##VIDEO ID:stoWAApFYt0## e e e e e e e e e e [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] oh on good evening chadam welcome to the uh joint meeting of the chadam select board and the affordable housing trust Board of Trustees of October 8 2024 please note this meeting is being recorded and will be available shortly Hereafter for scheduled and On Demand viewing on any smartphone or tablet device if anyone else is recording the meeting please notify the chair seeing no such notification I'll proceed pursuant to Governor Healey's March 29 2023 signing of the acts of 2023 extending certain covid-19 measures adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law General Law chapter 38 section 20 until March 31 2025 this joint meeting of the chadam select board and the affordable housing trust fund Board of Trustees is being conducted iners and via remote participation every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings as provided for in the order a reminder that persons who would like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling the phone number 1508 945 4410 conference ID 2203 386 491 pound sign or join the meeting uh online via Microsoft teams through the link in the posted agenda while this is a live broadcast and simal cast on chatam TV Xfinity channel 1072 despite our best efforts uh we may not be able to provide realtime access we will post a record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible before I um establish a quorum and open the meeting I just want to note uh that um Douglas douge Bowman passed away um this week um she was first elected to the town of chadam board of Selectmen in 1993 after she had served 12 years on the finance committee she proudly served on the select board for 15 years and ultimately became the first female chairman of the town of cadams board of Selectmen uh I'd like to offer a note of Silence uh in her memory thank you so uh we have a joint meeting I will um from first open up the um affordable housing trust Board of Trustees um um Miss schneberger present uh Miss mclen present Mr Bean present Mr Shell is present and uh Miss Davis present and then the select board Mr Mr opheim is here oh forgive me Dave David David oppenheim uh you're you're present um and and good that you are thank you um select board uh Mr Mets present uh Mr um dkin present M Davis present Mr necastro present and Mr Shell is present um so our first order of business as the joint meeting will be to consider the land disposition agreement with Penrose for the sale and development of housing at 15330 Main Street um and I will defer running through the rest of the um of the agenda until we complete the joint meeting and with that I think we're going to turn it over to our Town Council if I'm Jill go ahead thank you if I can just do a pleas uh Jill Goldsmith your town manager so tonight we're here to consider the land disposition agreement with Penrose for the sale and development of housing at 1533 and zero Main Street this is a sign significant step forward following the vote of approval on July 9th by both boards to affirm my approval of the evaluation committee's recommendation to proceed with Penrose for development rights for both 1533 zero Main Street as well as zero Meeting House Road in preparation for this next phase I convene a negotiating team which includes myself and key Town staff members including Katie dunan Gloria mcferson Carrie masero along with Mike shell chair of both the affordable housing trust and select board select board member Jeffrey dykens finance committee chair Stephen Daniel and our town councils Lisa me and Jay tallerman our team prioritized the LDA for 1533 Main Street which we are presenting to you this evening this document will serve as a template for The Meeting House Road LDA with modifications reflecting the distinct car characteristics of that site our team made internally with Town Council numerous times and held two meetings with the Penrose with Penrose represented by Charlie Adams and Rio shanet Town Council Lisa me worked directly with attorney Jacob Taylor legal council for for Penrose to create the LDA attorney Lisa me will review the LDA in detail tonight including the schedule for insertion in exhibit B as well as deadlines the purchase price and the affordable housing restrictions it's Rec excuse me it's respectfully recommended that the select board and the affordable housing trust vote to execute the land disposition agreement with Penrose for the sale and development of housing at 1533 Main Street thank you thank you I'll turn it over to um Lisa me I I do want to say that we are inviting public comment alongside of the two boards after the uh leases uh presentation so thank you Lisa um you're welcome and thank you uh Mr chair and members of the committee and the board it's great to be here I think that um we have a presentation um that uh Kathy helped me with to help kind of guide us through this conversation um so as H the town manager said this is the land disposition agreement for the sale of 0 to 1533 Main Street if you go to the next slide so what I did was I took the basically the meat of this agreement and broke it down into uh three component parts um and the first is you know when is the when is the project going to be done and what are the deadlines driving the completion of the project um and so most of these deadlines initially run concurrently that is all at the same time even though there may be a different time frames involved so once we sign the beginning date is the execution of this document so um the effective date would be let's just say for um sake of discussion it's tomorrow um the applicant has agreed to file a project eligibility letter uh with hat Mass housing within 14 days or eohc within 14 days um uh of the signing of the LDA in no more than 30 days so that will commence immediately they've been working on that while we've been working on the LDA then uh the due diligence period also starts on the same effective date and they have 90 days to conduct the due diligence um please know that they're Lisa if you can hear us you're muted long for talk she's like Brant I try to go in through highly so uh we have fortun sir Lisa we've had technical difficulties so um it's as soon as you started on slide one sorry about that uh Folks at home and in the building weren't able to hear you but I'm sure people thought you were brilliant on teams because they could hear you so if you can start over if you don't mind okay I don't mind are you gonna put the slide back up okay um well that was a good exercise anyway so um essentially there we go essentially as I said earlier we divide I I when I decided to overview this view I picked I thought the the three biggest sections um of uh the components of the LDA and and the first being the deadlines um and so for everybody to know the deadlines at the beginning at least run concurrently with each other so if the effective date um is the signature date let's call it for tomorrow for example um the applicant would have to file a project eligibility letter with Mass housing within 14 days of signing the LDA and no more than 30 days and it's our understanding that they are well in their way of working on that and um will be poised to to make that filing in that time period at the same time their due diligence starts on the effective date and they have 90 days to undertake the due diligence and um you should know that um if there's anything that they find that is unacceptable to them during the due diligence period um they would be able to terminate the the transaction at the same time they would also undertake their title objections um importantly uh we included if they had any title objections and the town decided that it did not want to resolve those title exceptions excuse me objections the town um would not need to do that on the other hand of course the town would have a right to um resolve any title objections should they arise um and then within 90 days of the effective date they are required to file their comprehensive permit application with the zoning board of appeals um that of course depends on whether or not the project eligibility is letter is issued from um Mass housing um but assuming it is in a timely fashion um you're looking at filing a comp permit in January to March of next year and then the closing would happen um within 180 days of obtaining their um litech approval and litec is low-income housing tax credits it's the um funding that allows the the developer to produce um below um affordable units which is um one of the town's goals and allows that to happen in this project once you get litech approval though you actually need to get um the financing for that and so um within once they get their litec approval within 80 Days of that they need to get the rest of their financing um they do have two 60-day byright extensions um but then if they need another 60 days they would have to pay an additional $225,000 non-refundable deposit to the town which if they didn't get financing and they had to terminate the transaction the town would keep that along with its $110,000 deposit but if the um project goes forward um the $25,000 would go towards the purchase price and then construction starts importantly within 30 days of the closing so if all things go well and of course we all know that that always happens um you're looking at project uh construction starting within probably around March of 2026 so um those are the the big components of the deadlines that are embedded in the land disposition agreement can I have the next slide please and so what we did here is actually what Kathy did I Didn't Do It um is lay out um a sched so everybody could see how these things um kind of run concurrently and where they all end up um in the time frame and that's no different than what I just um went over in um verbally with you so uh the next um question is okay what's the purchase price so the total purchase price is $2,900 how is that paid it's paid at the closing so it's not paid until let's say that's 2026 what we talked about um cash um would be $875,000 and then you have a seller loan um of that's from the select Board of $715,000 or the town side so to speak and the affordable housing trust loan of $500,000 and that is at 0% over 40 years and um this is how it is allocated back to the town um from the developer at the closing and then eventually at the payment of the the various loans and so you have an allocation of a mil4 21200 going to the affordable housing trust that's 68% um that includes the the cash upfront going to the affordable housing trust and then you have $668,500 going to the town for the total of2 million 9,000 um so what I do want to note here um before we talk about the affordable housing restriction is that the loan documents that are done in a in a transaction like this um are essentially pre-approved by U Mass dos which was um eohc and Mass housing um worked with have worked over a number of years to get a set of documents that is that are acceptable to both the municip ity as well as uh the lenders as well as eohc um and Mass Housing and so um those are the documents that will be used obviously they will be um reviewed by um myself uh to make sure they're consistent with this agreement um and um and then we will um move forward with the execution when it when it comes time um and the both affordable housing trust chair probably and the uh select board chair um will be voted to authorize to enter into those documents when that time comes but they are a prescribed documents and those documents are referenced in um the land disposition agreement so really why are we doing this uh we're doing this uh to provide affordable housing uh for the town of chadam um and there was a lot of work done on um making sure that the right affordable housing was Secure for the town for many many many years to come and so what is it and what are we getting um so the agreement um requires that the proposal which was made to the town is nine structures for housing and one Community Building um it has to be in substantial conformance with the concept plan um it could change based upon the requirements of the zoning board of appeals because of course the zoning board is an independent body here but by and large it needs to look a lot like what the concept plan is uh next slide please um oops there we go so um the there are Perpetual restrictions that are included that that is that these apartments um or units will be restricted to these affordability requirements with the following caveats um forever so there'll be a total of 48 Apartments 16 one-bedroom apartments 26 two-bedroom apartments six three bedrooms 32 of the units will be at 60% or below um the area meeting income at least seven but no more than nine of those units will be at 30% Ami 16 of the units will be at 110% Ami or Workforce housing um if the sub it's important to note that the 30% Ami units in addition to the low-income ta housing tax credits get other subsidies if those subsidies supporting those units expire and are not available those units may go to 60% U but they won't go over 60% Ami um as to the Perpetual nature of the Restriction it's also important to note that there is one exception um as many of you know on the world of comprehensive permits there's been a lot of litigation over the years regarding the nature of the restrictions and under 40b the requirement is at least 25% of the units have to be um affordable in perpetuity at 80% Ami and so in this instance um we typically also uh under a straight 40b that doesn't receive special financing you would have those restrictions survive um foreclosure by any lender but here because of the affordable housing tax credits the only lender that um if it were to foreclose um would expire would extinguish the lower amount of um affordability that is the 30 and 60% Ami on 100% of the units and it would be limited to 25% of the units in perpetuity at 80% Ami only for the senior lender foreclosure if there's any other foreclosure on any other um later um lending um the underlying restrictions would be perpetual and so I just I wanted to point that out that's part of the mass STS it's part of the litech funding um but you still get a Perpetual restriction of 25% of the units at 80% Ami if the senior lender forecloses Mass Housing and uhlc like to talk about how of course they're not ever going to foreclose U because they are in the business of financing affordable housing um but there is that um remote possibility next slide please so I think some other things that are important the um that the uh Town worked really hard the committee worked really hard to make sure some details around the edges that are going to make this a great Community uh for the town of chadam um all three bedroom units must have two bathrooms um they um must install solar panels on all Southwest exposed um rooftops um they haven't done that study in full yet so if they don't or can't do that they have to provide a reason based in fact as to why they are not able to do that and can only do it on some so so um but that is a requirement they have to install Street trees and sidewalks along Main Street um we have provided a right of Entry as part of this LDA so they can get right in and start uh working on site related to their due diligence um and their final plans