[Roberta Cameron]: All right, well, I will call the meeting to order. This is the meeting of Medford's Community Preservation Committee on Tuesday, November 12th, 2024, 6.30 p.m. We're actually starting a little bit late. I will acknowledge it's about, oh, just 6.35 p.m., we're not that late. And the meeting is being held via hybrid means so members of the public may participate either in room 201 of Medford City Hall or via Zoom. And with that, I will invite, we have on the agenda this evening, an application presentation for the Medford Movement Assistance Program from ABCD. So do we have a representative from ABCD?
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes, I'm here.
[Roberta Cameron]: Welcome. Thank you for joining us. And why don't you tell us about your project?
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes, so my name is Tondo Dube. I am the deputy director of housing at ABCD. And we would like to present the Medford Move-In project. So Medford Move-In is a project we've worked on with you all since 2021. We essentially provide first month's rent, last month's rent, essentially move in costs and move in support to residents moving into the Medford area. All of the residents we serve are low income residents. They're at or below 100% of the area median income, and we essentially support them so that they don't face as many barriers when they're moving into the city, hopefully then maintaining a long tenancy with the city.
[Roberta Cameron]: Thank you very much. And so I see that your application you have requesting $99,989. Yes. And this includes, I see, I think I understand administrative costs that add up to $23,988. And then I think you had 76,000 was the actual program delivery costs.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes. So we have program delivery costs. We also have some salary costs in there to support the staff members working on the program. We have some program supply costs to support marketing, distribution of flyers so that folks are aware of the program as well. We have a little bit of office supplies and various items as well. And then a few, a small percentage of that as our indirect for our kind of financial team overhead costs.
[Roberta Cameron]: Thank you for that confirmation. So all of that is included in the what I calculated is $23,988.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes, that's correct.
[Roberta Cameron]: Great. Are there questions from committee members?
[Joan Cyr]: I have a question. I was looking at the move-in log. It looks like it's an image, not an Excel spreadsheet, which is fine, but I can't tell what the total amount is once I get my calculator out. But I think I had asked for what the total was that we awarded thus far.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes, so far we've spent $35,354, and that excludes the returned check that you'll see there. And then this year of that was $16,229.
[Joan Cyr]: I was just gonna say, how much have we awarded? That's 35 spent. How much have we awarded? Do you remember, Teresa?
[Theresa Dupont]: We've awarded 2 awards, 30 and then a 60,000. So, in total, they've received 90,000 so far over multiple years and multiple awards. So, this would be their 3rd award in this program.
[Joan Cyr]: So, the difference between what has been spent and what has been awarded, where is that? Is it sitting in, where is that? Yes, I'm trying to figure out where that works in with this amount that you're asking for.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes, this is the current amount. So we still are actively spending that as well, actively taking applications for folks moving into the city of Medford. And our goal is to be able to continue the project as well with additional funds.
[Theresa Dupont]: Of that $35,000, that's from the $60,000 award. So they still have a bank to spend down. Does that clarify your question, Joan?
[Joan Cyr]: Yeah, I'm trying to figure out where the dollars are being spent and how they're getting expended. So I'm trying to figure out the amount that it's asked for now. Is additional required beyond the extra money that you haven't spent so far?
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes, so the amount that we're asking for in this application will be for the future three year period.
[Joan Cyr]: Three year period, so we're not going to see you back next year.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Actually, my questions were pretty much in line with what Joan was asking. I was going to ask what previous requests were and how that money was spent down, if it was spent down. So basically, bottom line is you have about 90-ish thousand in the pot in your bank right now. You spent 35. You're asking for an additional 99 to just use in fiscal year 25 or like, no deadline, like just give us 100 and we'll see how far we can go with it type thing or?
[SPEAKER_05]: We'd love to spend it in the next three years. So our request, I believe was fiscal year 25 to 28. But our goal is that we will continue to spend down in the meantime, as well. We've done a lot more marketing this year, and pushing the program. So our hope is that folks will really engage with the program, the more the word is out, I think, some of the trouble with spending. We just faced some barriers. Folks weren't aware of the program, weren't aware of the services being provided. And so we've really been able to push that this year, and we hope that that continues to increase in the future.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: And this started during COVID, is that correct?
[SPEAKER_05]: Started in 2021.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Okay. And like, do you have an average amount, like you help on a monthly basis? Does it hit more in like the winter Christmas time? Like, or is it pretty even? Like, what do you see?
[SPEAKER_05]: We do see, we tend to see folks reach out a lot more winter time and then also September 1st. It's just a very popular move-in date around this area. Some of the barriers we face with folks are just not turning in documents. I think the other thing that we see is folks are very interested in security deposits. So we do first and last month's rent. We've noticed folks reach out for security deposit as well and maybe also have other ways to get this funding. if they're not utilizing this program.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Do you have rules for, like, do you only help a person one time? Is there a max amount you help them with?
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes, right now we've only been helping folks once at a time. We have not capped it. We internally capped it at about 5,004 folks, but most of the time folks won't hit that amount since it's first and last month, not first last in security. We don't hope folks move again, or we haven't so far. But that's something that we could definitely discuss and talk through as well. But definitely most of the folks that we see are also a mix between folks that we serve with our housing counseling program. So we do housing search with folks in-house as well. We have a homeless outreach team that serves Medford as well. And so a portion of these folks come directly through our systems. and then some other folks doing various tabling events or outreach events that we interact with residents.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: And I assume you help with like rent arrears like to avoid evictions and stuff like that.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yeah so we have a separate Medford program as well where we serve Medford residents with rent arrears and for all of the programs we won't serve folks who are rent burdened so If somebody's paying more than 50% of their income towards the rent, we wouldn't allow them to lease up with this program because the goal is that they'll stay leased and stay in Medford long-term. Yeah, that's good.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Okay, thank you.
[Roberta Cameron]: I have a couple more questions that come up for me. First, following up on what you just described, you said that you do have a rent arrears program for Medford residents. Is that funded by CPA or that's funded by, okay, what program is funding that right now?
[SPEAKER_05]: Yeah, so we get CDBG funding from the city for our rental arrear program in Medford.
[Theresa Dupont]: Okay, that's good to know. Yeah, it's pretty common, like we fund, CPA funds ABCD as well as housing families. CDBG does the other thing on the other side. So we're like a financing sandwich for those two organizations. Yeah.
[Roberta Cameron]: Okay, and the other question I had, so was the table that was provided in this application material, is that table only showing how you spend the FY, the 2020 grant of 60,000, or is it also the 2019 grant of 30,000? It was the, let me double check.
[SPEAKER_05]: was the 2020 60,000. So it didn't include the first initial but it that was the 60,000 that we've spent.
[Roberta Cameron]: So did you fully spend down the first initial 30,000 already?
[Ari Fishman]: Yes.
[Roberta Cameron]: Okay, so what you've done, okay, so that was a little bit of like, we're, I think we didn't all make that connection. So you have actually spent $65,000 in total out of the total $90,000 that we've given you so far.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes, we currently have the remaining amount in the bank was just released. I think something else to note was that you all released to us after we spend about $30,000 each time, but you didn't release it to us all at once. So we recently received the next, the remaining $30,000 from you all.
[Roberta Cameron]: Got it. And did the previous grants include the Um, program delivery, the administrative cost, um, portion.
[Theresa Dupont]: I don't believe they, I don't need to speak for you, but I don't believe that they did. This was something that we had discussed as a team to introduce to help support the program. Yeah.
[Roberta Cameron]: Okay. So I just wanted to be clear about that. And I, I, if that helps you to get the word out and to actually spread get more Medford families enrolled. I support using the funds for that purpose. One bit of feedback that I heard anecdotally over the past year was someone who had received a Section 8 voucher from Medford Housing Authority was not able to afford the moving costs for an apartment that they found in Medford. And so they ended up having to give up their voucher and move elsewhere. And so that's really disappointing to hear because this program exists to help them specifically. So I wonder whether you have any collaboration or partnership with the Medford Housing Authority to make sure that there's that people who are receiving vouchers in Medford know that this program is there to help them?
