CPC meeting minutes from 4-16-2020-final (1)CITY of BEVERLY
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
191 Cabot Street
Beverly, Massachusetts 01915
Phone (978) 921 -6000
Fax (978) 921 -6187
Mayor
Members
Michael P. Cahill
Derek Beckwith John Hall
Chairperson
Robert Buchsbaum Nancy Marino
Marilyn McCrory
Thomas Bussone, II Wendy Pearl
Vice Chairperson
Christy Edwards
Heather Richter
CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
COMMITTEEXOMMISSION: SUBCOMMITTEE
DATE:
LOCATION:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Community Preservation Committee
April 16, 2020
Google Meet Virtual Meeting
Chair - Marilyn McCrory, Vice Chair -
Heather Richter, Derek Beckwith, John Hall,
Tom Bussone, Robert Buchsbaum, Nancy
Marino, Christy Edwards, Wendy Pearl
MEMBERS ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
Denise Deschamps - Economic
Development Planner, Planning
Department, acting as Committee staff
Jodi Byrne - Recording Secretary
1. Call to Order
Chair Marilyn McCrory calls the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Denise Deschamps takes formal
attendance. Chair McCrory informs everyone that the meeting will be recorded. Chair McCrory
takes a verbal roll call and then reads the following:
Pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12, 2020 Order Suspending Certain Provisions of the
Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 30A, §18, and the Governor's March 23, 2020 Order imposing
strict limitation on the number of people that may gather in one place, this meeting of the
Beverly Community Preservation Committee will be conducted via remote participation to
the greatest extent possible. No in- person attendance of members of the public will be
available, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the
proceedings in real time, via technological means. In the event that we are unable to do so,
despite best efforts, we will post on the City's website an audio or video recording,
transcript, or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the
meeting. Please see page 2 for detail on accessing the meeting remotely.
REMOTE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THIS MEETING WILL BE PROVIDED IN THE
FOLLOWING MANNER:
1. Broadcast and/or live streaming by BevCam at Channel 99 and /or
https. //bevc ore/video /live - stream
2. Access through the Google Hangouts Meet application. This application will allow users
to view the meeting and request comment using the Chat function. Pursuant to Open
Meeting Law, M.G.L. C. 30A, §20, the Chair may elect to recognize public comment
submitted through the Chat function at appropriate points in the meeting."
Applicants and /or representatives required to appear before the Beverly Community
Preservation Committee must make arrangements to present remotely as there is not a
physical meeting location. Documentary exhibits and /or visual presentations must be
submitted 3 business days in advance of the meeting to Denise Deschamps via email at
ddeschamps @beverlyma.gov. If you wish to have a comment and /or question read during
the meeting please submit them to Denise Deschamps at ddeschamps @beverlyma.gov by
Noon on April 15, 2020.
Chair McCrory repeats that the meeting is being recorded and will also be captured on video. All
participants are given the option of turning off their video and audio, and are asked to keep their
mute button on unless formally speaking. She says that anyone who would like a copy of any
documents from tonight's meeting may contact Denise Deschamps.
Chair McCrory states the rules of conduct for the meeting. She says that after the Board speaks
she will call upon members of the public to speak. She asks everyone to use their mute button
unless formally speaking. She also states that all votes will be taken in a formal roll call vote.
1. Approval of Minutes
Chair McCrory defers this to the next meeting.
2. Membership Dues to Massachusetts Community Preservation Coalition
Chair McCrory explains that the CPC is a local committee and a member of a state -wide
coalition. She says the Coalition provides advice to the CPC related to topics such as funding
category restrictions and funding guidance and that each year the CPC votes to approve these
yearly dues.
2
Derek Beckwith motions to approve the $3,500 in annual dues. Wendy Pearl seconds. A formal
roll call vote is taken with each of the following Committee members voting in favor of the
motion: Heather Richter, John Hall, Christy Edwards, Robert Buchsbaum, Derek Beckwith,
Nancy Marino, Marilyn McCrory. The motion passes (7 -0). *Wendy Pearl's audio cuts out
leaving her unable to participate in the vote. Tom Bussone enters the meeting after this vote is
taken.
3. Continue Review of Funding Applications
Chair McCrory provides background information for the two part application process. She
explains that the CPC has been reviewing applications since January and that they have assigned
each project a rating based upon CPC set criteria. She also states that the CPC has requested
clarification from certain applicants and that they have successfully received this feedback. Chair
McCrory says that the hope for tonight's meeting is to be able to move some of these projects
forward with a recommendation for approval to the City Council.
