you had indicated that there's a number of open positions at the authority. Two interviews today, both seem to be successful upon checking the references. Two administrative positions, one in maintenance and one which would be a float. And I have an interview tomorrow with the plumber, with a journeyman plumber. And we'll see, that's a recommendation. The way we do hiring here is that the immediate supervisor will review the resumes that come in to Barbara. And then they'll make a decision whether or not to interview. Usually we have two people who sit in on the interview. They'll recommend folks to me, and then I will do the final interview. It's a nice check and balance, if you may. Lastly, we're going to see an uptake in legal activity. Right now, I have 18 cases. that we're working on for numerous lease violations. And some of those will result in agreements, some of those will result in evictions. I was in court this morning with an individual. We had a trial and the judge ruled in our favor. And that was a result of unauthorized occupants that were in the unit. where there was a fire that cost the Housing Authority $287,000 that we're presently renovating. So that we acted on that. There's a number of residents who participated in the emergency rent program through the pandemic called Shara that ended on April 15th. We received payments for that. I believe it was for probably 20 to maybe 30 residents sometime in May. There's a six month grace period before we can begin any action against them. A good number of those expire on November 20th. and a good number of the individuals who receive that will be getting correspondence from me and will be visiting in court. Michael indicated the write-offs, so he left. Michael indicated the write-offs. We're going to look to try to work with these folks, but a number of them are fairly extensive, and so that I would anticipate that the write-offs next year might be a little bit higher than this year, but hopefully that's proven wrong. Hopefully it's proven wrong. Madam Chair, that's the extent of my report. If anyone has any questions, I'd be certainly willing to attempt to address them.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Madam Chair, if I may. Yes, on October 9th at 6.15 p.m. It was a Sunday. My wife and myself were driving up Riverside Ave. Three police cars in front of the building. Were you aware of that?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: I'm not aware of that time, Michael. I am aware, though, that the police have been here for at least one instance, maybe more. I don't know what the date or the time was.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I'm talking about October 9th at 6.15 p.m. Sunday night. Right.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: I had a meeting with the staff today, the management staff, and they did alert me to an instance where the police were alerted for this building. I don't know that that was the time, but it dealt with a resident's son who may have assaulted someone or may have assaulted the mother. I don't know that yet because we're in the process of getting the police report. Usually they'll reach out And they'll oftentimes reach out to either me or Chris April because they have a lot of interaction with Chris being on the family site. So sometimes they'll be dealing with him on something and then they'll mention it. But I'm at a point right now where in this instance, I am going to Somerville District Court more than likely, if not tomorrow, then on Monday. to get filings there on two instances. One here, I believe the other one was at Willis Ave. And then I am also going on my way in within the next few days. I'm going to stop at Quincy District Court because there was an incident with one of our residents who had some sort of a violent act committed on them by someone who I believe may be living in a unit unauthorized. So I'm going to pull that police report or that complaint in court to see if in fact that individual's address that is not supposed to be living in this unit is actually in that unit. So it's just a number of the things that we do to try to get enough evidence to go after these folks. And we were alerted to that by our own police, because the Quincy police were looking for information.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: One other thing, and then I'll let it go. Down at Tamponi, I know police go down there. Sometimes they have a farm. the police, that they can get into the building? They do. Some of them do, and some of them don't, and they usually park over by the garage. So I'm just wondering why some do and some don't.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: I mean... Yes, we don't want to hand out... They walk through the whole building. Right. We don't want to hand out fobs to everyone, to multiple fobs without being able to take control of them. So we were requested that I'm going to guess, Michael, maybe a year and a half, two years ago. And that was provided to the detectives. And the offices on patrol are supposed to reach out to the detective. And I don't know where they keep it. They may keep it at the front desk for all I know. But that detective, I forget which one we gave it to. I'm not sure if it was Detective Mattis or some of the others. I know we deal with Detective Mattis quite frequently. that they were going to be in control of that. But prior to that, they didn't have access to the building. So it's just a matter of control. We have more control today than we've ever had because we limit the number of fobs that go out to one. We don't give two because we never had control over that second one. And when we find that someone is abusing that, we can see who it is. and there's sometimes that we've had to shut it off when there's been unauthorized occupants who've been coming in. Because we do have an issue with, every housing authority, Kayleen can tell you, we do have an issue with unauthorized occupants and it's tough to prove.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: You've been in a little old Lexington.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah. You don't have that in Lexington.

[SPEAKER_06]: Of course we do. No. Not in Lexington.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Thank you. They may have one to every 10 that we have, but they do have one.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Is that all? Thank you.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Thank you, Madam Chair.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: You're welcome. Is there anything else? Can I get a motion to close the Executive Director report?