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes, we do a little bit of both. So folks can come to us from Medford Housing Authority and other organizations to do the housing search. So we'll support with housing search for families looking to move within Medford. area as well. And then we do try to hang flyers when we do have them available at the Housing Authority and talk to folks there to let them know that the program exists, and it's available for their residents. I think a challenge that we have talked about with you all in the past is just the maybe additional security deposit or security deposit funds, because we see that voucher holders, their first month we can support them with, their last month oftentimes the voucher will cover. And so the additional balance that they're looking for is really that security deposit as well, or a broker's fee, which we haven't implemented in the program so far, but we've been talking about making that a possibility in the future.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah, unfortunately, we were advised in the beginning when we originally set up this program that security deposits are very difficult to pay for with public funds because it's ambiguous who the money has to go back to after the end of the tenancy and keeping track of the tenants years after they moved in. so that the money can be recovered that's supposed to come back to the city is really difficult. And the money is intended to go towards their apartment and not to the tenants themselves. So making it a grant to the tenant wouldn't work for us. So that's the reason why it was determined that we could really only cover the first and last month's rent. Are there other questions from committee members?
[Joan Cyr]: So curious. I know that this is the first time that you're requesting personnel charge funds. How was the personnel being funded previously? Or is this to hire new personnel?
[SPEAKER_05]: This is to hire already existing personnel. So we do have general ABCD funds that we've been using for folks working on this project. So this won't cover full salaries for anybody, but just to supplement some of the project time that they work on approving applications, reviewing applications, collecting documents for folks.
[Joan Cyr]: I'm trying to figure out if this is not for new people, is the funds that normally supported them going to be used for additional help for the client?
[SPEAKER_05]: Yeah, so we would use that funding to then support some of our other housing programs as well that are still able to support Medford residents. So we can then use the funds to really push towards housing counseling more, which is our program that provides the affordable housing search for folks and things of that nature. Right now, we've kind of used that funding to supplement this project.
[Roberta Cameron]: Other questions? Well, thank you so much, Tando, for joining us this evening. A lot of great information and discussion. And so we'll continue with the committee's deliberation process and we'll let you know how it turns out.
[SPEAKER_05]: Perfect. Thank you. Thank you for having me. Thanks, Ellie.
[Unidentified]: All right.
[Roberta Cameron]: So who is 7815267405? It's just a member of the public. Okay. Sometimes when somebody is on the phone, anybody's ever taken a zoom phone call over the phone it's uh maybe if you're able to change the name so that it says it's done i just want to make sure that we keep a clear record of who's talking thanks okay so the next on the agenda um the application deliberations. So it's kind of a little bit complicated how to approach the application deliberations. The first thing I want to do is give a couple of updates that we can take into consideration as we go through our deliberations. So one is the administration request that was included in your meeting packet for FY 25 Riverside Plaza shade structure. They are The application has not changed in terms of the scope and budget, but they're asking for an expedited decision because the city is awarded a park grant and we have to, in order to accept the park grant, we have to appropriate the local matching funds for the park grant before the end of this year. And in order to do that, that they're requesting that we make a decision this evening whether to recommend CPA funds for that project. Doug? Nope. That's disregard. Never mind. OK. So that was one update. I also wanted to just recall that Shiloh had asked for an expedited decision back in September. And so I thought that it might be fair to also consider whether to give them an early decision in line with the Riverside Plaza request. So there are two projects that if we decide that the committee wants to recommend funding for those projects, we'll try to see if we have time to actually make those two recommendations this evening.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Shiloh was for the daycare center, right?
[Roberta Cameron]: Yes, that's correct, for the daycare center. And so those are the updates relating to scheduling. And one other major update that I don't believe is reflected in any of the materials that are given in your meeting packet is that very lately, as of today, the facilities director has requested that we switch. So the City Hall has a couple of emergency projects that are in the pipeline. One of them is the bathrooms project, which was presented to the committee last month. And the other is restoration of the city hall chamber windows. And because the I raised the concern that because the city hall chamber windows are actually a more historically sensitive feature asset of the city hall building. It would make sense to use CPA funding to ensure that the project is completed according to the Secretary of Interior standards, and the bathrooms are less sensitive. Even though it's an eligible project, it's not as historically important to follow those standards. So the mayor, I had this conversation with the mayor and with city councilors, and the mayor requested that the facilities director switch the two requests. So they're now going to be pursuing the bathrooms out of the stability fund, and they're requesting from CPA restoration of the city hall chamber windows. And we were given an estimate with a budget for the City Hall windows, which Teresa will share with you.
[Theresa Dupont]: Yes, I'm also going to put it into the drop box for those who might be following along there, but I will also screen share it.
[Joan Cyr]: So the ADA update restroom restoration application has been withdrawn?
[Roberta Cameron]: Um, yes, but the so they changed the scope entirely. Otherwise, it's still the city applying still for City Hall, still the same staff who are making the application request. And it's still an urgent project, according to their, you know, for the same It's on the same timeline of urgency as the bathrooms, but obviously for different reasons. But yes, they would prefer to request funding for the windows out of CPA and do the bathrooms out of the stabilization fund as they were going to do it in the opposite order.
[Joan Cyr]: So we don't have an application for the windows?
[Roberta Cameron]: We have an estimate for the windows is all that we have.
[Joan Cyr]: But they haven't made a presentation or whatever. They just sent us a call and said we'd rather do this? Yes. Do you think we should get them to come and do the application presentation as all others have? Is there some emergency here?
[Roberta Cameron]: Let me take Ada's question and we'll see if
[Ada Gunning]: I was less of a question and I mean, I actually kind of agree with Joan. That I feel like they should come, but I just want to say, I'm really happy with this turn of events. I felt like it was a really bad precedent. For the PC to come in and they've. City Hall in this way, I'm glad that they're using different funds for that. I think this is a positive that we're actually going to be targeting something that is specifically historical. That's all I was going to say. Thank you. But I agree that I would love to see an actual presentation.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: What's the estimate on this?
[Theresa Dupont]: Uh, 3 22 5. So this is more than the windows. So the bathroom was 2 50.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah. I was concerned that the bathrooms did not really have a specific scope of which bathrooms they were going to be renovating and like what the actual plan was for renovation. So in agreement with about the, um, the bathroom, you know, that it's nice to see them coming to CPA for an actual historic restoration project. I also am relieved to have a more specific scope that has a budget that, you know, that's describing exactly the restoration work that's going to be done. And that was missing from the bathroom project.
[Joan Cyr]: Okay, so we all like this 1 better now. Uh, can you scroll up a little bit? Did I see 9 windows?
[Theresa Dupont]: These are the city council chamber windows, so they are extraordinarily large.
[Joan Cyr]: I know that they're big. There are 9 windows for 300 and something thousand dollars. Is that what I'm saying?
[Unidentified]: Yeah.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Well, it's at the top of that. It said phase one is for windows, phase two is five. So the whole thing is 322, but they're just going to phase it or phase one.
[Joan Cyr]: So they only need phase one money now? Is that what I'm understanding?
[Theresa Dupont]: This scope includes phase one and phase two for the total amount 322.5.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Right, but why are they phasing?
[Roberta Cameron]: So that the room isn't completely blacked out. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.
[Theresa Dupont]: So not like money will be like plywood. So.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Ada Gunning]: Sorry, I just didn't take my hand on. So we could ask them.
[Roberta Cameron]: to return to our next meeting and give a presentation and explanation of this project and answer questions. But I wanted to invite the committee to consider including this in our initial prioritization projects. including this in our initial prioritization of projects so that we can evaluate which, you know, whether we don't want this project to keep us from making decisions about other projects. So we may be able to prioritize it high, medium and low, but still request that they come in and give us more information before we make a decision.