um they're also allowing the fire department to use the Cottages uh that aren't restricted in any way um as fire exercises and then the town will remove the debris from those um Cottages so um there's been a lot of cooperation back and forth in that regard next slide please and then finally um you know in the world of default in real estate we always hate to talk about this but it's important to include it um if there's a default by the buyer um there is a $10,000 deposit uh not the least of which it they're putting in hundreds of thousands of dollars in the permitting and process that they will lose um but the $10,000 deposit would be kept by the town of course if it's later down the road when that $225,000 additional payment is made that would also be kept by the town um if the town defaults uh then the developer can require uh specific performance and make the town sell them the property for these purposes um and perform under the agreement uh again the developer is putting in hundreds of thousands of dollars to uh to complete this project and if the town tries to walk away they need some security in that regard so that's the overview of the LDA I'm happy to answer any specific questions um that anyone might have um Mr chair thank you very much um I'll look to the board uh I know there's at least one question any any um do do you want to ask your question Carolyn sure I I do have a couple of them um just reading over the LDA um let's see I'll go with the the one slide that you well let's go with the um the timeline because the one thing I'm confused about is in the um LDA you mentioned the 180 days and then you get two consecutive 60 days and you know because you have you have stuff to do and you don't know how long that's going to be I understand all that I don't see where that that's almost a year is in is a denot in the timeline that you gave us the one that's the slide that you had on the screen so if you could show me where that year of getting things in order before you start construction is denoted um I think I'm looking at one here I don't know if you want to pull that back up but I'm look the one I have that I printed out in front of me it's the second line from the bottom on the second page I think uh purchase subject to terms and extensions of LDA that takes you out to January 2026 I think how come I don't see that it's the next oh on this one all right let's see so the Excel spreadsheet slide that I think you're referring to Caroline that's one that Charlie Adams kind of put together with the timeline and there is a note at the bottom with the due diligence listed is that um that's about the funding rounds I just don't see this if you look at go on I'm sorry yeah if you look at line 14 M so purchase Financial closing subject to terms and extensions options in LDA February 2026 construction Dart start date March 2026 right so you only but it's only for three months and you're telling us that could be actually a year right that's why it says subject to extensions options in LDA right all right so that it so then it could be that much longer just so we we're prepared for that and then um yeah absolutely and then the next thing in regards to um the Ami schedule that that you have that you mentioned that um if they if after 40 or 50 years if they need to um change the Ami and move it from 30 to 60 on the LDA the document I got it also says you can go from 60 to 80 but in the slide it said you just did 30 to 60 yeah so that I didn't need to interrupt somebody it's on it's on page nine at the top of the LDA I believe no those are the EXT that's the extension all right I'm sorry that's okay it's page seven it's page seven yep thank you so I got to find my um so if you look right in the middle of that paragraph uh it says the affordable housing restriction will further provide than the event of termination of applicable subsidy contracts for the 30% Ami units with the approval of the applicable financing parties be they can be converted to 60% Ami units and will contain the standard language regarding the rights of senior lenders in the event of foreclosure right there yep all right all right so in that case we're losing the lower end of our our 30% correct and what's the Matrix for determining that just if you lose the funding for the subsidy yes there that's correct so it's based on it's a a profit Matrix not based on the need of the community after 40 years we could lose it if they're not making enough money and they don't have the subsidy is that correct no it doesn't have anything to do with what they're making it has to do with the availability of the subsidy right so if there's a state subsidy if there's a state subsidy that is um that is providing those units at 30% and the state eliminates that program then they won't they won't continue on that at 30% so I guess you could say that that has to do with profit but it also has to do with the availability of the subsidy okay um and then the other thing about what they go forclosure 25% will remain affordable um correct we some some developments do 50% is that not an option where we're giving up uh TW yeah 25% on foreclosure 25% at 80% Ami on foreclosure only by the senior lender all right so there's no way to do 50% they the answer is no okay all right um hold on one second the other thing is on the closing on the um I'm sorry when we talk about chadam being the next in line for uh getting these uh credits on the proposal that you gave us on the last page there was um a list of properties that uh Penrose is currently working with and there's three in Massachusetts that are still pending they haven't got their tax credits yet so my assumption is that they're in the round and they will get credited before us is that a logical assumption or so I didn't give you anything about who's do what in what rounds right it was yeah so um we have been informed by Penrose and I think that anybody's been on this committee that they are attempting to put this in as their next project um for the litech credits no I realize that but in the proposal not in the LDA in The Proposal that from that they gave to us in response to the RFP they listed their properties is they have three pending properties that are waiting for um credits that have already been applied for that they're waiting for so I'm just saying ours would one oh yeah okay so there's a len so they had two projects in lenux one was already funded and the other one was not funded but is in in the um in the process but it was not funded last time all right and then you have um Chelsea Soldier home in in 95 Everett Mass I mean this was in their proposal yeah I don't I don't yeah I I don't know about the Chelsea Chelsea project or the ever project I don't know maybe somebody else in your meeting knows that I don't know anything about those projects yeah I I'll jump in here but we we may get some help from other people who are in the room sure the the two that were addressed were the ones that Lisa mentioned Lennox um and the other one I've forgotten the name of it but uh they said one was funded and the other one they they pretty clearly said they intended for it to be behind behind us now I don't know how uh to to be more detailed about why or how that is but they they they did suggest Pretty strongly that um they intended for us to be first up sure I I don't know if you want to correct that or or add to that that that's my understanding of what we're being presented I'm just I'm just thinking that the state's not deciding who's based on their opinions the state's already got these these pending applications so they're going to decide who they give it to that's all I just want to be aware that we could be a couple more years so that we're not and it will be what it is there's no around there's no question and that's the reason for the the all those extensions U availability is that concern but um well that's even after this well the buildout will happen but I mean I'm just saying I just want to be realistic in terms of knowing that it could be one two or three years depending upon how that works out which is that's there's nothing we can do about that I understand that that's um so and the only other thing was uh so we have 185,000 $175,000 in cash coming to us when all this is done that's the 875 oh I'm sorry 875 yes um so that comes at closing which could be um one two or three four years out technically right um so does that go escrow account does that get interest does that do we just get it when we get it or it's like any other real estate like any other real estate transaction you don't put the money up until you do the closing so that's their money until we are ready to do the closing okay all right that's all for now thank you anybody Bruce one other one other one other minor thing on the um where is it uh page five on the solar uh I'm sure in the full document there's uh more detail on this but they must uh install panels if not they must provide a fact based reason is there a dispute resolution mechanism there if we disagree that the fact that precludes them um so I'll jump in here so the what this kind of went back and forth during negotiations um there was a presentation um made that they were attempting to put solar on all the Southwest exposure on the buildings but had not yet done any studies and couldn't guarantee that they would be able to do it and the committee went back and said well we want it on all of the buildings um but they're like well we can't guarantee that because we haven't done a study it may not make sense to do on every single one of the buildings and so the resolution was okay if you can't do it on every single one of the buildings you have to tell us exactly why you can't and it has to be fact-based it can't be because it doesn't make you know it's not convenient it doesn't make Financial sense it needs to be fact-based it's not you know they're not going to produce enough electricity to make sense or things of that nature okay so it could not it can't the reason cannot be it doesn't make Financial sense correct uh could it be that they can't get financing for it um I don't I don't think that that I mean I guess they would have to to come back with or say we couldn't get financing for the solar but I don't I mean that that could be a fact of course could be a fact okay and one more um if this somewhat aspirational um timeline goes through I would slightly worry about their projected cost per square foot of construction is optimistic and if it by some chance stretches out for to a worst case it the likely the cost of construction would balloon beyond what their financing would support um is there a mechanism with which they can approach the town for more money to make up the shortfall so I think um and I think uh Mike and Jill can jump in here so it's my recollection that um that Mr Abrams um I think that's right Charlie um indicated that their estimates were based upon kind of a worst case scenario they had a they had a a gap in there to make sure that they knew what they were um looking at in the event that they didn't get funded immediately um you can always amend an agreement by both parties agreeing to an amend an agreement but um it it that was his thought that by the time they get funded they they've taken into consideration a potential increases in construction costs that's all for me okay thank you Dean thank you thank you Mr chairman I I have a handful of questions and I think a couple of typos um I'm looking at the LDA itself on page two this is I think a typo under paragraph C if you go down to the seventh line which begins reasonable wear and tear accepted the phrase design the designated developer I think is misplaced I think it belongs in the line following after the phrase due diligence period with a comma before it it seems to be a stray phrasing you put um I see that I'll take a look at that I think you're right you can take a look at it um the next I really want to talk about the money and I do appreciate the the pie chart slide I had requested that yesterday um I'm trying to understand who's paying what to whom because um the purchase price is recited to be $2 million approximately and $875,000 in cash is coming to the town at the time of closing but then you have these two loans you have a seller's loan which I assume is from the select Board of 750 we're going to share it equally here okay yeah 715,000 so is that a loan from the town to them or for them from them to us uh they will the town will issue a note to them they take a no doubt so it's a loan from the town to them and the same thing is true I I think you may want to reconsider that I I I think that they're giving us a note corre which is aone from U it it's called alone but essentially they're giving us a 40-year note in the amount in question um which is deemed alone from us to them because it's in it's in lie of payment of cash or some other consideration so they they're going to pay us $715,000 they have up to 40 years to pay it correct okay and the same thing is true um mechanically on the aht loan of $500,000 they're paying that to the trust soct that's correct and I guess I I don't challenge that I'm just wondering there really it's effectively an installment plan although the installments can can vary they have well except I assume it's a bullet so it's payable at the end of 40 years okay okay um I didn't understand um on the in the document itself on the um it's on page four um this this figure of 46 it's under BC sellers notes allocation they referred to $46,200 I'm not sure what that is and is that I understand the 668,000 that's the allocation to the [Music] town what is this $46,200 that is part of the $715,000 right that we're subtracting 6688 into the balance of the note is 462 okay all right I get that um on page um five the deposit is $10,000 is it and you did mention that they have that the developer is incurring permitting expense and so forth so is this I mean it's obviously a small amount of money um is this typical in these type of Arrangements yeah a lot of times there's no deposit at all or $1,000 so um yes it's very typical okay then on page six under um section four designated developer additional obligation um under a it refers to customary peer review costs what what what would that be I'm not sure who's doing the peer reviewing here sure that would be at the zba so when they go through that um process to get their comprehensive permit they're going to pay for all the per review that the zba has uh yeah okay all right thanks um the next page under paragraph D1 and you referred to this in your slides about the conceptual plans possibly being revised who makes those revisions are they made unilaterally by the developer or are they jointly agreed to by the town and the developer so I think it it depends right the zoning Board of Appeals has a right to require them to do certain things of course um but if they the developer makes his changes to the conceptual plan they need to come to the town so in fact the developers already started to do that um based upon meetings with uh with the committee that was meeting with them so the conceptual plan is that which was part of the of the um RFP response and then there were some things the committee asked to see um the developer start to implement before he submits to the zba um and he's already started to do that so he would