There are some technical challenges and so Deschamps agrees to monitor the chat box for
technology issues /questions.
BEVERLY HOUSING AUTHORITY — as represented by Dawn Goodwin.
Chair McCrory introduces the BHA project noting that CPC members, when ranking the project
applications, ranked the BHA project as second based on CPC criteria. McCrory provides a
background of the project, stating that the request of $96,000 is to fund a project to improve
housing conditions, specifically the failed roofing shingles, that threaten the sustainability of
Roger Conant Apartments located at 77 Sohier Road. Chair McCrory invites Dawn Goodwin,
who is representing the project, to comment.
Goodwin says that McCrory's review was complete and that she is open to questions. Chair
McCrory asks the CPC if they have any questions or comments.
Derek Beckwith states that the application is strong and that he values its high ranking by the
CPC. He also says that the question of how the cost estimate was developed, posed by the CPC
during their application review, was sufficiently answered by the BHA.
Robert Buchsbaum agrees with Beckwith and notes that there was a debate on the eligibility of
this project related to whether it should be considered housing preservation or maintenance. He
says that the project is deemed eligible for preservation and that he supports this.
John Hall says that he also had concerns that the project was maintenance, but he recognizes the
importance of this project and he will support it.
3
Chair McCrory notes the strong connection to preservation within this project, and she feels all
concerns have been met in order to support this project.
Wendy Pearl compliments the applicant's history of executing projects both on budget and on
time. She states that she supports this project.
Chair McCrory invites a motion to move this application forward. Pearl motions to fund this
project at the full amount of $96,000 for community housing preservation. Beckwith seconds the
motion.
Tom Bussone joins the meeting at 6:55 pm.
There is a formal roll call with each of the following CPC members voting yes: Heather Richter,
John Hall, Christy Edwards, Robert Buchsbaum, Wendy Pearl, Derek Beckwith, Nancy Marino,
Marilyn McCrory, Tom Bussone. The motion passes (9 -0).
McCrory states that an MOU must be executed before the project work begins. Dawn Goodwin
thanks the CPC for their support.
2. GILLIS PARK PROJECT — as represented by Tiffany Collins and Suzie LaMont.
Chair McCrory provides a brief overview of the project, noting that it qualifies under both the
historic resources and recreation categories. McCrory states that the funding request is for
$22,635 and that the actual cost of the project is $22,935. McCrory explains that the project
request is to restore the historic stone staircase that provides access between Pleasant View beach
and the playground. McCrory reports that there were questions as to whom would provide
oversight on the project and receive the CPA dollars since the property is owned by the City and
that these questions were sufficiently answered by the applicant. McCrory invites the applicants
to speak.
Suzie LaMont and Tiffany Collins report that they have no further comments. McCrory invites
questions or comments from the CPC.
Pearl states that the Beverly Historic District Commission has not yet determined if the treads
need to be granite or brick, but that the history indicates historical support for either. She notes
that the applicant has chosen brick and that the Secretary of Interior's Standards are all met in the
category of preservation.
Chair McCrory says that upon approval, conditions could be attached along with other options
for voting.
n
Buchsbaum says that sea level rise needs to be an awareness although it was noted that this area
does not flood.
Beckwith says that this is a strong application that has clear support and project management
with the City. He states that he is in favor of this project.
Chair McCrory states that the application includes eight letters from various organizations that
are supporting this project.
Bussone motions to fund this project for the full request of $22,635 under the categories of
historic and recreation. Buchsbaum seconds the motion.
Edwards says that because this project qualifies as both historic and recreation, that the CPA
funding could be evenly drawn from both the historic and general reserve accounts. Bussone
amends his motion to include this and Buchsbaum seconds this motion.
There is a formal roll call with each of the following CPC members voting yes: Heather Richter,
John Hall, Christy Edwards, Robert Buchsbaum, Wendy Pearl, Derek Beckwith, Nancy Marino,
Marilyn McCrory, Tom Bussone. The motion passes (9 -0).
Chair McCrory states that an MOU must be executed before the work begins. The applicants
thank the CPC for their support.