[Joan Cyr]: That plus this is, this would absolutely blow the bank. We can't, we would not be able to fund everything, all requests if we gave, if we awarded this entire thing in one year.
[Theresa Dupont]: We do have some updates to that.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yes. All right.
[Joan Cyr]: I will listen.
[Ari Fishman]: In that case, you may have just gotten there because my response was, whoa, this budget kind of, and with no explanation and is almost twat, well, one and a half times more than the previous one and it's phased. Can we divide this out over a few years? And sounds like you were about to talk about that. So certainly not opposed to the project at all, but have questions.
[Roberta Cameron]: That is, so it's possible. And when we make our, when we do this prioritization exercise, maybe that's something, you know, we may end up, in the past, we have sometimes come up with compromises, breaking projects into chewable bites. So that might be something that we want to consider if need be. The other update that we needed to bring to your attention is the St. Francis Church project has been withdrawn. So that was the window study and restoration, which was $150,000 project. Why? Because the church and the diocese weren't comfortable with sharing the amount of financial information that we were asking for. So we asked them to provide information about the total amount of improvements that they've done on the building within the last five years and what is the capital that they've raised from their own community toward making these improvements. And, you know, I didn't mean to ask for too much, but it seemed fair before we commit public funding to know how much they have raised in their own community for this project. And they withdrew rather than providing that information.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Okay, but in your, but in your little Excel, in your Excel sheet of all the projects, maybe I'm jumping and you can tell me to be quiet. I don't see the city. Is it in here? The window? The 325? No, they didn't do that one. They didn't send it to us either. Well, because I see St. Francis crossed off. But I don't see the addition of 325. OK.
[Roberta Cameron]: Well, it would be a replacement of where it says City Hall, Restroom, ADA improvements. This is a very late change. It came in today. So we haven't updated this yet to show the 322 instead of 250.
[Joan Cyr]: All right. So, Teresa, have you done the math?
[Theresa Dupont]: We have done the math. In that spreadsheet, if everybody is looking at the financial worksheet, if you keep scrolling past all the projects, that is a snapshot, and I can share it into here. I'm going to go ahead and do that. That is a snapshot of our total financial picture. Let me share this over so Roberta and I can see. Everybody's still seeing the spreadsheet, right? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So I can actually see it. Here we go. So left to right here, this is what we had budgeted, our 10 and our 15% for the categories with the budgeted reserve. If we look over, so that's the 1.836 here. As we look over to the right, that 883 is actually carried over reserves from undesignated funds from previous years. We had some cancellations of previously funded awards, of which I'm happy to speak of. But just to continue the financial conversation here, we have 883 in the bank, additional to our fiscal 25 budget of 183. So this 2.7 is actually our total available funds to expend this year. So if we're still navigating, 2.7 is what we have. This does not reflect the additional 72.5 that would be the difference between the windows and then the back. I'm sorry, I'm looking at the wrong. Here we go, right here. Oops. I'm able to make that change live. I'm not sure if you guys will be seeing me make that change. I'm going to go ahead and try to do that because how we're sharing is a little weird. Yeah, we can see it.
[Joan Cyr]: Fantastic. Thanks. Roberta, does this include the match money? This does not.
[Roberta Cameron]: No. So the match money for this year will actually be available to us next year.
[Joan Cyr]: Though this includes match money from last year, correct?
[Theresa Dupont]: Correct. And I'm designated, you know, we estimate our budgets and then there's a little bit of a difference. So, this is all just catching up. I had a question.
[Ada Gunning]: Sorry, it takes a 2nd time on my phone. So, sorry, can I just ask that going back to St Francis for a 2nd? Yeah so because the project seemed great for us to fund it's kind of a bummer that they withdrew and it just made me wonder is there like a negotiation to be had there like oh you're not comfortable giving us that information like what like can we have a conversation about it or is that just not how this works like i'm just is that has it happened before with the catholic church or what's the deal
[Roberta Cameron]: I am with you. I would have been inclined to negotiate, but I think that they had some internal disagreement as a result of this, and I think that has led to the cancellation of the project.
[Ada Gunning]: I say, okay.
[Joan Cyr]: Yes, yes, not the 1st time the Catholic Church disagreed with an application sent to us our very 1st year. We had an application to restore the Saint was it Saint Claire's or. St. Clemens School into affordable housing. The Somerville Community Corporation, they had the whole plan worked out and the archdiocese wouldn't allow them to use it for affordable housing, so they withdrew.
[Ada Gunning]: It almost makes me wonder whether we want some documentation of the diocese being on board before we like, Oh, a hundred percent.
[Joan Cyr]: That's what we asked for in the first one. And they were like, no, okay. Yeah, man.
[Ada Gunning]: So fascinating. Okay. Sorry. I didn't want to derail us. I just wanted to make sure we couldn't salvage it.
[Theresa Dupont]: They can always come back.
[Ada Gunning]: Yeah.
[Theresa Dupont]: Um, all right. So So our financial picture here is we have more money available than the asks this year.
[Roberta Cameron]: And so that $150,000 that's crossed out, does that... Yeah, can you just delete the cell that says the $150,000 crossed out?
[Unidentified]: Yeah.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah, that one. Just delete it. Okay. It didn't count anyway, but I just... Yeah, I had it. Okay. All right, so the total requests minus the, that leaves about roughly $350,000? Yes. Okay. And last year, after some discussion, committee members agreed, and of course, we don't have to continue doing the same thing that we agreed on last year. Last year, after some discussion, the committee members agreed that they wanted to preserve something like $225,000 in our carryover funds just to ensure liquidity. So, 350,000 is below, I mean, it's more than 225,000, so that leaves an ample amount for liquidity going forward. So we don't have to fund all of the projects that have requested, but it looks as though, once again, the requests approximately equal the funding available, so we could fund the projects as requested.
[Joan Cyr]: Doug, is it time for the Andre LaRue stamp?
[Doug Carr]: Can you hear me, Joan?
[Joan Cyr]: I can hear you now.
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, I don't think we need to prioritize these products as much as we probably have in the past couple of years. When we were short, if we can find everything, if we think they're valuable and worthwhile, then yeah, we should but focus on just the value of the projects that we want to fund and not the priority.
[Roberta Cameron]: Okay. So where we have this prioritization column, we should, I think it's still helpful for us to go through project by project and have some discussion about how we value them. But maybe we can score them 1, 2, or 3, wrapping our heads around what we mean by 1, 2, or 3. 1 means they're highly valued, and we fully support them going forward. 3, meaning perhaps we don't support it going forward. 2, meaning you know, we maybe have some disagreement about it or some less than enthusiastic support for it. So maybe we can go through each of these and see how we fall on each of the projects so that we decide how we want to. And maybe we can also, as we go through each of them, people can raise whether they think that we need to consider any conditions on these that we haven't had in the past.
[Joan Cyr]: Well, I think we also need to hear from the city of Medford about the council chamber window restoration. They have not made a presentation to us.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah, so we'll make a request for that to come to us next month to talk about that project.
[Joan Cyr]: Doug has his hand up. Is that from last time or is that a new one? No, he just popped it up. Okay.
[Doug Carr]: No, that's new. Just two quick comments about the City of Medford projects, which I both think are excellent, but they both, to Joan's earlier point, they need documentation, right? The windows, all it is is a verbal description, and I just want to make sure that that is consistent with the restoration of windows. that we've done at Chevalier and other places that have done that. We've had a pretty high standard for that work, and it's usually a little bit more than just a shopping list of pieces. There's usually something involved with it, drawing-wise, or at least in alignment with the Secretary of Interior's standards, that kind of thing, Joan. And Roberta?
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah. So Paul really went, I'm sorry, go ahead.
[Doug Carr]: No, no. Why don't you address the windows, and then I'll talk about the ADA bathrooms from there.