be working with the committee to make any of the changes to the conceptual plans except for unless they're required by the CP okay um then on page [Music] nine um under the designated developer deliverables it does refer to an assignment I I assume that there's an an assignment to a third party is not permitted under degree under I think it's on page 15 is that am I reading that correctly the only assignment could be to a a com a companion or an Associated entity correct to the developer all right um that's correct the same management yeah same yes and then on page 11 this is just a typo I call it to your attention under paragraph a and I think it's one two 3 four 10th Line down begins with the word town its is misspelled it's should it's just IDs thank you yep thank you um I want to also just I think my last this is my last one um I think yeah um on page 13 section a default you have this in your slide also um the um liquidated d damages um is just $10,000 right that yes that's correct it would be $110,000 and the $ 25,000 if that's already happened but that is correct is that plus all the money they've spent okay is that why it's is that why the liquid liquidated damages are so low because of the amount of money they're investing in the project yeah yeah that's part of the discussion yes okay if I may I I I for the record here just to be clear they've I I don't want to mention specific numbers uh but they've indicated To Us by the time they get to this point to to the point of being essentially ready to start they will have several hundred, invested in this project in the in the in the preparation the getting ready the permitting and so forth okay and and the financing and the final question on the next paragraph about specific performance um is there a reason why the Town can't compel specific performance in the case of a default on their part well if they can't get funding they can't perform right I mean that's that part of the issue so you're okay okay Dean we're just having some trouble keeping up so what page were you just looking at about that was page um 13 13 it's the same page right here okay thank you um I did find one one other typo on page 16 this is up at the top second line I think you mean to say a third party beneficiary it says third part good catch okay that's it thank you Mr chairman thank you um anybody else um and I David I can't see if you are um have your hand raised so I'll just offer you the opportunity to ask any questions if you have any no I don't have any questions thank you okay uh you may indeed all right back to that one just I just want to be clear on my understanding of I'm having a little trouble accepting the reduction of the 30% Ami and the page I was looking at is at the top of page eight it actually starts at the bottom of page seven where it says the town acknowledges that the project will be required to meet so-called residual anal Anis requirements and are to proceed in the event of the project is not able to meet these requirements the town will work with the designated developer in good faith to modify the affordability requirements should this become necessary by allowing some of the 30% units or 60% units um be converted to 80% but only after the 50 years so and then on the RFP that was issued which you guys I don't know if you have that in front of you but on page five in the bottom it says the town will convey the the property to the successful proposer with a restriction that will ensure that the housing remains deed restricted at the various levels of affability and perpetuity so I'm concerned about losing those low lower Amis um when the whole point was to develop a r uh the point of the RFP was to develop a range of um Amis uh to meet the community need I know we have the higher ones there which is great we want it attainable but we're kind of just abandoning the lower end now granted that's at 50 years um but if we want it in perpetuity if that's the point um I don't think the need for these lower Amis is going to go away um 60% right now that's could be a single person making $50,000 or something this is this is a a good segment of the population so I I really have a trouble with having a development like this that will at some point have a mechanism to abandon the lower Amis because that was one of the reasons we chose this developer in particular was to meet that need so if I I could address the residual analysis um for a minute because the the committee pushed really hard on related to this very specific issue um which is what led to the language that um at the beginning of that paragraph on page seven that we read earlier um about 32 of the units rented to families at 60% Ami inclusive of at least seven units and no more than nine units rented to families at or below 30% um so the residual analysis um is that um the in order to qualify for the tax credits um there has to be an opinion from a tax attorney that the 0% loans are actually in fact loans and not grants and that when you take out the project to the very you know to the 40 in 50 years that in fact the project can pay for those um those loans and that's the residual analysis and again um and again Mike and Jill can speak to this um but the reason the change we there was actually a change of the potential of change in that 30% to 60% to 30% and that no at least seven and no more than nine was to address that issue um and so there's really little to no thought thought that they would have to take any of the 60% up to the 80% um at all but that's why that's in there but it's in there it's on page eight that that's a possibility yeah I I agree no I'm agreeing with that for sure is is that a I mean I I I'm not aware that my knowledge is what it is but I'm not aware of any other project having that caveat that they're they're going to change the Ami I always my understanding was always the Ami you're locked in that's where it stays so I would want to know if this is a customary thing that's done on other projects and other communities I think that's all very Project Specific um and funding specific um so to to say is it done on any other project you know I don't I don't know if it's done on any other project or not but it's very everything on the financing end is very Project Specific for sure every affordable housing project has to face the same issues of what's going to happen 50 years down the line are there going to be funding is there going to be funding available so I I just I'm just very um disappointed in this opportunity here to lose those layer lower Amis that's not what I had wanted anyways I I if I may I I'm G to say two things here F first of all specifically what Charlie Adams said was we we Penrose have done the financial financial analysis this is a a a financial analysis that as Lisa explained has to be done to look at the the value based on all the assumptions of the project at the end of the 40 years um they said we have done it and we're confident that this eventuality will not come to pass but they said we are at the mercy of the people who are who who who are giving a tax opinion that we must have in order to proceed and obtain the tax credits um and and therefore we're asking for this this flexibility if you will um I I think um it's in here it can be used if the eventuality comes to to to pass I at least I was convinced and the people around the table can speak for themselves but that this was a relatively low likelihood of of occurrence that's point one point2 in terms of what's customary I think that um in in part this is a function of the fact that they have made an effort in their presentation in their proposal effectively to allow us uh to recover our um uh cost of acquisition of the property and if if we were giving them the property that the the circumstances might be very different now I'm just speculating but uh I'm I'm all I'm telling you is when you when you start fussing with the numbers in the entire equation it it's hard to say that something is is customary or not because every every transaction is is uh fact specific that's the best answer I can give you okay well um they're giving us the 875 I believe we'll get that the other money is coming in 40 years at a much reduced value in 40 years at 0% interest so I don't know if it's a recovery I mean it is what it is I'm not I'm not haggling over those figures what I'm concerned about is our purpose here is to provide affordable housing at these lower Amis I've been open to expanding our window attainable housing because I think that's needed in the community as well but I'm not uh convinced that we should be giving this away and I there's been so many projects on board that the Comm capewide and other places that have been doing I would be curious to know was there any inquiry into any other development uh they is this something something that's done cuz I've never heard of it but like I said I would defer to people who are in the industry not necessarily the developer who's trying to do this but the other the affordable housing community at large is this what's happening was there any inquiry made to look beyond what what Penrose was giving us well I I I I've given you the answer that we got there were a bunch of people sitting around the table um who who by the way pushed hard on this and were had the very same concern that you did originally the way the language read was um at least um at at at least seven units and and they came back and limited it to seven between seven and nine so I I uh I'm sorry I'm mixing up two two points here um I we we pushed on it this is this is where we ended up I that's the best I can tell you Corey has his hand up yeah Corey go ahead thank you Mr chair so I mean no big secret not overly happy with the process and where we landed with the with the where we are but to Caroline's Point um I think there's some philosophical um stability that we had a certain goal in mind you know and and we wanted to keep certain elements of this as part of our goal this is this okay we're gonna we're going to move forward with this project and this is what we're providing for the town and to have I think to some of us significant elements of it pulled away at some point if it's so unlikely to happen why is there such a push back into amending that language um it seems to be kind of a hot button if I I didn't participate in the negotiation team obviously but if there's such a push back to to to not amend that language kind of a red flag for me a little bit because if we're looking to our a project that we want to provide for the community what is the I guess it's boiling down to just the dollars and cents and that's a little bit unnerving for me versus the philosophical goals of the housing elements that we're trying to provide for the community so I'm kind of on on Caroline camp with this one well I I would also point out that this this is after 50 years this is not next week or you know day one of the so this is after 50 years we're all long gone and well okay I yeah yeah I'm sorry yeah go ahead one thank you one thing if we wanted to do away with that event possibility is the sense of this committee that we would be willing to negotiate away the 875 in into a form of a 40e at 0% which I'm not sure I would be willing but I suspect we could get that I I I suspect we could get that removed if we were willing to sweeten the pot well I I I'm not sure whether that's true or not I I I think um it may well be but but I frankly I'd rather have the 875 and use it today to develop further our program um I I I think um and and I think if even if you took it out um hypothetically speaking if the eventuality comes to pass it's going to be at a point where we are very committed they are very committed and they're going to come to us and look Us in the eye and say we need this in order to get the tax opinion can we amend the agreement so um in in some sense they've they've given us the the the concern they've given us the the window of flexib ability they might need um down the road and and we've said okay we'll we'll make that decision effectively in advance uh rather than getting to a point where um it's it it's sort of um almost make or break so I I and it was on that basis among that in the 50 years that this seemed to me to be a a reasonable compromise yeah Mike yeah I I I agree with what what Mike just said I mean I think uh penr look for some flexibility after 50 years on whether or not if in fact the tax folks said you know hey the residual analysis is saying you know we're got to do better here so he was looking for flexibility and I got really comfortable with it because it's 50 years out so we know we've done a good deal for affordable housing for 50 years and in fact this may never come to pass but he he argued um and we agreed after some disagreement that if you really needed that flexibility that we weren't going to hold him up for it so I think I think that's a very fair was a fair outcome and no inqu no inquiry to any other community that's done these developments in recent years if that's been a caveat for for them because they would face the same problem that what if in 40 years we can't get funding that 50 50 years I'm sorry so I I Carolyn I I you're making an assumption here that I'm not sure is a correct assumption that it it would have been profitable to get out a bunch of agreements and look at what Pro look for a provision like this or not as I say I don't know for sure but um I do know that this is a financial viability feasibility point that is always going to be unique to the to the project that you're looking at so yeah can I just ask a a basic question because what what is the phrase residual analysis referred to is it a term of art it's in quotes in the document I'm not familiar with the concept so the residual anal is specifically done as I indicated earlier to qualify for the tax credits um and to make sure that in fact the project can support the funding of the project and that they're not that the loans that are being provided are not actually grants but rather really loans and so a tax attorney will do the analysis with what other Financial um individuals to show that if the project is funded at you know know at for at least 50 years for these this [Music] um this the breakdown of affordability that in fact the project could pay for those loans and so it actually is called a residual analysis and it's um a term of art related to the litech tax funding opinions and it's it's prepared by their tax the developers tax attorney no it is prepared by the lenders tax attorney that uhc's all right thank you so uh I'm going to open it up for um questions or comments from the uh from the public if there are any uh I see one I see at least I think I see I can't tell can you help me um uh Jill can you help me with who has their hand up I do see Elaine Gibbs has her hand up Miss Gibbs yes I see elae Gibbs thank you uh thank you Mr chair yes uh first of all I'd like to comment on page eight where you list uh things that you've added like solar panels and trees and uh sidewalks Etc um I had previously sent some suggestions uh that I don't see in here and I think they should be included because they weren't in the RFP uh but had been committed to at some point during discussions um I I think that it has to identify that each unit will have a dishwasher and washer and dryers not just hookups