3. THE CABOT THEATRE —as represented by Casey Soward, Rachel Hertzberg,
and Bob Stoneham
Chair McCrory provides a brief review of the project, indicating that it qualifies under the
categories of restoration and historic preservation. She reports the funding request at $275,000
and notes that the entire project cost [as it relates to the lobby restoration] is $492,000. Chair
McCrory reports that this project was ranked fourth by CPC members using CPC criteria. She
says that the project includes the restoration of the lobby's ceiling and the rose window and that
this is part of a much larger project. Chair McCrory reports that the CPC asked and successfully
received clarifying information on the specifics of what was being funded by the CPA. She also
states that compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards was confirmed. Chair
McCrory then says that the CPC has questions about the ownership of the building and
ownership was verified. There is also a question as to the implementation of some type of
restriction or mechanism in order to protect the public's investment. Chair McCrory invites the
applicants to speak.
Bob Stoneham thanks the CPC for their time. He notes that The Cabot has been closed due to the
COVID-19 pandemic and that they hope to use this closing as an opportunity to complete this
5
restoration work. Stoneham reports that they did remove a drop ceiling in the lobby and that this
work revealed the elements to be restored to the public and elevated project support.
Rachel Hertzberg has no further comments and thanks the CPC for their consideration.
Chair McCrory says that there is still some discussion the CPC would like to have regarding
some type of mechanism to protect the public's funds as they are used by a private organization.
She invites the CPC to comment on this.
Pearl asks if the CPC received a budget sheet from the project proponent and this is confirmed.
McCrory says that the sheet was submitted on Jan. 24, 2020 and included a breakdown of project
funding with CPC funding representing 16% of the total project budget. It is noted that all other
funds are from donors and grants.
Bussone says that he still wants to know how the public interest will be protected in this project.
He likes the project, but because The Cabot is a private entity, feels a need to protect the public
interest.
Edwards says that she looked at a February 10th, 2020 memo that included options used by other
communities to address that point. Edwards says that she was drawn to the "Boston" model
which requires payback in various time bands if the property is sold; 100% repayment if sold
within 5 years, 75% repayment if sold within ten years, and 50% repayment if sold within 15
years. She reports that it also includes a clause that would require the owner to maintain the work
completed. She reads this clause aloud and then welcomes comments.
Bussone also likes this model, but notes that this will set a precedent and that other private
projects may come forward and ask for the same arrangement. Pearl says that there already is
such a precedent and refers to Historic Beverly, given that they are also a private entity.
Chair McCrory suggests a condition with an agreement as has been described and asks if Bob
Stoneham would be open to some type of clause that would be like the suggestion from Edwards,
and Stoneham says they are willing to discuss this. McCrory says that the CPC could make a
recommendation for funding this project with a condition of some type of fund recapture clause
to help preserve the public investment.
Pearl asks why they are not considering a preservation restriction. Deschamps says that the
practical reality of securing a preservation restriction (such as seen with Hale House) proves it to
be a difficult and time- consuming task. She also says that there is a need to balance preservation
with a need for preserving vitality as a private enterprise. Pearl says that she wants to confirm
M
that this is the CPC's choice and not made because the applicant does not want to accept this
restriction.
Pearl states that a scaled -basis condition (such as the Boston model suggested by Edwards) for
funding is best for investment protection.
Beckwith states that the dollar amounts of both the total funding amount and the repayment plan
should be considered. Pearl states that the vote to fund the project could allow for these details to
be worked out later. Chair McCrory confirms this and suggests that within the vote the CPC
could decide on what to fund, the amount to fund, and an agreement of a funding recapture
mechanism.
Buchsbaum suggests that the CPC wait until a plan is firm and then approve the full packet at the
next meeting of the CPC. Hall notes that due to The Cabot's current closure, they may want to
expedite the process so that construction can begin while the schedule of shows is off.
Stoneham agrees that it would be good to know for both funding and public safety. He asks how
long it would take to work out the details, and Chair McCrory answers that although the CPC
plans to make the recommendations to City Council in May, that it could be June before the City
approves the recommendations and there could be a memorandum to sign. Deschamps says that
April 27, 2020 is the next City Council meeting.
Pearl asks if there could be a motion with embedded criteria. She says that a MOA could be had
without all of the details as this would probably be a separate document anyway because a
document with the more specific conditions might be required because the term of the agreement
would be much longer than the typical MOU. Pearl says that she is supportive of this project and
feels compelled to motion forward tonight so that The Cabot could begin with their plans.
Beckwith offers his agreement along with both Hall and Edwards. Marino says that she agrees
and would like to move this forward. Buchsbaum is supportive and wants to support The
Cabot's continued success.