[Roberta Cameron]: I know that's not part of it, but it's... So, Paul Rickey, when he emailed about this change earlier today, said that the company that gave them the estimate for the windows is a historic preservation company, and he gave some examples of historic preservation projects that they've done on major buildings in the area. But I think it's fair that we ask them, in addition to the budget that they've given us, if he could just name the company that they're working with and give us some balls so that we know that it is a company that's qualified to do historic restoration of windows.
[Doug Carr]: Agreed. And if they're put together that quote, they must have taken photos just to show kind of the before versus the after photos. We just need a little bit more documentation, nothing that would prevent us from awarding anything.
[Joan Cyr]: Like the Royal House, that is like the best application that they sent us, you know?
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah. Yeah. So we'll ask them to provide some more documentation and also give them feedback that the committee is Um, favorable to this changed request and would like to, um. Would like to consider making a recommendation for funding, but that we need more documentation before so that we can demonstrate the value of this project to city council.
[Joan Cyr]: Exactly.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Is someone coming on to talk about the shade thing today?
[Theresa Dupont]: The Riverside Plaza?
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Yes.
[Theresa Dupont]: Is that on the agenda? Is somebody coming to talk? I think I saw Amanda here. I haven't gotten there as an agenda item yet.
[Roberta Cameron]: Ah, okay.
[Theresa Dupont]: But Amanda is here, and the mayor wanted me to text. The mayor wants to come on and speak in support as well, because the metal technically came from her office.
[Roberta Cameron]: Would we like to... hear that request first, or would we like to go through the prioritization first?
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Well, are we like putting that in the category of like, yeah, because, yeah, I agree. I mean, even if it's an immediate off, whatever approval.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah, it's just a matter of the order. I think there's no point in keeping Amanda waiting longer, but the mayor did want to come on.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: So we should maybe- Yeah, you want to text her and then we can just kind of go through our priority and when she pops on, we'll go do that.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah. That makes sense.
[Theresa Dupont]: I just texted her. I believe Amanda's eavesdropping right now. I told her I would text her as well.
[Unidentified]: Yeah.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: So I don't remember anything about the Shiloh application of it being an emergency or need to be approved super quick other than they just want to get going.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Right.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: So I'm a little nervous to set a precedent there for no other reason that they just want to get going. And I feel like their application actually really wasn't that strong. I didn't feel very confident in the numbers they gave. I think she, you know, if you have an emotional case for the project, which is great, but I don't. My 2 cents, I don't think it's necessary to give them approval. I have anybody else.
[Roberta Cameron]: I wanted to present that as an option, given that they had originally asked for an off-cycle decision. But if we want to hold to giving them a decision along with everyone else next month, I'm fine with that too.
[Joan Cyr]: Yeah, didn't they say the reason they came off-cycle was because There wasn't anything in particular that was driving their request except that the longer they wait, the longer it'll take, which is true for every project. So it's not like something was imminently going to fail or something like that, or there wasn't any driver except the calendar that they wanted to keep going.
[Theresa Dupont]: Yeah. That is true. Mayor acknowledged, but I think she's trying to join right now. And Amanda is waiting on bated breath. Does she have the right link?
[Unidentified]: Oh, yeah.
[Theresa Dupont]: Actually, here comes the mayor.
[Unidentified]: OK.
[Roberta Cameron]: Hi, Amanda. Hey, everyone. And, uh, Mayor, I can see it looks like you joined us. There you are. Yeah.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Hey, everybody. Good evening.
[Roberta Cameron]: Good evening. So thank you for joining us. I understand that you would like to present your request for an expedited decision for the Riverside Plaza.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes, thank you. Thank you to Teresa for putting this on and Amanda who's been working on all the park projects with us over the last several years. The Riverside Plaza projects, one that we've been looking into for several years, prices came back pretty high. So what Amanda did for us was apply for a park grant. And we were very excited to receive that grant recently. That grant does need a match. which is going to hopefully be approved tonight. I know that you do consider that potentially somewhat of an emergency. Thank you, Chair Cameron, for speaking with me last week on this issue. We have to go before the city council as soon as possible. I think my chief of staff is prepping that with Teresa's support for next Tuesday's council meeting. And with the match, we'll be able to move forward on that project. That is, Riverside Plaza is a beautiful spot to host events, and it's used daily, especially in the nice weather, for people to congregate, either play chess or have lunch, have dinner in that location, and the one sticking point that is tough for our residents and business owners and employees that frequent that area is it's, it is right directly in the sun. And with global warming, it makes it very difficult to have an enjoyable lunch, especially in the summer months when it's 80-90 degrees. So shade in that location is so necessary and something that will be greatly appreciated by all who use that, including City Hall employees.
[Roberta Cameron]: Thank you. And thank you, Amanda, for the effort to obtain the park grant.
[Amanda Centrella]: Oh, my pleasure. Is it a dollar for dollar match? It's slightly. I can't remember the exact percentage. The park grant is actually slightly more. It's a calculation that's done at the state level. So it varies from municipality to municipality. And I want to say ours is something like 50 It's like 52% park grant and then 48% match. Great.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: It's always great to see matching funds.
[Amanda Centrella]: Just gets you that much more for your dollar.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Exactly.
[Joan Cyr]: Right. And will that allow us to, we had talked about a potential third sale over the performance space. I know you said you were going to look at that because having been to the Oktoberfest this past year, they were directly in the sun and sweating while they were playing. So that would be good if you could look at that too.
[Amanda Centrella]: Yeah, we could. We haven't made any design changes beyond the conceptual that was presented to you all. But within the budget that we have, I would talk to the designer about what adjustments could be made and maybe there's a way to prioritize over the stage. And I'd be happy to, we could shake it out where after final designs are set, we could present to you all Um, before we go up to bid, if you're curious to see where the design is at and, or obviously we can, you know, it's your prerogative to, um, attach conditions to the approval as well. But I guess to, in short, to answer your question, Joan, we haven't like adjusted anything from the concept because we don't have design funds at the moment. Um, but this would, this match and part of the park grant would go towards design and, um, we can, you know, within the constraints of the budget that we proposed for this project, adjust accordingly.
[Roberta Cameron]: Excellent. Thanks, Amanda. And we also want to make sure that we have some rat prevention built into the design as well. So let me know if I can help to bring some more information from that for my colleagues.
[Amanda Centrella]: Yes, I would be really, um, I think you had mentioned having a conversation with a contact at Somerville. Um, I'd love to set something up there to learn from their experience and we can bring that to our design team.
[Unidentified]: Thanks.
[Roberta Cameron]: Any other questions or comments for Amanda and the mayor?
[Joan Cyr]: No, I think this meets the conditions that we had set forth in our ordinance about, um, you know, the sort of off cycle or emergency consideration of a project based on an outside influence, so.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yep. And just for me, thank you so much. Thank you all for serving on this committee and all your hard work. And thank you for considering this project that we've been working on for so long. Thank you, Amanda and Teresa again.
[Unidentified]: Thank you.
[Joan Cyr]: So Roberta, are you suggesting that we vote on this now before we continue with the rest of them?
[Roberta Cameron]: So I think that we'll make a decision. So I think we still need to go through this valuation prioritization exercise, but safe to say that we will be able to vote on this this evening. And before you all came on, Amanda and Mayor, we found that we have the funding available to fund all of the projects requested this funding round. So we're just going through each project to evaluate how we feel about each of the projects. So we'll go through that first, I think, but we'll make sure that wherever we leave on whatever point we get to, we'll make a decision about this project before we really close this evening.
[Theresa Dupont]: And Mayor and Amanda, if you feel free to go back to your evenings, I'd be happy to text you with the outcome of that. Thank you. Thank you very much.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you. Thanks, guys.
[Theresa Dupont]: I'm going to re-share the financial worksheet again. Thank you all for speaking with my colleagues.
[Roberta Cameron]: All right. So the Riverside Plaza shade structure that we've just been talking about, prioritization, where do we land with this project?
[Ari Fishman]: I really like it, not just because it's my closest park. I think it moves a space that's good to grade.