because that sort of is what happened with the solar panels uh I think that uh occupancy has to be restricted uh these particularly the three-bedroom apartments can have six unrelated people in it um and despite what they said is uh the the occupancy at nset Green I think it could be different in chadam so I think the document should say that one bedroom can have two people a two-bedroom four and a three-bedroom no more than six and that they all have to be on the lease um so that there's not a concern of uh a lot of temporary housing people moving in and out uh one of the other things that concern me is the uh what responsibility do they have in providing maintenance maintaining the property in good condition uh and in ter terms of um outdoor uh private space for the units uh does chadam have any um control over that once the units are built if we are unhappy with the management uh in terms of their maintenance and the condition of the property uh I've been to nset green and I don't think that is acceptable for chadam the condition of that property and uh so I would hope that something could be worked into that document for that um and and also including the landscape they said oh yes we can add more landscape to Shield it better because the Landscaping at nset Green is a bismal and you're going to see those buildings from Main Street so they said we could do it but they didn't say if it was going to cost us more so I think that should be in there um and pemrose did previously say that the Amis could never be changed uh once they were deed restricted so I would have the same concerns that um uh Carolyn mclen had has that at 50 years that could occur uh so um I think that should be checked into and then I had two other really serious concerns um what if we're talking 50 years that's a long long time the building could collapse before that but what if the development uh Penrose decides that it's no longer profitable for them can they sell that property since apparently they're owning owning the land can they sell that property to um uh another developer without our approval or knowledge or anything else and if penro should go bankrupt which has happened to companies all over the world within 5 10 years what happens then to the property uh does it go into chapter 11 can anybody take it new management does chadam have anything to say about that property at all uh because I I think that would be real concern and the other concern I have is I've always had problems with the financials I think they were overstated in terms of what they thought they could get for uh rents for two and three bedrooms uh so if they don't qualify uh I think something should be in there that they cannot in order to meet their numbers that they cannot reduce the quality of the materials or equipment that they will be using um uh on on the property that it has to be the same quality that they had quoted um and then finally to go to the land uh distribution agreement I think those deadlines that have been provided are are wildly optim optimistic to say that we could conceivably start construction in May uh March of 2026 uh according to this they're required to do three rounds to get the LI HTC grants each one of those rounds if they get it in on time which you know would have to be by January uh could take six to eight months then the second round begins in the fall and then the third one would begin in 2026 and they usually take six to 8 months and then on top of that you add the 180 days that we have to give them uh to work out the details and then two more 60 days that's another year so I would suggest that the idea that we will break ground before close to 2027 is highly highly unlikely and you did say something that really concerned me that we have to go through that and if we decide uh all if they decide to back out after all of that because they can't get financing we get $10,000 after wasting three three and a half years but if we want to back out if I understood correctly so I'd like clarification on that uh I believe it was said that they could come after us and take the land because of the money they've invested that they would have an action against us so after us going through 3 or 4 years and the fact that they've only spent $200,000 they could actually walk away with a pro land worth you know $5 million i i i that that Clause scares the heck out of me so maybe I'm misunderstanding but what if we wanted to back out after all of these delays that we've had what what liability do we have against them what what could they come after us for could they take the land and those are my questions thank you thank you uh do we have anybody else um Miss Burke evening uh Jan Burk West chadam I have a couple of questions on the financing structures in the loan first of all the um two loans that the town would be taking back one to the board of Selectmen and one to the trust are they collateralized no I don't believe so uncollateralized loans yes no there they mortgage no there's mortgages on the property I'm sorry I misspoke yes okay it surpris me okay uh and I presume that those mortgages would be on this property and they would be subject to and subordinate to senior financing for sure okay are there limits to what that senior financing is we're going to be second and third mortgage holders what are our guard rails to prevent pen rolls from over financing us and putting us into loan to value ratios that would wipe us out in a foreclosure so there the the limits are what's it's going to take to do the project so there are not you know there's not a loan to value ratio for sure there are no guard okay so there are no formalized guard reels here are there any limits well then the town is then obligated to continue to subordinate to the senior financing correct correct is there any limit to the subordination that the town is required to give I don't think I understand your question they're required to subordinate their loans to the senior financing right so let's say they they take a loan construction loan out for $5 million they find out then we subordinate to it we find out that's not enough money they amend their loan to add another million dollars are we then obligated to subordinate to the amended senior financing was related to the original construction loans yes okay so there's no limit on Our obligation to subordinate to senior financing that's correct okay um the mortgages if Penrose it was already brought up the notion of Penrose decides to sell which is quite likely actually after they have matured the tax benefit out of this like a lot of these projects which are seeing right now 30-year projects are coming due with Federal subsidies are going to come out of the federal subsidies once they've uh taken the benefit of their financing out of this they sell are there du on sale Provisions in our two mortgages would we then be paid off or are we further obligated to permit a buyer to assume our the obligations coming back to the town and if so do we have the right to approve that assumption or not there would be no assumption um when you if the senior lender is going to be bought out and the Project's going to be gone the the mass do does not have an assumption requirement so the town would be paid as well so on a sale there would be due on sale correct very good another subject on the comprehensive permit um I presume that the documents provide for the Builder you know the buyer Penrose that if they have unsatisfactory conditions in the comprehensive permit they have the right to terminate is that correct well they would have a right to appeal yes they would they would have a right to appeal the the comprehensive permit and or terminate for sure okay so do they have Broad discrep disc about what's an acceptable permit uh they would have any other discretion that they would have I don't I don't know that I understand your question all right a permit permits issued by the zoning board of appeals Penrose doesn't like the conditions is there some standard for what they can like and not like or is it just up to them to decide it's unacceptable to us in our judgment who who gets to make that call it would be Penrose who would get to make that call okay so they have they have dis now does the town have the same discretion if the town doesn't like the permit no oh my God okay thank you those are my questions thank you uh Miss Stern yes thank you Nicole Stern um a former speaker had some excellent questions but the speaker before her also had several really important concerns and I didn't hear anyone address those now I don't know if it's the select board the trust but it's almost as if you know we speak but no one ever addresses it I'd like someone to address some of her concerns so we know they're being heard and responded to now I I Mr chair yes I I I heard you I I'm going to ask um Town Council in the first instance I think she's probably referring mostly to the questions because you address the questions that Miss Burke asked I think she's mainly referring to the questions um raised by um um uh Miss Gibbs Gibbs correct sure I I can address some of those questions so in particular I'm going to address the question related to the specific performance so if the applicant um or the developer excuse me were um to if the town decided um that the within the four corners of the document that it was not going to perform not because um penr defaulted that the town just decided I've waited long enough even though there are still other things that the town's supposed to do Under the agreement Penrose could seek specific performance but they wouldn't be taking the land they would have to perform the agreement they would have to comply with the terms of the agreement so um that's that's what the specific performance language requires the other items I think some of those are more appropriate for comprehensive permit conditions and um were not included in the um the land disposition agreement so Lisa to clarify they can't take it they would pay the purchase price that's in the LDA and that's what they would be entitled to that that's correct and they would have to perform all of the conditions in the LDA yeah as in complete the project as as contracted for correct Dean yeah I I there was a question or two that Miss Gibbs asked and I think um Lisa answered it in response to the question indirectly in response to the question by Miss Burke and but I wanted to ask it specifically so the agreement can't be assigned to a third party but the developer after the project is up they could sell the project and they don't need the town's approval right Lisa that that's correct they would have to give notice because it's subject to a comprehensive permit um they have to notice to the zba the zba can't say no because it's considered an insubstantial change they would also have to give notice to the Commonwealth okay and then in the event of bankruptcy of Penrose the project the project could be sold I mean that it would be up to whatever the bankruptcy court approves obviously and one last but it would also be subject to the restrictions yeah yeah one other question relative to um the zoning board of appeals um your exchange with um um Miss Burke um so if the developer is unhappy with a condition that's imposed by the zoning board what is their relief they can go to Superior Court the HAC they would go to the HC um to overturn the determination of the zba or seek the seek a modification of the condition and is is that determination by the State final or can that be challenged in court it can be appealed that can be appealed to the appeals court Andor even the SJC could the zoning board appeal it the zoning board could appeal it yes okay thank you okay um y Miss Hicks Gloria Hicks Meeting House Road um mine is comments are just about housekeeping um I was unable to pull up this document until yesterday um and even pulling up the document um exhibits a c d and e were not visible so to have a conversation about an agreement as important as this I I don't see why we didn't wait a week till we gut things together gut things up so that people can read this get clarification make questions and and concerns so um going forward I would like for the meeting house to have a little bit more than two days notice getting these documents and being able to read them um the sense of urgency um is inappropriate and unnecessary thank you I I looked I tried to pull it up in the web and I only got it today okay and even today when I looked in recently you still can't all of all of them are empty except for exhibit B okay but in Fair and I I take your point I'm not arguing with you but uh Pro exhibit a were the the r the rfps the RFP so that's been published for okay there was nothing listed under exhibit a when I looked and um Exhibit C is is a subset of their um proposal which also has been public since June um but I wouldn't know that looking at a document that I assumed was complete okay those pages were empty so if we could just get that make it comprehensive because otherwise it's hard to have a conversation thank you I hear you thank you any other questions or comments uh if not I will accept the motion from let's start with the uh select board uh I move approval of the and to execute the land dis disposition agreement with Penrose for the sale and development of housing at 15330 Main Street second um discuss go ahead thank you Mr chairman I just wanted to say very briefly and this should be no surprise I don't like the project I prefer to nonprofit developer and I gave my reasons at a previous meeting I won't repeat them here um but the decision has been made to go go forward with this proposal and I see my responsibility as a select board member to try to make sure that the land disposition agreement is in the best interest of the town and that those interests are protected uh I do take some considerable comfort in the town manager's uh decision to include and the on the negotiating team which I think was pretty diverse by the way uh of the um our finance committee chair um and I also take some comfort in knowing that the zba members will take a careful look at this with an open public process uh with the understanding clearly that the responsibility is going to fall on them considerable measure to make sure that the town's interests are protected and I'm hopeful that they can address some of the U issues that appear to be still open like parking and a butter um screening so I will be voting to approve U the land disposition agreement and I will vote Yes on this motion thank you Mr chairman thank you uh Dean um all those in favor Mr Mets yes uh Mr dykens hi uh Miss Davis hi uh Mr nastro I and Mr Shell says I I will take a motion from the affordable housing trust board uh I have move that we approve the land dis uh disposition agreement I think under the circumstances it is an excellent document um as a previous speaker said the zoning board will have a lot of work to do on this but I think we're headed to make a lot of affordable housing in chadam and hopefully it will be as quickly as the proposed uh schedule shows thank you sir uh do I hear a second second second uh thank you any other comments um I I just want to uh sorry yeah I just want to um mention that the the timeline I feel is very aspirational and unrealistic and my issues with that are that in the RFP I think it