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I'll make the motion to close the Executive Director report. Thank you. One second.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Thank you. All in favor?

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Aye.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Management report, is that included with that, Jeff?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yes, yes. I didn't reference it, but it's the report. If anyone has any questions on any of those things, let me know. All right.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: All business? Move to all business. Resolution number 2022-053. consideration of request by Executive Director to approve a contract to Belco Landscaping of Salem, New Hampshire for MHC job number 2202, M1, 10-pound apartment, site improvement, gazebo, and fence replacement. The total amount of the contract is $121,900. Madam Chair, if I may. Wait.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: If I may, this was the item that was tabled from last month, and I've had two meetings concerning this, one with Gabe and one with Gabe and the owner of the company. When I asked Gabe why it was that there was that instance, and this was recommended, he said that he routinely checks and Googles the companies, and that he didn't do it in this instance because a few months earlier, prior to the Department of Labor's finding and being reported, he had Googled them. And that they had done work for us and had done an exceptional job. That was on a Friday. I think it was on a Friday after our board meeting. Shortly thereafter, on Monday, Gabe and I had a meeting with the designer who was on the project and the owner of the company. And he explained that for a period of time, that they were paying their employees at request of the employees cash. And that they were aware that it was wrong to do so. He said that they've paid the penalty. Everyone has been paid what they should have been paid. And that the penalty was in excess of what it was that they actually paid the employees. The reason why Gabe had recommended them and still recommends them is the fact that two reasons. One is that they did work as far as they did the fence replacement at Walkland Court, which he said went exceptionally well. He felt that the company was very responsive. And secondly, the second low bidder was the contractor who did the The upgrade of the landscaping at Willis Avenue is approximately, I don't have the exact number, between $300,000 and $400,000. And it's the only time in five years that I've had to meet with a contractor because that was not as successful. Now it may have been the second low bidder sub. but there were issues that we had on that. So that was the reason why Gabe approved them. We also reached out to the Attorney General's office to ask them, what is the standard that we have to meet in order to reject a bid? And he indicated that in this instance, while it was up to the authorities, Board of Commissioners, to make that determination, it's not something that they felt that it was not within the authorities, the board's authority to do so. So that it's up to the board is basically what they say. So it's up to the board to decide. So that's where we're at at this point in time. Gabe was happy with their performance, but I can certainly understand the concerns that the board may have.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: It's not really the performance. I'm sure the performance of the people working there are great. It was just the, you know, the guy did something illegal. He knew he was doing something illegal. It's just not, I don't like it.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah, his response, his response to that when I asked him. And I said, what is your response to this when you got fined by the DOL? And he said, we did it because they requested it, even though we knew it wasn't something we should have been doing. And he said, we don't do that anymore and we won't do it. He said that he has, I'm not sure if it was 20, Paul, or 30 employees. And I said, how many employees do you have that oversee this area? And he said, one and a half. One and a half people.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: I have no objection to it.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: You want me to withdraw the approval?