[Roberta Cameron]: I how about if. Well, we can't see I wonder if you can. show everybody on the screen, Teresa. That is everybody. OK. And we don't have all of your faces. So there isn't a real. I wanted to like everybody to hold up one, two or three fingers. That would be a really quick way to see like where we all end with this project. I'm seeing ones. Is there anybody who is not a one for this project? OK, I think this is a number one priority. Next year, I'll make tattles or something like that. All right. So car park renovation, the final tranche. Yes. Also ones. I see ones. Anybody not a one for this? OK. I think that's the best thing, is if you can shout out if you are not a one for each project. That's good.
[Theresa Dupont]: That way, it speaks off the video.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah. So the condom shell lighting improvements. I have also one for this project, I'm trying to recall. This project had, I think, two parts to it. One of them was lighting the stage and the other was lighting the pedestrian.
[Joan Cyr]: The surrounding area. Right. It gets really dark around the surrounding area.
[Theresa Dupont]: Right. And just to clarify, it is just from the parking lot. Basically, we're at the path of the farmer's market. That would be illuminated. Yeah, they are the farmer's market. is working on a letter of support for this application for whatever it's worth, verbal conversations, they very much support this project because it would help prolong their season as well. Sometimes during the late fall, they close up shop at six because it's so dark. Just wanted to add that.
[Roberta Cameron]: So we didn't have any concerns about the scope, but we did. I wanted to try to address something about the noise in our recommendation. Um, and I'm not sure, like, maybe, maybe we skip it. We gave them the feedback already verbally in our meeting. Maybe that was sufficient or I don't know if we want to.
[Theresa Dupont]: talk about the hours of use for the park and just as a reminder kevin did had shared kevin bailey who's the recreation director that right now programming amplified programming does not extend past 9 p.m okay he has no intention of changing that it would just make this a more pleasurable experience for the performers on the stage as well as for guests yeah so i just wanted to clarify that so
[Roberta Cameron]: I just wanna, I'm thinking about like, so that we're not really overstepping our bounds, but that we show that the city council, we show that we've given some thought to these matters. I wonder if it's worth mentioning that the CPC supports the recreation departments careful consideration of the hours of amplified entertainment. So it's their prerogative to decide what those hours should be, but we just want to acknowledge that that's a sensitive subject that they should be careful with. Yeah, and that might be in the not as a condition, but somewhere in the agreement, in the description of the project. So that's a one as well. All right, Placestate Park Tennis Court Reconstruction.
[Joan Cyr]: I wouldn't say that's a number one. That tennis court didn't look that bad.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I feel that too. Yeah, I agree. And I feel like the commentary was like, well, it's like next on the to-do list kind of thing, if I remember and correct me if I'm wrong, but I give that a two.
[Ada Gunning]: I'm giving it a one. I mean, I feel like the price tag really sucks and that was really dispiriting, but it is our most used tennis court. It's where we do like all of our significant programming with other cities, et cetera. And the pictures were bad. So I'm, yeah, I feel like we're the right place to fund it. We should fund it.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Yeah, I think we should definitely fund it. But I think it's just priorities, not as high as the others. Yeah, for sure.
[Ari Fishman]: Yeah, I think if we were didn't have enough funding, it's one that I would definitely want to talk about. But we have the funding and the case is certainly strong enough that if we have the money, it should get it there. I think the consensus seems to be a two and twos are getting funding. It's not a situation of only ones are getting funded.
[Ada Gunning]: I just wanted to register. I felt like my biggest issue with it was the price tag, not the actual project.
[Unidentified]: Got it.
[Roberta Cameron]: All right. So that was for the open space projects on to historic preservation. The exterior siding restoration for Unitarian Universalist Church. Oh, okay. Yeah. That was a pretty sad shape. Yeah. Is there anybody not a one for this?
[Theresa Dupont]: Doug says one.
[Unidentified]: I assume.
[Roberta Cameron]: So, here we are. love whatever everybody just watch me flounder in front of it it stays what you want it to um all right now the city hall council chambers window restoration assuming that they give us the information that we need next month how would we feel about this project
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Does the information they're going to give us also include sell out the application, like, all the other applicants.
[Unidentified]: Okay.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Yeah. I'll give it a 1 with an asterisk. I guess.
[Joan Cyr]: Yeah, well, assuming that their application shows us pictures of how these things are completely failing and in order to maintain the envelope of the building, they need to be restored. So 1 with an asterisk. I'm just curious. Do you know why this didn't make it above the bathrooms in their applications this year?
[Roberta Cameron]: I think it was being requested by two different parties. So it's not that the facilities director said, what is the area that needs the biggest improvement this year, and then proactively came to us with a request. I think that the The ADA, Department of Francis, came to him with a request, the urgent request for bathrooms. And simultaneously, the City Council came with an urgent request for the windows because they're not functioning. And for some reason, CPA got attached to the bathroom idea. but CPA didn't get attached to the chamber windows idea initially. But this is, you know, one of the things that I had wanted them to do was look at the big picture of everything that you're doing this year and all the different funding sources that you're planning to spend this year and which ones are appropriate to go toward this project. And so I think that that's exactly what we're landing on now by making this change. Reg, thank you, welcome, good evening. The big thing that we're talking about right now, if you wouldn't have received this update, is that the City Hall bathrooms application is being swapped for a City Hall Council Chamber windows request.
[Reggie Graham]: And- If you didn't hear the yelling just now down the hall. Someone's trying to throw something out the window. They might need some new windows.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah. And where this came from is the I was just explaining different stakeholders in City Hall made urgent requests of the facilities director. to make these immediate improvements. And he asked for CPA funding for the bathrooms and asked for stabilization funding for the City Hall and Council Chamber windows. And with some discussion with Teresa, the Mayor, the Facilities Director, and City Councilors, we talked about which was the most appropriate way to fund this project and they've now requested swapping the two so that CBA would restore the windows and ensure that it's done according to historic preservation standards and stabilization funds will be used for the bathrooms. So that's exactly where we're at right now with the funding.
[Theresa Dupont]: It's a bit more. It's $73,000 more. So the bathrooms, they were asking for $250,000, and the windows is for $322,000.
[Roberta Cameron]: But the windows project is a defined scope, whereas the bathrooms was just throwing a dart at the wall. There was no scope attached to the $250,000 request.
[Reggie Graham]: Yes. So, um, where does that put us in our totality? I mean, before I listen, I think my glasses the way on here. So, so if we had the extra money and we still are, we still able to, um, cause we were, we were below budget, right?
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah, we are a little below budget still.
[Theresa Dupont]: Uh, still these two numbers are here. Yes. The 2.7 on the bottom, that is our available funding that we have. Versus 2.3. And the 2.3 are the asks. Thank you.
[Joan Cyr]: Yeah, but you didn't tell them that St. Francis withdrew their application. I did.
[Theresa Dupont]: St. Francis withdrew their application. So we did pick up, they were originally asking for $150,000. Are they Christians?
[Roberta Cameron]: No. They balked at providing the financial information that we asked them for.
[Theresa Dupont]: There are some challenges with that, so they chose to withdraw.
[Reggie Graham]: So we still have a little bit of wiggle room at the end.
[Theresa Dupont]: Yes, but we gained $150,000 back to our budget for this year, not having that as a consideration.
[Reggie Graham]: But then we kicked back $75,000 for the windows.
[Theresa Dupont]: Right. Yes, actually, to your point, I alluded that there were some canceled awards that kind of came in through this funding that's down here, just to explain what they are. $76,000 here is actually for the Red Pond Aeration project that this body funded a couple years ago. They're having a difficult time sourcing an adequate consultant, as well as that was as a reaction to having high E. coli levels in the pond a few years ago. It hasn't been an issue the past couple of years. So seeing as they're having challenges finding the right partner on the project, and it hasn't necessarily been a need, the Recreation Department released us funding back to us. And then the $129,000 here for historic preservation that came back. And again, this I divided it. It's just going to come back into our budgeted reserve. So that $129,000 doesn't have to go to historic preservation. It's just sourcing, identifying the source. That was for the canceled awards at Engine 3 for the fire station window study, as we determined that they don't have historic windows in which to study any longer, as well as this body funded Chevalier ADA improvements a few years ago. At least those were done. However, they opted to use other funding besides CPA. So that money has been returned to us. So the project was completed. They just didn't use CPA funds for it. So that money has come back to us just to identify where that money came from. Thanks.