was equally so which was one of the reasons we chose this developer and I would be surprised if we lease up in by 20 30 or or later even considering the um delays that might happen I don't hold them responsible I I'm not faulting them for having the delays I'm fauling them for not disclosing them as being the realities that they have to work with in so I I I have a problem with that and I'm I'm going to have trouble I can't support this based I'm not going to support an affordable housing development that has even if it's improbable and it's 50 years down the road that you can reduce the you can change the Ami and reduce our lower Ami um thanks if you took that out of it I could support it but I just can't at this point thank you um all right we have a a motion in a second uh Mr oppenheim yes uh Miss schneberger yes Miss mclen no uh Mr Bean yes Mr Shell says yes Miss Davis yes thank you very much um thank you Lisa thank you everybody who worked on it including the committee uh it was a a a a very comprehensive process much appreciation to everybody and with that I'll take a motion to adjourn uh from the affordable housing trust so moved do I hear a second second uh thank you all those in favor uh Mr oppenheim yes Miss schneberger yes uh Miss mlen uh Mr Bean yes Mr Shell says yes and Miss Davis yes thank you Housing Trust have a good night thanks Lisa you're welcome much appreciated my pleasure so with that I'm going to um move forward here and just quickly um review the um the um our our agenda this evening um we have minutes of September 24 to uh approve uh we have public announcements and agenda requests um we have public comments on the business agenda I'm going to invite um the public to comment alongside of uh the board on items A and B of the business agenda item a is the allocation of responsibility for stepping stones in 127 old Harbor Road for develop Vel M of housing request requests for proposals um which refers to a request from the affordable housing trust Board of August 7 Item B is um a u housing request for proposals for stepping stones and 127 old Harbor Road um including a an agenda request um from the Community Housing Partnership um to consider authorizing a test fit for 127 old Harbor Road uh item C is considering a one-day alcohol permit and a one-day entertainment license for Witches Walk on Saturday August 26 um from uh monoy Community Services item D is a report from uh Gulf and Main off share wind project um Bureau of ocean energy management um item e is um Town Projects public engagement procedure first read from our Communications manager uh item f is a report from uh Health agent Judith Georgio on the opioid set settlement funds update and finally item G is appointments to the independent state parade committee uh the energy and climate action committee and the Aunt Lydia's Cove committee and with that I will um invite either a motion or comments on the minutes of September 24th motion to approve second uh any comments Mr necastro yes Mr chairman on page two under Public Announcement it's an agenda requests um the name of the Traffic Safety Committee uh we should strike the word advisory um then on page 8 um at the very bottom where it refers to Mr dyk's motion we should probably include in a parenthesis the language that was um being suggested I don't I didn't have it I threw my notes away from that meeting so have to check the video or you may have it yourself um was language that I provided I remember and finally oh I'm sorry just to be clear you would like your language Incorporated into it just that's fine it could even be in yeah I think that makes sense okay uh and then finally um maybe you caught this also I think on the page 13 and 14 the roll call U Mr nastra voted for Mr Higgins and I think the chair voted for Mr Clark correct right correct thank you Mr chair uh yes ma'am uh in the participating from the select board uh Jeffrey Davis should be Jeffrey dcins yeah wake up Mr dykens okay all those in favor Mr Mets hi uh Mr dykens hi uh Miss Davis hi uh Mr necastro hi and Mr Shell says I thank you um public announcements um I am informed that um Susan Ross from the town Swap Shop man have an agenda item request well maybe not any is Hicks thank Gloria Hicks Meeting House Road I just had a couple of things I would like to see um come up on an agenda for discussion um one of which is the speed limit on Route 137 um it's sailing along at 40 m an hour um I don't see any postings for speed limits from the corner store all the way to 28 um there are police details there constantly at the churches at the podador office um you know citing citing people um we don't have any sidewalks there there are pedestrians there are kids getting on and off school buses um I walk my dog I take my life in my hands getting on 137 which I have to do during bad weather um and it is thickly settled from Commerce to 28 but I'm suggesting that the whole Road be 30 m an hour um it's just it's a speed a speed demon um I don't know how many police you know how many violations are given out but it's a real problem um and they don't slow down for bikers as well and the bikers don't slow down for us either so that's a real problem if you could discuss that and uh in the future that would be great um the second thing is the pump station um Dr duncanson assured the community that this site was to be made more appealing uh and it planned to plant trees after the work was completed um and I do have to note that that land was never supposed to be cleared like that in the first place uh a butter got their letters after the land was cleared um so we didn't even have a a chance to voice our concerns about the defoliation of that entire Corner um the South chadam Village Association has brought this uh fourth two meetings as well Carol Gordon was told it would be completed in the spring it was not I was told it would be done in August it was not um and the planning board was very clear that these pump stations were not supposed to be unsightly if this isn't unsightly I don't know what is um I reached out to Rob Farley via email last week but have not received a responses yet uh the jury Jersey Barrier still up there uh no plantings have been done and it's been an excessive amount of time that we've been waiting for this so if we could talk about that that would be great um the last thing I have is um an agenda item that will be coming up which is the LDA for a meeting house um in negotiating for that meeting house LDA I would ask that it be posted earlier than the two days that we received for the main street if possible um people need to see it and um I asked the trust in the board to include my repeated requests for my own access to 137 from my home the current access is fraught with problems and safety concerns which I brought to you um for the last year vehicles blocking entry and exits backing up in my driveway turning around as well as a deterioration in my driveway um I was denied access today because of a UPS truck um I had to go back up back up into my driveway and leave the other way which is not the way I was going um it's a chronic problem which I which I've brought to you um and I should not be left in a worse condition than I am Now by dealing with what I'm dealing with Mr shelle you've been at my home and I've explained to you um how how things are currently working and they're not working um shared access has never been advantageous um in terms of property value and Logistics I had concerns before I bought my home I had a conversation with my neighbor that we would both maintain it together that didn't happen it's been me m maintaining it and that was my concern when I bought my product property um I would like to remind the trust in the board that I have a legal right of way across that property and want to be sure that an appropriate alternative access be written in the LDA before I relinquish my right of way you were thoughtful enough to put in Buckley Gardens as a title um I think this should take a little more precedence um and Mr sha you've stated your dedication to representing ing into achieving what I would like to see I invited Mr dykens to um see my home via email last week I don't know if you saw it um I hope you do take me up on that invitation so you can stand at the top of my driveway like Mr Shell did and see what I'm talking about [Music] um um and I think that's about all I had for concerns thank you thank you very much Mr sh uh yeah sorry Mike um I think we can refer the speed issues and 137 issues to the traffic study committee right yeah I think that's a good idea and I I I I'll just incorporate my own question which is I have complete sympathy with the request I also know I believe that's a state highway and so uh I I how we accomplish that needs to be part of what we refer to uh the Traffic Safety Committee I think we have two issues with this today we have traffic we have the the velocity of traffic and we have sidewalks that and I totally will dou it down on the request for sidewalks there it's especially after we developed that property we got to need sidewalks there I'm a sidewalk fan in this town yeah big time and we're going to need them and so we need to start early and often with the state because you know how that can become a total miasma yep and the dot loves us thanks we've had such a good relationship with them um okay um anything uh I started with the public I guess I'll keep going with the public anything else from the public anything from the board okay then we will turn to um uh oh sorry yes thank you public comments on the business agenda other than items A and B uh Miss Gibbs uh yes thank you Mr chair I just want to comment on the town project public engagement procedure first read uh I'm not really sure what that is um it's it's really complicated uh and it came from some International Association uh I don't know why we're doing something like this you know we're a town of 7,000 people and you know this looks like it's more from huge consortiums or cities or whatever I I think it's way too complicated I think it's going to require a tremendous amount of time by staff who I believe is already overworked and I think that it gives too much Authority concentrated authority to staff in terms of deciding who will be reached out to there are those five levels of um what is considered important who's interested I don't know how you can know who's interested if you haven't heard him speak um and I'm also concerned about all the different stat stakeholders and reaching out to them individually so since I'm a taxpayer but I'm not a club member um I wouldn't get invited to any of these things you know uh Sports Recreation environmental cultural uh I I I think going out and and having conversations and having discussions and making assurances and promises that are not recorded that uh have no minutes uh and that not it isn't open to the public at Large is inappropriate um I think there should be a meeting whenever anything is discussed on major projects whether you know whatever they are in town they should be at the select board where the public can listen attend watch it later have minutes and see it on demand so those are my comments on that I I I think this is a lot of unnecessary work and I'm not sure what the motivation was thank you very much thank you Miss Gibbs um anybody else okay um so now we'll turn to the business agenda the first one being allocation of responsibility for stepping stones and uh 127 old Harbor Road um this relate there there is a memo uh which recites uh the background for this um I I will just kicked it off saying that the the board of the affordable housing Trust um in in August um constructed a request for um the the uh this board the select board to discuss and perhaps consider um offering to the um the select board the affordable housing trust board um the um the responsibility for developing an RFP I I think um actually Gloria's um staff memo framed the three Alternatives and maybe you want to address that Gloria as the the three things that um potentially could be a response from this board uh to the uh affordable housing trust board sure thank you um just to introduce this to um people who are listening or watching um to reiterate a little bit on August 6th uh the select board uh started to talk about the next steps for the property at 127 old Harbor Road um one of the things that they discussed was dispensing with a feasibility study and just issuing a Housing Development RFP that led to further discussions about how the property could be developed and the possibility of um combining that RFP with the Stepping Stones property um the board took no action at that meeting at August 6 although they did um decide to come back together and discuss this the very next day on August 7th the affordable housing trust met um also discussing next steps um and at that meeting the board voted to petition the select board to designate the affordable housing trust the managing entity for the RFP process for the properties at um both 127 old Harbor Road and Stepping Stones Road um and uh basically with that petition I know that they requested to be the managing entity but of course the select board um which has control of the property um can choose to either allocate that responsibility to the trust um come up with some way of sharing the responsibility between the select board and the affordable housing trust um or maintain responsibility uh with the select board for the RFP process thank you um I'll open it up for comment on the board Corey go ahead all right no Smiles every body no okay this is this is why the our citizens are looking at us shaking their head going what is what in the hell is going on seriously we've went back and forth on this we voted three to2 on a select board level about the position on 127 old Harbor Road we had a lot of strong opinions about it one of my colleagues or one of one of our colleagues happened to be in town Mr culis and we were reminiscing about that wonderful 3-2 vote and he and he has his own opinions you know and I'm thinking I know he's watching out there somewhere and thank you for you know watching from afar but anyway we brought this to town meeting you I was on the minority side of it pitch it as lwh hanging fruit I remember I call Mr Dy like you know come on guys let's blank or get off the pot like this has been sitting forever enough's enough let's get a couple units let's get it going it's been sitting idle falling apart this is no good what have we done nothing nothing now we're talking about well let's go four to six units 68 units8 units combined it with we're just extending the process we put before town meeting said okay loow hanging fruit couple units if we're going to do it let's issue the RFP and move this process forward it's it's it's almost like a bait and switch almost like we're going to have this and then we're going to sit for several years and change the whole process this is this is why we we're losing respect in this town we put something forward let's fall through with it if we're going to change the tune of it bring it back to the town meeting let them weigh in on it if they want a bigger project let them weigh on it I'm not giving up my responsibility this board should not give up his responsibility whether it be me the four five of us five other people this board should keep