[Unidentified]: I'm deferring to Paul.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: You gotta do what you gotta do. We have to vote on it anyways. It's a money thing. So you guys vote whatever way you want to vote. I'm not voting for it, but you guys do what you want. It doesn't matter. They're still gonna use them either way. Vote yay or nay. You have to use it. It's part of the procedure for the bid, right?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: No, no, no. What the AG's office told us, it's up to the board to decide whether or not this is significant enough not to approve. And what would happen is that I would anticipate unless the board thinks over a period of time that nothing else has happened, that this is a contractor that we wouldn't be using in the future. Would you say the second bidder was someone you used before? Yes.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: So the housing authority is in like a rock and a hard place because the second low bidder is not up to standard.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: It's somebody they don't like that they've used before.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: And I also gave a bad recommendation. I've used them.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: for the second. I'm aware with the second one there was a problem with the sub. And I don't know if it was the performance of the sub or the oversight of the sub, but ultimately that was the responsibility of the GC. And it was with, like I said, it was with the GC that I spoke. And Kayleen, I wasn't aware that you had given a reference on that.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: I feel like, just to be clear, everybody should vote the way they feel. If they think that These people have done the right thing and they paid their penalty. You should vote that way. Don't vote with me. You vote what you think is going to be best for the housing authority. I personally don't like it because this guy went out, he broke a rule. He knew what he was doing. If his employees ask to get paid under the table, he's paying them under the table. It's not the right thing to do. But unfortunately for the housing authority, the next bidder is not a great option either. But I'm not going to let that weigh on my decision. Kayleen, maybe she has a different opinion because she's seen these people. She knows. What's the old saying? The enemy you know is better than the enemy you don't know, whatever the case may be. I just don't know the other contractor. I understand that there was an issue with them. But just me personally, I don't feel right OK-ing discontracted with the legal issues that they have.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: It's a pretty, you know... I would hate to be... Madam Chairman, if I may, you said this contracted you will walk in court.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yes, according to Gabe, they did very well. They did a very nice job.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Good job.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: I would hate to see this... They did... Michael, they did the fence next to the grocery store and the enclosures.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: The gazebo.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: And the gazebo, yes.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Yeah. I mean, it's been a long time coming, this Champoni fence. I mean, that thing is an absolute disgrace, and I'd hate to see us put this off, and it'd probably be another year or two.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: So I don't think you'll be putting it off. I think we would just be going with the next little bit.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Well, here it is November. Right. Chances are you probably wouldn't... Wouldn't get just too There is a third.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: He was like I think he was exceptionally higher than the other two.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Yeah, I think he was too. I was wondering if there was a third minute.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: I know that I, because I, I understand what you're saying Paul.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I know, trust me, it's your opinion, but I personally would like to see this thing probably get up in the next couple of months.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: I, listen, when There's going to be multiple times that we don't agree with each other in this place and it's not personal. It's we are here to represent the housing authority. What we think is the best move for the housing authority. You should make the decision that you feel is the right decision. If you think And it's hard for me to fight this, right? I don't want to be the guy that's like, you know, because like I said, I'm sure the employees working for this company are very good. They obviously are, because they've done a wonderful job on another project here. And it's unfortunate that I feel the way that I don't want these people back here to work. I don't want, it's not the employees I don't want back. It's the owner of the company I don't want to give the $121,000 job to, because I feel like, you know, just the principles of the way he operated in the past, which he's paid a penalty for, I get it. And you know, you're not offending me if you vote against me. You should make the decision on what you think is best for the housing authority. I'm going to make my decision on what I feel is best for the housing authority, and I think that my other commissioners should make the decision on what they feel is best. That's, you know, that's what it is.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: If I could just answer the question that was raised. The low bid, the base bid was 121.9, and the alternates were 19.610. The next low bid was 128,420, with the alternates being 16,500. And then lastly, the third bidder was 179,500, and the alternate number one was 16,000. So it's, if you look at it from a percentage point of view, without doing the calculations, that's probably at least a 25% increase.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: If you went with the number two?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: No, if you went with number three.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Number three.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Number two was out altogether?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: No, number two is still into consideration, but number two, the authority had an issue with the work that was done at Willis Ave.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Oh, another job.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yes, sir.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I'm going to make a motion that we go along with this resolution number 2022-053. Can I get a second on that?

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Second it. I'll second it. Thank you. All in favor? Aye. Need a roll call?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yes. A roll call vote please.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Thank you.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Commissioner Genvilla?

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Yes.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Commissioner Foley?

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Yes.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Commissioner Holien? No. Commissioner Lister?

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: No.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Commissioner Luongo? Yes.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Is it 3-2-2 vote? Okay. All right. Is it possible to see that list of the three contractors? Sure. Hey Mike, does Billy know about Steve?

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: I'm sorry?

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Does Billy Young know? New business. Can we move along now? Yes. All right. Resolution number 2022-055, consideration of request by executive director to approve the submittal of the resident service coordinator, RSC, NOFA application to DHCD. Madam chair.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yes, sir. This is a notice of funding availability. That's what NOFR stands for, for the resident service coordinator. DHCD is making additional funds available. We presently have an award of a three-year period of time, $40,000 a year. This will increase that, as I understand it, both in amount and in the number of years. And it is for Walkland Court. And I would recommend that the board so vote. and it's a voting not in an amount it's a voting to submit the application and we need to we need to have a in the application process we need to include a vote of the board in that to ensure that it has been authorized by the board.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Can I get a motion please? Can I get a second?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Second.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Thank you.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Do we need a roll call on that? Do we usually submit a roll call on that? Even though there's no money because it's an application? No.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: B, resolution. We did.

[SPEAKER_06]: We already did.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: Did we?

[SPEAKER_06]: We did. Yeah. I thought you were second.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: Oh, I. Yeah, no, no. You're right.

[SPEAKER_06]: Did we say all in favor?

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: Oh, did we, I? Yeah, I don't know.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Is David working you that hard, Kayleigh? I'm so tired. Instead of the, you know, all approval. Resolution number 2022-056, consideration of request of the executive director to approve the certificate of substantial completion with the date 1-12-2022 with the contractor Belco Landscaping of Salem, New Hampshire for MHA job number 2115-667-1, walking courtside improvement, gazebo and fence installation. can I get a motion for that? I'll make the motion.