[Reggie Graham]: Thank you for the update.
[Roberta Cameron]: And the 678,000. So last year we opted to keep somewhere in the order of 225,000. And so The balance is perhaps due to additional carried over funds that we had or maybe a higher than anticipated state match?
[Theresa Dupont]: Higher than anticipated state match, a little bit of just, we estimate based off of, we estimate our revenue based off of surcharge of previous years with kind of trying to factor in some growth there. So it's just an estimated number. So this is now the actualized figures for that. to get us to where we're at with 2.7 available.
[Roberta Cameron]: 2.7 available, 3, 2.4 requested. So we have the funds to award everything that's been requested of us this time, but we're going through right now this prioritization or really determining what value each of these projects is to us. so that we can decide which ones we are likely to award funds to. Raising any questions or concerns that we have about each project, and then, Teresa, and any conditions that we want to suggest for Teresa to include in the recommendation letters that we'll vote on next month. So that catches Reggie up. You can see that we've already just quickly gone through Riverside Plaza, shade structure, improvements, car park, renovation, convention, lighting improvements and placed in park tennis courts. And everyone has given. So one is the highest priority, and all of the projects that we've talked about so far have the highest priority, except maybe the question of Playstead Park Tennis Courts, just because the price tag is so... ...at Playstead.
[Theresa Dupont]: You just froze for a second. Are you still there? Are we still here? Yep. I'm still here. I'm still playing around with Zoom to try and see everyone.
[Roberta Cameron]: My internet connection is unstable. How great. All right. So we just talked about the City Hall Council Chambers window, and we'll work on having the information from them that we need to review that project next month. So the facilities department also has an application for building envelope restoration at the Heckner Center. So I think I can still see everyone. Show me if you want ones or shout if you think this is less valuable than a one, if you think it's something else. I think this is a one. The Oak Grove Cemetery building restoration. Phase two.
[Theresa Dupont]: This would, again, this is a reminder, get this project to be shelf-ready. It's all the way through construction and design documents.
[Roberta Cameron]: Oh, he's saying one. Anybody have anything besides a one for this? That's a one. Great. The ADA improvements at Shiloh Baptist Church.
[Theresa Dupont]: One, one. And that is one.
[Roberta Cameron]: Okay. Um, and then the affordable housing trust fund.
[Ada Gunning]: And say 1. I, sorry, I missed I missed the head nerd discussion because I was just hitting my kid. Good night. Um, but I was concerned about that presentation. Um, yeah, because of how. Kind of, like, remember exactly what the concerns are, but it felt like it was going to be a multimillion dollar project. We weren't going to be able to get that amount of funding. So we're trying to break it up into, like, bite size chunks. But the bite size chunks to me didn't necessarily seem like they had the forethought of. What was to come with that building? For example, like the need for an elevator for future use for the upstairs, that kind of thing. And so I just wanted to highlight that concern on that project.
[Theresa Dupont]: And I mean, all will be presenting again, the window, the city council window project at our next meeting. So I can ask him perhaps to bring some additional information about that to maybe set a better timeline of
[Roberta Cameron]: was I remind me refresh my memory did. So I remember that there was the feasibility study that had been for a different project at a different time, but it identified the condition of all the different aspects of the building, which was really useful information. Did the application give an indication of what are the minimum improvements needed to open the center today?
[Ada Gunning]: So they basically, if I remember the presentation correctly, they were like, we want to use the first floor for afterschool programming by the rec department. So not an actual afterschool program, but like afterschool programming and then a couple like administrative offices. Am I remembering that right? That is correct. And there was like no plan, no plan for the second floor. Like that was like TBD. Correct. That was a little concerning to me.
[Theresa Dupont]: I don't want to speak for Director Reggie, but if I recall, they have received an MVP, which is Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness grant from the city. And I think that that is necessitating the timeline a bit too, because they have to spend that within a certain time. So I think that's why he was breaking it up into phases, because they have to take action on that $850,000 that they got through this grant on a time frame. So that's why they were going to focus on the interior work. on the first floor to get that to standard and then down the road.
[Roberta Cameron]: And I also want, I'm sorry, go ahead.
[Ada Gunning]: No, it just makes me wonder. I remember that too, Teresa. And I think I don't see a reason not to fund it. It's just like, I was a little concerned hearing that presentation. It makes me wonder whether this is one of those places that we can provide, I don't know, funding or the support in, like, thinking through what the long-term plan for the building is, because the idea of having, after all this time, having the Heckner back online, but, like, only using half of it, it's just a little, like, upsetting, and that there's no actual plan to use the second half of it. It feels, like, not great. I don't know.
[Reggie Graham]: I wasn't here for the earlier tent this evening.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: No, this was last month.
[Reggie Graham]: OK. So I wrote some notes.
[Unidentified]: Yeah.
[Reggie Graham]: And I thought that we might want to place some conditions on them for various reasons and some of the reasons that they just talked about. And we're talking about they already received some funding sources other than us. but I too have concerns as to using half the building and not having the second floor being ADA compliant because everybody that comes to us knows that if you have a building remodeled or revitalized, that you have to have it ADA compliant. And that wasn't even talked about, that wasn't even discussed. So it seems like the plan is flawed.
[Roberta Cameron]: So I want to open up the possibility of considering that the building might be opened in stages, and we don't know yet when are they going to be able to come back and ask for the funding for the elevator. The Shiloh building is of a similar scale, so a similar kind of Lula elevator might be the way that they could get that building to be totally. And so after paying for between the three different funding tranches that have gone to Shiloh, it will end up being about a million dollar project to put in an elevator and even just a Lula. You know, all things considered, maybe it might be less depending on the what the placement is, what the building structure is like, but I've seen a number of projects that are able to proceed. in a phased manner, fixing different systems of the building over time so that they're ultimately within five years able to have a fully accessible elevator accessible building, but they start one system at a time to get to that. So I feel like the elevator doesn't have to be the first It's the choice. It would be helpful if there was a commitment to add an elevator in the future.
[Ada Gunning]: I think that's the thing, Roberta. Having a plan in phases, I think we can all get behind. But when he came to do the presentation, the lack of plan was what really struck me. And that was really disappointing as just a person that's been watching the Heckner and wanting to make the most of it. That's my thought on that. I would love to fund multiple phases of this over time, but I would also love for there to be a vision around that.
[Roberta Cameron]: Great. And so I think maybe conditions on this project would be that the design plans will incorporate the eventual construction of an elevator. Number one, number two, that the ground floor has to be fully handicapped accessible. You know, we're not going to put CPA funds into a building that isn't meeting the code for the part of the building that's being used. Thank you all for that discussion. so we were at affordable housing trust for the prioritization i think everybody said one there yeah one i would consider increasing i was going to wonder that so the committee would have a choice so we could increase the amount that we offer to the affordable housing trust or we could reserve that $100,000 of capacity for an off-cycle application over the course of this year. Both of those are very worthwhile eventualities.
[Joan Cyr]: Do you know, did they come up with the 250 proposed amount or was that something that we might have
[Theresa Dupont]: I might have suggested it, just based off of what I knew we had for budget. So the $250,000 kind of just came from an organic discussion between myself and the housing planner. But I clearly recall Kayleen, whenever she was presenting, saying like, you should be asking for more.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: So if this or... Yeah, I mean, I definitely support giving more, like a good faith, you know, for them. And I mean, being the Medford housing rep, I mean, and just with the work I do in Lexington, like the affordable housing trustee. really pivotal. But whatever, I mean, we can even just, what are they asking for? 350 or 250? Yeah, so either 250, maybe go to 300.