on keep their responsibility we're the elected officials of this town we should fall through with what we started and finish up the project period Dean thank you yeah thank you Mr chairman um I'm in agreement with Mr Mets probably no surprise um both of these properties are within the jurisdiction of the select board I really don't see any benefit for the select board to designate the responsibility for crafting an RFP over to the affordable housing trust um the um the Housing Trust and the Housing Partnership may have some valuable thoughts uh ideas that should be incorporated or considered for incorporation into the rfps and they can provide them to the select board but the task of actually drafting the RFP preparing the RFP is really going to be assigned to our staff person who's sitting right there um and I think that the select board should determine um and I guess I'm going into the second and Item B as well as a as I think Mr MERS was um the selectboard should decide how many units we want on these properties um and you know whether we want ownership only which I prefer um or a mixture and task the um staff to draft the RFP when the draft comes in I'm perfectly willing to and I would welcome any comment from the trust or the partnership and then we can decide whether we want to include that that information or not um I can get even more particular about my concerns about how the trust conducts its business I'll leave I'll leave my comment at that unless it unless um further discussion um merits um further further EX explanation on it but I I'm opposed to assigning uh responsibility um or have or sharing responsibility with the Trust on the rfps for these property these properties thank you Mr chairman Miss Davis thank you Mr chair um so uh giving this a lot of thought um in contemplation about um where we are as the affordable housing trust and where we are as the board of Selectmen and you know just having conversations with people about um you know how we can go about this and and be able to accept valuable input from the affordable housing trust and the the uh Community Housing Partnership and find a compromise that works out best for everybody um and respects the process respects the jurisdiction of the property but also gives insight into what could be some really uh valuable um recommendations so I I I was I'm not off from what Dean and Corey said about process what I would love to see is that this board does refer back to the affordable housing trust and the Community Housing Partnership um uh for feedback on an RFP process in partnership with um we our staff Lee aone is um is is the um is is Gloria and she would probably be in Partnership with the town manager preparing an RFP that would come back to the board I don't think this has to be an A A I can't say it because I'm somewhat of a match you can put a word in front of it um that has to create this dissension it's it's this is you know this is a process we're all trying to do the same thing we're all trying to figure out what is best for the properties and that's how I see the process go yeah I I agree um I I I think I want to do whatever is uh produces the most professional insightful RFP that affords the town and the select board and the affordable housing trust and the community uh Housing Partnership the most options for their development we have experts that we assigned that we we appointed in the affordable housing trust why wouldn't we use that expertise similarly with the Community Housing Partnership why wouldn't we ask them for their input and their expertise I know view any of this as holding anything up in terms of process you think we're going to do the RFP and glor's going to turn around and do one in a heartbeat and we're going to say yeah stamped approved two units here we go we have to exam we have to examine all the flexib all the options that we might have for this property I like attainable here too I like attainable for 127 you guys know that but I want to know what options we have I I heard ideas the last time we discussed this that I hadn't even considered and if you want to do more than a couple units we got to change the zoning we got to go 40b we got got to do stuff so and I don't have that res you know I I want to hear from our resident experts so whether whether we remand at the affordable housing trust or to staff I want to know our options and I want to get out of the politics of it it's too much too much boohoo here about the politics of it with Penrose we got off the dime and we'll continue to get off the dime and we'll do affordable we'll do attainable and you know Workforce housing as we go but I I want I want to know the options that we have to do it I don't really care who does the RFP I just wanted them profession Prof Al quickly and completely and if that means we go to the affordable housing trust I'm good with that I am I'm good with that we appointed them there are experts so I I kind of don't get some of this I really don't we want to move the ball down the field and I don't believe getting input from experts gets in the way thanks go ahead Cory I thank you Mr CH I just wanted to this very very appropriate response though brought this to town meeting low hanging fruit couple units voters voted to approve it it's our job to fall through they're the ones who elected us to do the job let's follow through with our job period okay um I I nobody will believe me when I say I agree with a lot of what every one of you has said I I I mean I I think it is completely foolish for us to get into a uh you know whatever Shireen was thinking about uh over 127 old Harbor Road it it's it it is a it it's a special location it's got all kinds of complications about it including the will including the the strong feelings of the people who live around there and and it it we're not going to do any service for cadams housing needs by getting into a a a a literally a civil war over what we're going to do there and and I I'm not in favor of that on top of it we now have an indication that some of the abutters have hired a lawyer uh presumably to either work out and understanding with Town Council what's permitted there or not um and and that's fine that's their right uh to do that uh the implication is if they don't agree maybe there's a potential lawsuit there again I attracting a lawsuit is not my objective in fact that is decidedly uh one of the things I would most like to avoid um so I I my view and I I'll I'll tell you what I think on the in principle here but my view is that we ought to put 127 old Harbor Road with all due difference Corey to your your comment about you know loow hanging fruit and let's move forward and let's not be hung up Let the legal issue get worked out with the abuts before we do anything and before we get into any arm wrestling matches that would be my attitude um I i' I've always thought that Stepping Stones was more deserving of our primary attention in the first place having said that and how we accomplish this I I I I I don't know that I have a good suggestion because I don't want to attract more resistance around this table than we already have but I'd like to just remind everybody that in June of 2021 the select board voted five to nothing the the the um uh finance committee voted nine to nothing and by a substantial majority the town meeting approved a a petition to go to the the general court to set up a um a trust that handled both affordable and attainable housing and the trust board was to be exactly what our trust board is now the same profile and then the next year because the the the um uh the general court had gone out of session and there was a new session we renewed the same question the only difference was it was five to nothing at the at the select board it was only six to nothing at the uh the finance committee um and once again we submitted that um last last year at the annual meeting 2023 we amended the bylaw to change the board from what it was before to what it is now again the same thing that two Town meetings approved and that the town meeting approved in 2023 why do I go through all of that the the point of it is there are people on that board who have specific expertise in the world of real estate in the world of housing in the world of development and I I I think it's it's it's a group that should not be excluded I'm not talking about putting them in charge of anything I'm talking about not excluding them and their input to get the best results for chadam again I don't know how we do that because I I I don't want to have an argument about who's on first or you know who gets to do what I I I just want to have that input as part of this process um I I I think I I'll just say this one other thing I I people are kind of careful about saying ownership versus um uh versus rental I have no problem saying I am entirely in favor of ownership on both of those properties absolutely we don't even have to talk about rental there it doesn't fit the neighborhood and and we're we're not looking to maximize the density or whatever we're just trying to build build some housing and and I think uh that the best approach here is to figure out a way that we can actually incorporate the um the affordable housing trust into the process not after the fact not sitting here in in the in the public as part of our meetings but rather uh where they do something like what they did uh with respect to the earlier the the rfps that we previously did where there was a lot of discussion and uh there was a lot of back and forth and a lot of public input and then it came to the select board and I I I if we can figure out a way to do that that's that's what I would be in favor of um I I I and by the way I I think I I again I like um carollyn McCullen's proposal to get a test fit but I don't think that we should be doing anything with respect to 127 until we've eliminated the the the litigation risk that's presently in in the in the mix Dean thank you Mr chairman uh well you said a lot of things just now and I would like to address some of them um I I think I agree with you about the 127 in terms of um waiting to see uh what transpires of uh the legal issue uh because um I think this predates your time on the board um I questioned prior Town Council about certain sections of the statutes as to whether truly um um this uh they they um didn't mean that um the uh restrictions had expired and Town Council um uh advised that they indeed had and uh it may very well be that current Town Council has a different opinion I don't know so we should probably wait on that but I would say one other thing and this Mr Mets is absolutely correct when 127 was presented to town meeting it was presented largely and I think the town meeting voters largely accepted it on the basis that we had two structures over there and we could very easily house a a fire person a police officer a teacher there they weren't talking about multiple housing on that property so it's almost like a bait and switch if if the select board and the affordable housing trust decides to do something more expensive um with respect to you know Carol mullen's Comm committee's um um request uh you know I I could entertain um a test fit that's limited to you know something in the order of four or five units I don't know I'd want to see what the public reaction is to that before this board decided to take it forward so so much for 127 it's fire is the composition of the affordable housing trust board and the bylaw and the and the legislation the the legislation died in the prior section prior session of the legislature as you know it was refiled I don't it still hasn't been passed the legislature will progue this year eventually uh if if it hasn't passed by then this this to this U town is going to have to consider refiling that legislation and I think there'll be some opposition from town from town meeting uh voters to refiling that legislation given the unhappiness in large segments of this this community about how about the process and the result out that emerged from the Buckley property uh and and even The Meeting House Road properties but um right now the affordable housing trust has no business in the area of attainable housing it's not in their jurisdiction and I'm not saying cut them out I'm saying don't let them have the first uh cut at shaping the RFP because the RFP determines the result I remember remember when the town manager told me as she discussed with everybody on this board individually what her decision was on the Buckley property and she told me she felt constrained by the language and Jill you can correct me if I'm mistaking this or misremembering it constrained by the language in the RFP on the Buckley property that was heavily skewed toward uh rentals there was mention of ownership but it wasn't really prominent so whatever you put in that RFP is going to determine what you want and that should be the responsibility of this board I have no problem and I think this is along the lines of what Shireen was saying with the irfp being drafted presented to this board and then our boards uh providing it to the trust and to the partnership for comment back to us that's what they did to us essentially they drafted it and they sent it to us for our comment and we can take into account their their comments I guess I don't share the estimate of their expertise that some other members of this board has about the composition of that board um and I don't like the way they do business I think they do too much behind closed doors I don't I don't get the sense that they're very friendly to dissenting opinion and I'll leave it at that thank you Mr chairman thank you any other comments anything from the public Miss mlen all right um Carolyn Mullen South chadam and the chair of the Community Housing Partnership uh most of you know I've been involved in this property advocating for it for a very long time and I was was it with three years I think we had to go to town meeting before we got it passed I was very happy about that um that said I know that the community has this is a unique I guess every property is unique but there's a lot of issues around this property a lot of ownership ship the community feels a particular ownership about this property um I think originally we thought yeah we'll put a house there and maybe turn the barn into a unit and I think if the house was salvageable that would be what we would do we wouldn't knock down a decent house that just need a few cosmetic repairs but because that's probably not going to happen it's um a waste of the property not to look at could it be developed a little bit differently um I really want the test fits done sooner than later I'd like them done so that all of us you folks here all of the housing trust my partnership and the public can look at the possibilities to see how far we are apart on our expectations and what we want for the property um I would like to see that done and then for our partnership to go work on our recommendations of how we would like the property developed the Housing Trust could look at it and think about how they want it develop we come to the select board and we make our recommendations ultimately they're going to have the decision and they kick it over to our housing and sustainability director to write up the RFP um I'm willing to concede on this property more than others