[cWHRmg4nTSM_SPEAKER_09]: What is this requesting? Just to complete the job? Yeah, to complete the job.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: No, this isn't payment.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: This is just a completion. Yeah, it was done. And then once this punch list of items are completed, they'll come before us for the remaining 5%. I assume they requisitioned at 95% already.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: I would think so. But that wouldn't be for a period of time.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I thought that fence was up.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: It is up, but They're just finishing off the paperwork for that. And as Kaylene said, we'll be holding back some monies for that for a period of time.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I'm still waiting for a second. Anyone for a second? No? Yes? Oh, did I second it?

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I voted, so you second.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I second it, sure.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: All in favor?

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: There's no money. I don't know.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Can we do a roll call? Yeah, sure.

[MCM00001419_SPEAKER_00]: All right.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Now, for payroll on this, are they certified payrolls they have to... That's something that on the state site, the DHCD would be involved, and GATE would be involved. So the answer to that would be yes.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Yes, 100%. They have to submit certified payroll for every pay period to GATE. Because it's the housing. Right.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: No question about it. Yep. And we follow that very very closely. Okay. Right, Kayleigh? Right.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Roll call?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Roll call. Commissioner Genvilla? Yes. Commissioner Foley? Yes. Commissioner Holien? No. Commissioner Lister? Yes. Commissioner Luongo? Yes. Thank you.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Resolution C. I want them done on the 11th. Resolution 2022-057, consideration of request of Executive Director to approve a contract to Northeastern Tree Services, NCORP. of Cranston, Rhode Island for MHHR number S22.11, routine and emergency tree trimming and tree removal at various developments. The contract term shall be three years and not exceed $225,000. Madam Chair? Yes.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: The Housing Authority has an enormous amount of trees, in particular at our two family sites. specifically the most are at Willis. What HUD maintains is that none of those those trees will grow within 15 feet of the building, inside of the building, or even over the building. And so that the Housing Authority actually had a study done back before I came by a, what is it called, what is the tree specialist called?

[SPEAKER_00]: Arborist. Arborist, yes, thank you.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: But thank you, by an arborist, indicating what the needs of the housing authority were at that time. And over the course of the years, we have trimmed those trees and trimmed those trees and trimmed them. We've cut down a few that were problematic, still healthy but problematic. I'm not really an advocate to do that. I'd rather keep trimming them back. but it's not a necessity that we do that. So this money is over a three-year period of time, and it's something that, like I said, in the inspections that the Housing Authority undergoes with HUD that they look to. Melissa, I know down at LaPree, there's a good number of trees down at LaPree also. That's a little bit more wide open, so it's not as much of a problem. But for some reason, at some point in time, maybe when the trees were six or ten feet tall, they planted them in a good distance from the buildings, but those things have grown. So just take a ride through. It's a tree city. Yeah, that's right. It's a good point. It's a good point. Maybe that's why.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I was going to say, get ready for... some comments from the neighbors.

[MCM00001419_SPEAKER_00]: What did you spend the last three year contract?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: You know what? I'll be honest with you. I don't know. But usually these estimates come in based upon what we've spent in the past and what the needs are. Honestly, I'm going to tell you, I think that we spend less than this. But I think that was because I don't believe we were as vigilant as maybe we should have been. And during the pandemic, This is the answer to during the pandemic, HUD was not coming out and doing inspections. So while the trees were not damaging the buildings, we didn't have an issue. But knowing now that they're coming out, and they've been out recently, we need to do something. Do they come out and make a list? Yes. When they come out and do an inspection? Yes. At the next meeting, I'm going to let you know where we stood with the most recent REAC inspection. And REAC is Real Estate Assessment Center. And they give you a very limited period of time. Used to be two weeks, now it's 28 days. Notice that they're going to come out. And it's a very, very intensive review of the authority. In the past, we have done very, very well. We've done very well.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: And the way they score is, like, the site issues tend to score high or low, you know?

[SPEAKER_06]: So, like, cracks in the sidewalks, like, stuff that It was a two-month, not a two-week time that they gave you, correct?

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: No, no. 28 days.

[SPEAKER_06]: 28, but it used to be two months.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: No, it used to be two weeks.

[SPEAKER_06]: Swayed the score kind of heavily.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yeah, when I know with LaPree, when they came out for LaPree previously, they cited us for growth through the chain link fence from the school department.