[Roberta Cameron]: In the awarded column, the next column to the right. Yeah, there, that way we keep track of what they asked for versus what we offer. Okay.
[Reggie Graham]: We're going to offer more than... That's what we're just... Potentially. Yeah.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I mean, I support that, but I'd also just support keeping money in our back pocket, too.
[Ada Gunning]: I like the idea of funding them well. On the other hand, I walked away from that presentation a little bit unclear what they were intending to do exactly with it. It felt like they were still in like a, we could do this, or we could do that, or we could do this, or we could do that kind of place. just kind of putting that out there. I don't know how much clarity we want from them if we're going to be giving them more than they asked for.
[Joan Cyr]: I think the whole idea about the Affordable Housing Trust is that they have work to do. They have to figure out what they're going to do and they're just starting out. It's not like they won't use the money for affordable housing at some point. The question is, do we want to give them the money now or do we want to save it for another application that may come off cycle or something along those lines?
[Ada Gunning]: Right. Do we want to wait for them to have more of a clear portfolio like X percent? We'll be spending on this, this year, and I don't know how it works, but it felt very nebulous in the presentation.
[Joan Cyr]: I think that over the years, the affordable housing, um, tranche, if you will, has not gotten the love that the others have gotten because we just simply haven't gotten the applications. Yeah. So I, at the beginning, we were kind of, um, you know, Feeling bad that, you know, although we were trying to distribute money equally amongst the three different areas, housing was not getting the same amount because we weren't getting the application. So, something to think about too. They haven't gotten as much as the others have gotten over the years.
[Reggie Graham]: Yeah. So, can I ask a question? How are we breaking it down by the three groups that we have now? I mean, I'm not being able to see such.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah. What is the percentage? Do we know?
[Theresa Dupont]: And it did percentage or just in totals by category.
[Reggie Graham]: So. I should probably sit closer to the screen.
[Joan Cyr]: Do you have amount to date on this? Are you highlighting that? That's not it.
[Theresa Dupont]: Yeah. These are the asks per category. So.
[Joan Cyr]: Right. But I mean, do we have the amounts per date per section since the beginning of the CBA program? We don't have that.
[Theresa Dupont]: I don't have it right in front of me. But last year, or actually, technically earlier this year, when we went on a little bit of a CPA outreach campaign, where we did identify how we distributed CPA funds in its totality since the program began. And we were right about neck and neck, a third, a third, and a third. Open space was a little bit higher, like 39-ish percent. But so we have distributed roughly a third of our funds towards housing. Those were just kind of big chunks, you know, like the walkway courts, pre-development costs, which was about $1.9 million that we awarded to them. You know, fellows like Wes got about $650,000 CPA dollars. The money has been distributed equally, I would say, but perhaps not by number of projects.
[Joan Cyr]: Yeah, definitely have done the products, but you're right. Lockling court was a big 1.
[Ada Gunning]: Another thing about this being the first year seeding the Affordable Housing Trust is we could go big and give them more money so that they can accrue interest or whatnot and then have the condition be like next year when you come to like re-up your funds, provide a little bit more of like a portfolio of like this is where we're planning to designate such and such funds. So we'd be giving them the benefit of the doubt so they can be accruing interest, but like having a little bit of a conditionality to it.
[Theresa Dupont]: Yeah. And in her presentation at DT Magor, she had shared that they had their two major projects in the trust pocket right now. One is to create a declaration of trust and the other was to Create a plan, create an action plan. Thank you. Then that will help guide them in their, their quarterly goals or monthly tasks or what have you. She had identified a couple of possible projects of how to spend the money in terms of courting. Nonprofit affordable housing developers with some of our city owned lots right now, but to your point, it's not like a definitive we're going to take this to 50 and distributed here amongst these things so.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: And I kind of agree with Ada. I mean, why don't we just let them get a year under their belt and get that action plan, and then maybe next year we give them a little more, you know? I think maybe it being not so, like, their plan not being so clear, let's just keep the $150 or whatever in our pocket for now. Okay.
[Theresa Dupont]: And one thing other communities such as Somerville What they do is they automatically, I believe it's 50%, right? Of your annual budget just goes right into their board of housing trust. For them to kind of tackle the housing portion of what CPA can do. So that's something that we could discuss as a committee of taking that on as a best practice. 50% of what?
[Roberta Cameron]: So the Somerville, Somerville CPC allocates half of their revenue every year to affordable housing.
[Ada Gunning]: And so right now we're doing like a third right now.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah, we're like right now we're doing the 90 percent. Yeah, well, 19% would be what we spend if we bumped it up by 100,000. It would be 14% if we didn't. But right now we're just doing the basic 10, 10, 10. Sometimes we bump up the housing by maybe it's 10, 10, 20, but like we've made that decision on a year to year basis. Um, Summerville technically does too, it's just that every year they choose 50%. Um, so... So that's really different.
[Reggie Graham]: So, they really don't have a track record here.
[Roberta Cameron]: Right, and that's the thing.
[Reggie Graham]: Because they don't have a track record, why, in my estimation, why would we give them additional funding when they've asked for $250,000, right? Right.
[Roberta Cameron]: And...
[Reggie Graham]: they probably don't exactly have an action plan in place or even thought out yet. And if they thought that the $250,000 was adequate,
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Yeah, I agree. I think what Roberta was getting, the point you were getting to, like for the Somerville example, is that agencies like Somerville Housing, they don't go to CPC for money. They just go straight to the housing trust, correct? Yeah. So the same thing is happening right now in Lexington. There's a, that CPC is having a huge discussion about what to do with the HT and, um, like the future for, you know, me as a director, well, I not have the ability to go to CPC anymore. I might just go into the housing trust, you know, there's pros and cons. Um, but yeah, I mean, I agree with, but, uh, what you're saying, I think just give them the two 50, but then some, you know, miles under them and then go from there.
[Roberta Cameron]: I just fixed the percentages down here.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I felt a little weird about that 99.9. I don't know where that came from.
[Unidentified]: Anybody else?
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I mean, maybe they can give us a better budget, but I was like, well, what money have you spent? What's left over? Like, could we just give them another 30 or 60 and then have them come back next year? I felt a little weird about their ability to spend. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. I jumped ahead. So it's almost my bedtime, guys.
[Theresa Dupont]: They increased their base request from 60 to 75 and then that 23 to increase all the other. Yeah, they're being counters so they went right down to the penny to see how much it would cost to have a salaried person support the program. But yeah, they should just rounded it up.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Yeah, but I don't even know if they need that much money.
[Roberta Cameron]: But I mean, if they spent their funding in two years instead of three years, they could always come back early. They don't have to wait three years. They're anticipating that they'll spend this down in three years, but I'd like to see them accelerate that because I think there are more than that number of people who need help. not getting it for some reason.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Yeah, I felt like their outreach wasn't that strong. I could email her right now, like, four contacts that went for housing, like direct, you know what I mean? Be like, you guys should contact them. I'm sure they have a list of rent arrears that need to be paid, you know? Yeah, yeah.
[Ada Gunning]: I felt the same way about the outreach. It was a little concerning to me.
[Theresa Dupont]: I think she did say tonight, though, that part of this additional admin expenses were to help supplement their marketing program. She did say that they've been trying to market it more. But perhaps we could put that as a condition. You get what you pay for.
[Roberta Cameron]: And I'm hoping that if we pay for more admin, they will do more work on our behalf.
[Ada Gunning]: What if there's a condition around the outreach, like, on the condition that you maintain ongoing dialogue with, like, such and such agencies in Medford, you know, to Kayleen's point, like, to make sure that there's communication? Because, I mean, there's marketing, but then there's just, like, knowing who to talk to in the city. You know what I mean? Right. And it feels like even if you're marketing, if you don't have those relationships, like you're not going to be getting that steady stream of people coming in.