because of the community buyin and their expectations I want as many people to be as happy as possible with the final product I think we can deliver a quality product I would like obviously more than two units I don't need 12 and to speak to the fact that someone has um contacted an attorney that happens in affordable with affordable housing all the time it can't be we can't just stop because that happens all right I really think we should move forward I think if we had the test fits and had all these conversations within the public maybe some of the abuts wouldn't be quite so enraged about what we're proposing I think some of the other test that that somebody presented with the I don't know 12 or 18 however many units is too much and I I bet that scared some folks that's not what I'm advocating for that's not what I want I want some folks to live on that property and I want the majority of the citizens in this community to be thrilled with what we produce and I'm willing to do what we need to do to get there I want to build back some Community Trust And I want to deliver a good product and I think we can do that I don't think there's any value value and the two bodies between the trust and the select board doing their saber rattling about who's going to be in charge ultimately this has to belong to the select board until all that happens um and that's just the reality we have to deal with and I think the public in particular on this property is expecting that and I don't see any reason to create more animosity while we're trying to develop this property so that's how I'd like to move forward thank you uh Miss Gibbs uh yes yes thank you very much um yeah the the town owns the property the two properties which is the taxpayers and the one thing I didn't hear today between the two boards was that a public comment and and our ability to participate in the process I think this is totally premature I think it belongs absolutely to the select board they represent all the interests of the town uh we have been made promises over the years a lot of things have morphed uh I think we have an absolute right early on in the process to look at what is being considered for density the number of attainable units and Home Ownership that's what we had expected we expected that more people who live and reside in chattam were going to be able to qualify for housing and this is our opportunity uh By the time rfps are already drafted it's too late the Deeds Done we make comments I can't tell you how many comments I have made and suggestions and asked questions over the last two years of the affordable housing trust and I've never gotten an answer on any of them tonight I asked there are five questions that I thought should be incorporated that nobody even addressed about the the quality of the maintenance on who's going to take care of it you know what if it's bad do we have a say in it restricting occupancy they can't use inferior quality materials uh and all kinds of things like that you know putting dishwashers in you know why is it that we ask questions and we never get answers and that's what the affordable housing trust does it all the time I absolutely agree it has to stay with the board because now it means it stays with the people we're the taxpayers we get to weigh in on it we know what we want on these properties you got your ways in terms of desity on 1610 and Main Street or excuse me 1633 in Main Street I think that we have an opportunity now to do it the way we were promised thank you thank you any other comments I'm I'm G to say for myself I I I think I'm I'm just going to say to me it's it's not so much about what we want or somebody wants or anybody wants as it is about having a project and and an RFP that has a realistic possibility of attracting the interest of a responsible developer with a proposal that is somewhat amable or at least negotiable from our point of view to to to build a project um it it there there is an element of feasibility that goes into this that um I I think um may be getting a little bit of short shrift in this discussion but having said that I I'm I'm I'm going to say from my where I am tonight is the following um I think the select board should authorize um the um the housing director to engage somebody to to do a test fit along the lines that are suggested in the Community Housing Partnership proposal and when we have that we can then decide what we want to do in terms of how we proceed from that point forward I I am not prepared to have a an arm wrestling match here over who's going to uh develop the the the um uh the the the RFP or rfps um I I think and I as I say I I I don't I would hope that merely doing that test fit will not um inflame or otherwise exacerbate whatever is brewing with respect to the the potential litigation and I agree with Dean uh it may be that our new town Council will have a different View and until we have that in place I I I don't think we ought to be doing much of anything so that's that's where I'm coming from uh but I'll entertain other comment um Dean with re thank you Mr chairman with respect to the proposal from the partnership would you be amenable to amending the the test fit categories to just two the first being the one that is stated here a test that contemplates only the ReUse or reconstruction of the existing structures with two dwelling units total and modifying the second one to um instead of saying 6 to8 units approximately four to six units and delete the third category which is a higher density test fit in other words test fits for two units and by the way two units under our current zoning could include an Adu um two units one test fit and four to six units for the second test fit would you be amendable to something like that and I only I bring this up because I'm I'm willing to consider doing that um and I know we did test fits what else do I have to give you I don't know um we did we did a bunch of test fits for stepping stones yep and and we had a lot of feedback I don't really know where those stand right now but we we we had some feedback that reflected that you know we thought they were too many units um and you know we could do the same here so I say that because I don't want the public to think that I'm endorsing four to six units I'm not I I would be interested in seeing what four to six units look like so and I would especially be interested in seeing what the public thinks of four to six units so anyway those are as my effort to try to move things along so you asked me a question I'll yeah I I'd kind of like to hear what Carolyn has to say about it but I I that would be acceptable to me and subject to what the rest of the board thinks yeah I think it's a good suggestion and I think your Rec I think your notion is a good suggestion as well um time to move some stuff along I never thought higher density on that property was going to be a good fit anyway I mean it just it it never was in my mind um I'm fine with looking at um Carolyn's two proposals but if there has to be a compromise made in order for us to get along and get this going um I'll be willing to look at the four to six because I think it will open up conversation enough that we'll be able to get good feedback Corey sorry Dean no no I this this is what it boils down I feel like I'm just hitting my head against the wall we brought this the town meeting a couple units we could we could move on RP right now probably have little elements that any legal push back would would have to to stop a project but we we bring things to town meeting we should respect what the voters say I I didn't want to develop this property period I I thought we should have kept it as far as the school you know there should the the town should keep it it should fall in line with the wishes of Miss Ellis and the deeds and that was my position all along town meeting said Noe we're going to develop it for housing fine I'm on the losing side of it but now we're going you know what we're going to keep pushing a pushing a little bit further pushing a little bit further four units four units you know it it just bothers me P the people look at us p and how we do process and just this just frankly just rubs me the wrong way so I I know I'm on the minority on this one again no big surprise there but it just it's things like this that just irk me and and upsets a lot of people and I think um I think more people may speak out I encourage them too I mean we listen to the voters that's what we that's what we you know answer to at the end of the day um but you know I think 127 for me 127 all Harbor Road couple units let's move the forward move that forward stepping stone home home ownership 100% um you know I think 6 by right six to8 was a number I had in my head something that fits in the neighborhood issue those move those forward but we're spending so much time spending our Wheels with process and kicking the can down the road that it's going to be another three or four years before we see a damn result and that's it's frustrating okay I I just just so you understand why apart from being I mean there's I don't see what harm there is in looking at a drawing as an alternative but moreover and and and in part for Community input for expert input for everybody to look at it and say yay no you know up one side whatever um but I personally and I don't know anything about this but based on what little I think I do know know the idea that we can get a developer to come in and essentially rehab the two buildings that are there and turn them into housing for sale I find that I I I I I just that that seems highly it's so improbable that I'd like to at least have an alternative to look at in case I might be right about that it's not that it's got to be four or you know you know it it just you know that's the the the the hill we're going to die on I if if somebody will do two and that's a good project I have no problem with that do you want to say anything Carol yeah I just I just want to say I I'd be fine with that change drop off the higher it I'm not interested in that last possibility either and to speak to Corey I I think if if people could see it if they all hate it that's fine I'm I'm I want to move forward with a consensus might not be everybody but a consensus I want the community to like it I want the community to have the chance to look at it and have an opinion about it but they have to see it to understand what we're talking about and if we just let them see it if they all hate it then we'll go with two units I don't think there's any rehabbing those units I think you have to build two new units but that will be what it will be but I really want I mean affordable housing doesn't exist without a consensus you know that we we we won't move forward as a community if we don't move forward with consensus so I just want to give them the opportunity to see what we're talking about and take it from there I'm not trying to steamroll anybody or get anything done behind the scenes I just want this property to be someday inhabited by people by we're all still alive thank you um unless somebody has further commentary I think I'm going to see if anybody wants to make a motion or take no action Dean I I just wanted to say you know Carolyn and I had a conversation about this the other day and and in response to the argument about two units keeping it at two units she said those Bill Carolyn correct me if I Mis misremembering she felt that those building things had to come down that they're not salvageable and we should look at it as a a lot and what would we do with it and that's that's a very credible response um I you know postulated what I did before because I'd like to see this move move ahead um and I fought this having housing on this property as everybody knows along with Corey and was voted in the minority several times um but I accept the fact that town meeting wanted wants to have housing there and frankly if I if I thought that there were three votes on this board tonight to support going ahead with two units as Corey has advocated I would support a motion to do that I would vote to do that tonight but I don't think the votes are here so um I would I would Port [Music] um um the test fit for two units and the test fit for 4 to six units again I that doesn't mean that I favor four to six units but I'd be willing to take a look at it and see what the public thinks about it before making a final decision and uh I I guess that could go along go on at the same time as whatever is going to happen legally on this thing but I'll def that no I no I did I'm not making I'm not going to make a motion does anybody want to make a motion by the way I think we should put a cap on the cost of this uh as part of any motion but go ahead Jeff well there was $110,000 was the contract mentioned here is that a reasonable I guess we asked Jill ask Jill is that a reasonable amount yes up to yes okay so I move that we uh do test fits and 127 old Harbor Road noting that test bit contemplates the ReUse of construction or or reconstruction of the existing structures with two dwelling units in total um and a testfit that uh continues uh blah blah blah uh on four to six units and contemplating with the contemplation of developing four to six unit on that property 4 six units thank second all those in favor uh Mr Mets no uh Mr dykens I um Miss Davis I uh Mr necastro I'm assuming that the blah blah blah Incorporation it's literally the language that's on the page so I'll vote I'll vote Yes um and Mr Shell says yes stickler thank you moving right along just to clarify we have not taken any action we are not or with respect to allocation of responsibility for anything that's correct okay thank you okay um moving right along the next item um is um and I think we've we've addressed A and B together with that whole discussion so I'm going to move to item C considering a one a special one-day alcohol permit one-day entertainment license Witches Walk on Saturday October 28 2024 from 6p am I reading that uh 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. at uh 527 524 Main Street and 564 Main Street Teresa Malone are it looks like you're on welcome hi thank you um it's actually uh the event's going to be held on Saturday the 26th not the 28th just sorry I I I didn't have my glasses on and and I misread that I'll put them on now thank you um it we're asking for a similar request that we've asked for the past 15 years um we're asking for an alcohol permit at the uh chadam cookware and we're asking for an entertainment permit at um Milan on the front of the library and the event will this portion of the evening's festivities will be over between 6 and 7 o'clock um and will be attended by approximately 180 guests I'm not sure what else you need I think that's I appreciate that any questions from the board Teresa a Limbo Dance Party yeah we're mixing it up sh we figured we a little bit of exercise it sounds sounds like fun your expectation that 180 people will be on the front lawn of eldrid public library or is or is it uh no not at one time there's five different locations and what happens usually with the group is they move from one to another we have a small activity or a raffle or something at each location so I would guess they'll probably have more watching than limboing probably anywhere from 40 to 50 people at one time okay a lot of them take