Chair McCrory asks Deschamps to check with Stephanie Williams regarding the legal aspects of
this plan and how the agreement would work. She says that the Boston model is favored. She
asks Deschamps to meet with the City Solicitor regarding the specifics of a plan. Deschamps
says that Bussone emailed her (as his audio was not working) and he would like to explore if the
proposed plan to recapture CPA funds under certain circumstances could /should be filed with the
Registry of Deeds. Deschamps says she will also check on this with the City Solicitor.
Pearl suggests that the details be worked out in the MOU (memorandum of undersanding) and
that they could just adopt the Boston model. McCrory suggests that the CPC should see
7
something in writing to include time frames and percentages. She likes the concept of the Boston
model but would like more time to review.
Pearl motions that the CPC approve the funding for The Cabot restoration for the requested
amount of $275,000 in the category of historic preservation. The motion includes the condition
that the CPC and the applicant will come to terms in a long -term recapture agreement and
maintenance improvement agreement over a period of time to protect the public investment. Hall
seconds the motion.
There is a formal roll call with each of the following CPC members voting yes: Heather Richter,
John Hall, Christy Edwards, Robert Buchsbaum, Wendy Pearl, Derek Beckwith, Nancy Marino,
Marilyn McCrory, Tom Bussone. The motion passes (9 -0).
The applicant thanks the CPC for their support.
4. Recap of phone call initiated by Medford CPC re Possible Use of CPC Funds for
Emergency Housing Needs Resulting from COVID -19 Pandemic
Richter, Deschamps, and Beckwith report that they were present on a phone call initiated by the
Medford CPC that discussed using CPC funds to support emergency housing needs as a result of
the COVID -19 pandemic. Deschamps reads a prepared statement with some of the presented
ideas:
1. Municipality could apply along with local or regional organizations with experience in
this area, to the CPC, Possible regional organizations are: Harborlight, Partners, North
Shore CDC, the YMCA and NSCAP.
2. It is unclear if an agreement between the City and the entity chosen to administer the
program would be sufficient, or if the role of administering the program would have to be
put out to bid.
3. Deschamps also notes the criteria would need to be defined regarding type, amount, and
duration of program. For example, it would need to be determined if the funding plan was
just for now or a longer term, how the efficacy would be monitored, and how this could
all be verified by the CPC.
Beckwith says that he is interested in doing this as people in the City are being severely impacted
by the COVID -19 pandemic resulting in loss of jobs and housing. He says that other cities are
putting efforts into this and that the models he saw showed CPC collaborating with other entities
who had experience in housing. Beckwith says that he is open to the CPC providing help.
Richter says that a statement was made on the call that there would be no need for procurement
to take place. She also says that CPC should be aware of restrictions for use of the funding.
Deschamps makes Chair McCrory aware that Councilor Rand in on the call with the CPC and
has a question. Chair McCrory asks if Councilor Rand would like to comment. Councilor Rand
E:3
says that she was also on the call initiated by the Medford CPC and that she reached out to
Mickey Northcott and Andrew DeFranza and other housing service agencies and let them know
of the meeting. She received information back from Mickey and Andrew about other funding
that is in the works for both rental assistance and to cover landlord losses. Councilor Rand says
that there is money out there, and that they (CPC) not providing rental assistance if monies were
already being received by residents from other resources. She suggests that this may be an
opportunity to support Family Promise and that perhaps CPA funds could support people who
are ready to move into housing. She says that there is much to learn, and that she would like the
City to have a plan in place.
Pearl says that the CPC should be ready to act quickly in order to move money where it needs to
go. She says that there should be a procedure for out -of -cycle housing assistance and that the
CPC should be ready to deliberate and vote to avoid procedural hang -ups.
Chair McCrory suggests that a subcommittee be formed with a plan to present to the Committee
in the near future. Marino suggests that the CPC and the City could work with the Housing
Authority. She also says that she will be happy to work on this proposal.
Chair McCrory says that this conversation will continue.
5. Schedule next CPC Meeting
Chair McCrory states that CPC meetings occur on the 3rd Thursday of the month, and that
through email, they will agree on the next meeting date. Deschamps says that she will post the
agenda as required by the public meeting law. She says that the next date would be May 21,
2020, but asks if the CPC should meet earlier because there are three other applicants who are
waiting for feedback in addition to a possible report from the soon to be formed subcommittee.
Beckwith suggests adding a meeting while keeping the 3rd Thursday in May. Pearl notes the
urgency in these items. The CPC agreed to schedule a meeting for May 7, time to be
determined. The CPC will also maintain its scheduled meeting for May 21.
Adjournment
A motion was made to adjourn and it was seconded. A roll call vote was taken with all voting in
favor to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:12 PM.
M