[6zUtu0XZLH4_SPEAKER_05]: Vegetation.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Vegetation, yes. We successfully appealed that. They also cited us for a walkway that wasn't shoveled. And what it was, was the residents decided, well, we don't want to walk down the walkway because that's too long. So we want to walk this way. And they created a path that we wouldn't shovel anyway. We were successful on that. Things like that. At Bradley Road, We scored close to, Michael, you might remember, but and Losa, you guys were here. We scored close to a 98 point something, I think. And one of the .02 deductions we got was because there wasn't a plunger. In one of the tubs, the resident had taken the plunger out and it was on a chain. He took it out and put it in his closet.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Right, so even like tenant hall issues or scoring issues.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: It's a very- One of the issues that we recently had was that air conditioners were in bedrooms where there was only one window. That's an egress issue and we lose points for that. One of the other issues that I know of, and again, I've only looked at the report briefly, see the sprinkler head? On that head, there's a circular piece of metal that served no purpose. There were three that were missing, I think it was in this building. And we got a company who comes in and inspects that. And I spoke with Gabe. We're going out to bid on this, because that company that comes in now is not only going to inspect it, they're going to fix it like we used to have when I was in some of them. And I anticipated that we had you. But I'm more than likely to have a more intensive report for you next month.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: I know Willis Ave, I think, has the most of the trees.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Oh, yeah.

[MCM00001408_SPEAKER_03]: Willis Ave is loaded.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Yep, yep. You know, we've had some significant, my first week here, we had a microburst. Not only took out our system over here, our heating system over here, but also knocked down a number of trees. And it was actually positive because it cleared it out to some extent. We haven't had that over at Willis because it's a more confined area.

[MCM00001419_SPEAKER_00]: And how fast and how responsive was the tree company you were using?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: I think we've used Northeastern in the past, to be honest with you. It's difficult to get them. I'm curious, they're from Rhode Island. Yeah, and, you know, they bid it, you know, they would have, I thought I might have had the bid list here, but they've been responsive to us in the past, I know that, or else we wouldn't be using them.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: I know the one at L'Esprit that we, are they?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: I think so. Yeah.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: The one at L'Esprit that you referred to, they were out there very quickly. Yeah.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Same day. Yeah. Usually it's a same day response.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: The tree was actually, falling almost into the back door of the tenant.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: That was like seven o'clock at night. I was the one that called. You called me.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Yeah, I called him when it happened.

[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I'll make a motion.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Second.

[SPEAKER_06]: Commission Janvier? Yes.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Commissioner Foley? Yes. Commissioner Holy? Yes. Commissioner Lister? Yes. Commissioner Luongo? Yes. Thank you.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: I have nothing to report because I was supposed to be, they actually did the preservation meeting today and I told them I wasn't going to be able to make both meetings, so I have nothing to report because I'm not there.

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: David, I met with, like I said earlier, the chair of that committee and we expressed the fact that we have submitted an application to them and that we do need assistance from the city relative to funding whether it comes from community preservation or opera funds or through the city itself and as I indicated I did submit a some correspondence to the mayor concerning a number of issues that involved in particular walkway and and affordable housing. And the mayor has emailed me back and I'm going to respond to her. But she said she's very supportive of affordable housing. And while there are legitimate concerns that the mayor may have, that's the reason why I am going to hopefully be meeting with she and her legal counsel fairly soon. But we do have an application into the Community Preservation Committee and they've been very supportive of us in the past. They've awarded us $350,000 for pre-development costs at WalkLink, which has helped us get to the point that we're at. We've got, out of the $15 million, we have approximately $1 to $1.1 million from the state to be able to do that pre-development. So that's what's taking us to where we are now. We anticipate the closing on that to be in the, it sounds like it's so far away, but it's not, in the spring to early summer of 24. We're hopeful that the CPC will see fit to award us more. We've actually asked for $2.4 million over a three year period of time. We had a discussion about the city's ability to maybe bond that and give us the 2.4 and have the CPC pay that back, that bond back on an extended period of time. I don't know that that would work. But we also discussed they're providing us with the 800,000 this year. That takes up, Melissa, you would know this better than I, but from what I understand, that takes up a significant amount of the money that they're allotted. So we'll continue to work with that. You know, the reason why we're looking for the assistance of the city is because the award of the $15 million from the state was predicated on assistance from the city going forward. I don't want them to pull that $15 million grant. So, I've had very good discussions with the mayor up to this point. I have appeared on a couple of occasions in front of the City Council. The last one, we discussed this project, and they seem to be very, very receptive. So I may be coming to the commissioners individually to seek your assistance in maybe lobbying the Council and the Mayor, but at this point, I don't think that's necessary.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: Okay. All right, can I get a motion to adjourn?

[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Motion to adjourn.

[Losa Julie Genevieve]: second all in favor