[Theresa Dupont]: I'll wordsmith us a couple of variations of the condition that address that. So then when we vote next, next month, I'll have those options ready. But I think we can figure out some sort of conditioning around engagement. Yeah.
[Roberta Cameron]: Appreciate that. All right, so that's a one from everyone, I assume. OK, so it looks like we don't have any argument against funding all the projects as requested. We did promise to vote on the one project this evening before we depart. You did miss that, Rich.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Roberta Cameron]: We had the mayor came to ask us to expedite the decision on the Riverside Plaza project.
[Theresa Dupont]: Oh, that's due to they have a matching grant with obligations that have a deadline that's precipitating the urgent request.
[Reggie Graham]: Yeah, I kind of know about that one.
[Roberta Cameron]: Okay. So the request is for $144,250. Do you want to pull up, Teresa, the letter?
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Do you want a motion? Are you going to look at the letter?
[Roberta Cameron]: Yes. I'm looking for a motion, but I want to just pull up the letter. I think there are no conditions in our draft.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I do not have conditions. The only thing about the letter, it doesn't say the amount they're asking for. I mean, I see it in our chart, but I had to dig for it. But it doesn't matter. I'll make the motion.
[Roberta Cameron]: Wasn't it in change in the letter? No. The table was 144,250.
[Theresa Dupont]: Yeah, it was for this time. Oh, okay. So yeah, it should still be in there. You're right. There should be a sign.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah. Then the one condition that I wanted to consider adding as a general condition is To say that if the, if the improvements, if the CPC funded improvements are discontinued within so many years, the city will reimburse the CPC, the CPA fund.
[Theresa Dupont]: How would that work since this is a match? You can't necessarily tie the CPA funds.
[Roberta Cameron]: It means that if in five years they decide to tear down the shade structures that we built, they have to put the money back in the CPA account. The park doesn't have to do that.
[Reggie Graham]: When you talked about that project, you had told them that you thought that they should put in a base layer. Is that included in that?
[Roberta Cameron]: Um, it will be so they, they, they need part of the funding is going to go to completing the design. And so they're going to put that as 1 of the things that they want to include in their final design.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I understand your intent with that, Roberta, but I just have a real hard time with putting constraints like that. It's really hard to know what's going to happen in five years or ten years or whatever down the road. I don't know. I feel like we just have to give them the benefit of the doubt and the good faith that
[Roberta Cameron]: So where this is coming from is that we've had projects in the past, including Manfred Housing Authority, which requested funds for the Bocce courts.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: So I have information, very good information, that they never actually got CPC funding for that. And that was completely paid for by Manfred Housing.
[Roberta Cameron]: For the Bocce courts? OK.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: Y'all need to take that one back. They got awarded, but you never paid for it by you, but it never got reimbursed or whatever. That is true. Okay. All right. But I understand what the intent is. I just, I'm not sure what kind of precedent and setting, because like... Let's say you did pay for the Medford housing, but then five years down the road, they get $65 million to reduce all install, and they need to take away the BACU courts for parking. Sorry, BACU courts, but this creating, I'm just saying, I don't know. It's a hard thing for an agency to know or forecast with that stipulation, but without it being a little bit more specific.
[Roberta Cameron]: Yeah.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: That's all. That's my two cents. I don't know. I mean, I just felt like I needed to say that.
[Theresa Dupont]: I'm just riffing.
[Roberta Cameron]: I'll see what. I mean, it could also happen with improvements made to the schoolyards, for example, that We fund $900,000 worth of improvements to a schoolyard, and in five years, the school department decides to build an addition to the school building that completely eliminates the schoolyard that we just paid for. I mean, obviously they have to do what they have to do, but would we request that they reimburse the cost of the improvements that they've just undone?
[Doug Carr]: Roberta, I guess my two cents is, I think it's a little different when the city of Medicare is doing it than others, just because we are all the city of Medicare, you know, when we decide to change gears or, do something different with a park or a building. It's with the knowledge that we spent money, maybe not great money on previous things. A lot of band-aids happened in the city and then we invested in something like a new fire station, not anymore, but the police station. These things happen. I don't see the need, I guess, for the city of Medford's conditions here because I don't see a track record of them doing anything over five and plus years that would go for it so far.
[Roberta Cameron]: Okay. Well, I hear that we're satisfied without making any conditions on this project then. Yeah. Okay.
[Reggie Graham]: But you said that other piece, the flooring was going to be part and parcel of it because we wanted to make sure that we kept the rodents from that wooden platform or whatever. Because they were going to put the wooden platform in and they were going to put the structures because it's coming to us next.
[Roberta Cameron]: So we just had a conversation with Amanda right before you came, and she reiterated that she'd like to get more information about that to work with the designers. So it sounds as though she's committed to implementing some kind of rat prevention. I don't know if we need to include that in our recommendation that goes to city council.
[Reggie Graham]: I guess, I mean, it was just it was just a suggestion to you all right to the commission. Yes, but we don't we don't we don't we don't go that deep into it. Yeah, we don't want to the.
[Theresa Dupont]: Project of itself, we just maybe in the disbursement schedule that would be in the so there's a decision and then the agreement where applicants sign it with us and blah, blah, blah. So perhaps we can outline something in the disbursement schedule of, you know, subject to a final design or something. I'm not sure. I'm just trying to think of another way to reiterate some of our paperwork that we want to see that.
[Roberta Cameron]: Maybe just like my suggestion with the shell, the lighting improvements of the convent shell was to put it somewhere in the project description. Right. So we could maybe for this one say in the project description that the Riverside Plaza Shade Structures project, which will include rat prevention technology. So that is iterated somewhere. Yeah, so it could be iterated maybe in the memorandum of agreement there might be a one paragraph description of the project that includes it's going to have so many shades and it's going to have a boardwalk and the boardwalk is going to include rat prevention, rodent prevention or whatever we want to say. Okay, I'm satisfied with that.
[Reggie Graham]: So Joan?
[Joan Cyr]: Yes.
[Reggie Graham]: We're waiting for you to make a motion.
[Joan Cyr]: Yes, I make a motion to approve the application for the Riverside Plaza. I recommend 144,254 signs. And someone seconded it. Reg did. Kayleen. Oh, Kayleen, sorry. I can't see you all. Kayleen seconded it. I will call the roll.
[Roberta Cameron]: Um, Joan? Yes. Haylene?
[Theresa Dupont]: Yes.
[Roberta Cameron]: Ada? Yeah. Ari? Yes. Doug?
[Doug Carr]: Yes.
[Roberta Cameron]: And Reg? Yes. And myself, yes. Thanks. On behalf of the city of Medford, thank you very much. And that is all the business that we need to cover today. Minutes. Do we want to approve minutes? Do we want to save that for the next meeting? I know it's after eight now, so.
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: All right. I'm just piling up. I'll make a motion if you want to.
[Roberta Cameron]: Motion to accept the minutes for both meetings.
[Ari Fishman]: I'll second.
[Roberta Cameron]: Seconded by Ari. and I'll call the roll. Joan? Yes. Christine? Yes. Ada? Yes. Ari? Yes. Doug? Yes. Reg? Yes. Myself, yes. Minutes are approved for October 8th and October 22, 2024. And I need a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn. I heard Reg first, and who seconded?
[MCM00001830_SPEAKER_05]: I think Ari did. No? Yeah, Ari. One of us. It wasn't me.
[Roberta Cameron]: I just teased everyone. All right, Joan? Yes. Kayleen? Yes. Ada?
[Ada Gunning]: Yes.
[Roberta Cameron]: Ari? Yes. Doug?
[Reggie Graham]: Yes.
[Roberta Cameron]: And Reg?
[Reggie Graham]: Yes.
[Roberta Cameron]: Myself, yes. All right. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you, everyone.
|
total time: 2.09 minutes total words: 203 |
|||