their hats off so I I just wanted to make sure that that was clear to the everybody that it wasn't just everybody showing up at once because I know you do stagger um yeah activities throughout the town um I'm going to make a motion unless it's too okay Dean had a question so thank you uh Teresa it's Dean uh just um one question I know this is after the library has closed for the day have you had any conversation with the library just to alert them that you're interested in doing this yes um I went and spoke with Tammy D pasquali she was going to run it by Amy and if they had any concerns um we would certainly um we would certainly back off from that I have not heard back okay but seem to think it was pretty much would be a go right thank you I'll make my motion now if that's okay uh I moved to Grant a one day alcohol license to terresa Malone as representative of monoy community services for Saturday October 26 2024 from 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. at 524 Main Street and a special one-day entertainment license to Teresa M loan for limbo dancing and Amplified recorded music on October 26 2024 from 6:00 to 7 p.m. at the Eldridge Public Library front lawn second all those in favor uh Mr Shell says yes Mr necastro I M Davis Hi and Mr dykens hi and Mr Mets I good thank you Teresa good luck thank you much appreciate it y okay um next item is a presentation and or report from the Bureau of ocean Energy Management um concerning the Gulf of Maine offshore wind project and I'm told we have Luke and Zach from boem online here to make a presentation welcome gentlemen thank you very much you're able to hear me uh we can excellent um I'm going to also try to share my screen we'll see if we can get the technology working we have liftoff excellent all right well I want to just start off by um thanking the the board um for this opportunity uh we apologize that it took us a while um to to get before you here but I think the timing is good um that we can share uh an update on the final sale notice and I'm going to try to run through uh this presentation fairly quickly at a at a high level and then depending on sort of where your interest lies um we'll be happy to answer some some questions should take about 10 to 12 minutes I think to get through the presentation all righty so my name is Zach Jula and I'm a pro project coordinator um within the office of renewable energy programs um at the Bureau of ocean Energy Management uh we sit within the department of interior um our mission is to facilitate the responsible development of renewable energy resources um on the outer continental shelf which is the area um from three nautical miles off the coast to um approximately 200 miles off the coast uh through conscientious planning engag engagement uh in environmental analysis and Technical review um I like to start out these presentations just kind of recognizing the big picture perspective um that offshore wind um is something that our elected officials both at the federal level uh and at the state level um have emphasized as a priority for for the nation and this region um so that's really why this process is taking place and and why we're here um we recognize uh a lot of differing views on offshore wind and and we appreciate that um and respect that and our job um this evening is to really focus on and provide an update on uh Bam's recent uh planning and leasing activities uh within for or propos for the Gulf of Maine uh and to address any questions you have on the final sale notice um so we're looking forward uh to hearing from you and incorporating um feedback as we always look to refine and improve our processes as we move forward so I'll go through there's sort of three different um sections one is the the lease areas themselves and how we how we defined the boundaries um then there's the actual lease document itself um because it's a legal document um and then the format of the auction um that'll be taking place and we'll go through all of those so first on the areas so the final sale notice published on September 16th um 2024 that's when the announcement was um and it would be the first commercial wind energy auction for the golf of Maine there's been some confusion about the term Gulf of Maine the Gulf of Maine um refers to the the body of water that is uh east of of Massachusetts New Hampshire and and Maine or partly south of Maine you see it on the screen here it's it's this body of water um it's kind of known as a sea within a sea there's unique Geographic or geological features including George's bank and some outer um Banks um along the kind of along the hag line out here along the E that really Define the Gulf of Maine as a feature um so when we say Gulf of Maine we're referring to this whole this whole area here the um auction for the Gulf of main I'll explain more about how that works um is scheduled for October 29th of 2024 so that's where we are now but now I'm going to take a bunch of steps back and just sort of take a big picture overview of where we are in this process so this graphic um depicts the renewable energy authorization process um we are still at the beginning of that process um we we begin with planning and Analysis and that leads to um a lease sale or leasing activities um a lease is not permission to construct a wind farm a lease is basically gives a developer the sole um right to um develop a survey plan and conduct survey and site assessment activities and then they use that information to develop an actual proposal um so that site assessment at term in here can take up to five years and meanwhile that um Les or the developer develops a construction and operations plan which is their proposal um to be reviewed for permitting um so that that process that environmental review and permitting process takes at least two years um and then if the project is approved they can get that permission to begin construction so many of you are probably familiar with this process for from lease areas in Southern New England and have seen that it it takes quite a long time um here in the Gulf of Maine we wouldn't expect to see any um actual development um should a project be permitted and approved until probably the early to mid 2030s so we're really at the very beginning um of this process as we are finalizing the identific of the lease areas and having having an auction so the area identification process can be thought of as a process by which we start with a very large area in this case we started with almost the entire Gulf of Maine as I'll show you as a planning area and then through different steps of Engagement and and public comment we slowly narrow that box down um kind of piece by piece and we look to deconflict it and look for the areas that are kind of least conflicted and most suitable for for wind energy areas um and ultimately we get to the final lease areas for an auction so in this region that process began um in May of of 2022 when we issued a request for interest area which I'll show you in a moment um the the process in general of exploring offshore wind in the Gulf of Maine um kicked off back in 2019 actually um when the governor of New Hampshire Governor sununu requested the formation of an intergovernmental renewable energy task force to explore um the possibilities of offshore wind in Massachusetts and Maine um kind of joined with the governor of New Hampshire um to to seek those opportunities and ask boam to begin this this planning process the process is really founded upon um information that we get from the public and engagement this map shows um the locations of some of the in-person engagements that that boam has taken part in some of this most of this engagement has taken place um since 2023 because of Co restrictions um earlier in the process um so these these meetings represent you know public meetings um our attendance at conferences smaller kind of targeted meetings with specific stakeholder groups um kind of a full range of of different activities um but you can see that we started with a very large region that was exploring you know offshore wind up to the kind of down east part of Maine and all the way down to to the cape and over time this kind of area you're seeing in blue got narrowed down to these smaller lease areas that are being offered in the auction so I'm going to go right through these slides and you'll just see the area kind of shrink down you know we started with the planning area in 2022 and then we moved to a request for interest area this this was an optional step that wasn't required by our regulations but we did that several times including these optional steps for engagement to really maximize um opportunities for for comment then we came forward with a draft call area to get proposals on a draft before we finalized it and then we issued a final call area in April of 2023 you're seeing that green area kind of shrink down um in October just about a year ago we issued a draft wind energy area um and and took comment on that and did a series of of inperson and virtual meetings and then in March of this year we issued the final wind energy area um but this isn't the final lease area so this was the area that we moved forward with for initial environmental review um however we still needed to carve this area down further into potential lease areas so in um uh let's see this was I think May 1st we published the proposed sale notice um with eight lease areas and again took comment on this uh and did public meetings both in person and and virtually and then ultimately we took the information from those comments and issued a final sale notice and I'm going to go through some of these details now because these are the final lease areas you see on the screen that are being offered for auction so there are eight of them um they total about 850,000 Acres however not all of those Acres would be developable um there are some that would be in the lease it it basically stipulates that development wouldn't be allowed in portions of these lease areas along these corridors that you see because that's those are going to be um potentially used to facilitate existing Transit um so that those areas would not be developable um these areas represent a 12% reduction from the proposed sale notice um the the previous step um and a 92% overall reduction from the original call area the average lease size is around 100,000 acres um which is what the wind industry and the the states of the Gulf of Maine have said um is sort of the approximate size that would be needed um for a commercial viable lease um these areas would have a combined capacity of about 13 GW of of power um which would meet the stated needs of both Massachusetts and Maine so Massachusetts has come forward and said that they anticipate needing 10 gaws of of offshore wind from the Gulf of Maine and Maine has a law on the books um saying that they need to procure three gaws of of offshore wind from the Gulf of Maine um you can see there's some Geographic diversity having some areas that are closer to Maine and others that are closer to Massachusetts um and some of the areas that we prioritize for avoidance included um offshore fishing areas particularly for the ground fish Fleet um and the hering Fisheries um and also some um continued attempts to avoid um some of the remaining sensitive benic habitats that were identified including Jeff bank and Franklin swell and reducing overlap with areas um that have relatively higher levels of North Atlantic right well sightings and detections one other thing I'll mention here just in case there are some of you that are fairly new new um to to this topic um in the Gulf of Maine is that the Gulf of Maine is significantly deeper um the waters that we're exploring here than the areas that have already been leased and some of them have been developed in Southern New England so all of the areas that we're talking about here um we expect would require floating uh technology so floating offshore wind and we can talk more about that um if you have questions so those are the areas I'll quickly go through the leases so the the actual lease instrument itself again just offers the exclusive right to alessie to submit plans to boam um it does it so those essentially are survey plans um in the development of a site assessment plan um as well as a construction and operations plan so they can basically submit those plans but a lease issuing a lease does not authorize construction that's still a long way out um with many more environmental reviews um and permitting steps required so just want to make that very clear there are different sections of the lease probably the most kind of relevant here for this conversation is addendum C where you get to some of the lease specific terms um conditions and stipulations one that I think is really relevant um for local communities is a reporting requirement that's really intended to enhance engagement so it requires that um a lesie a developer has several different communication plans one for Fisheries one for tribes and one for agencies including um local agencies there's also a progress report requirement where lesie every six months has to um document and describe the engagement that they've taken part in um with all of the potential affected ocean users in the region so that includes tribes um the fishing industry at large so not just the fishermen and Fisher women themselves but also the local kind of like docside businesses underserved communities and other Coastal communities um anyone that could be affected they need to engage document that engagement report on it show how they're using the feedback from that engagement to inform their process and then we post these reports on our website they're publicly available and then this is a cycle so it starts over again um and it's kind of a way to increase the transparency and accountability on the engagement that's happening and how it's being used several other stipulations that we've added um I'm just going to kind of list these off and we can go into them if there's interest but there's there are requirements around Baseline monitoring for North Atlantic right whales and other large Atlantic whales um stipulations around Habitat impact minimization um there's a requirement around engagement another one whereas uh boam can decide to host a meeting and require uh any lesie to attend that meeting um there's a stipulation around transmission planning um that basically would say to the extent practicable lsie must consider the use of of shared cable corridors to minimize the the cable Corridor footprint and consider meshed or kind of um offshore backbone systems where you'd have multiple projects plugging into to potentially a single um or you know far fewer potential cable routes so those are things that we know there's a lot of interest in and we're going to require that those um potential plans be considered and Incorporated if if practicable so I think that covers the new lease stipulations and then for the auction format there are two different regions that we've identified here so within the AU there's a North Region and a South Region um and a potential bidder can win up to two leases um and they can win either two in the South or they can win one in the South and one in the north um they cannot win both of the north leases and that's to kind of maintain um some some competition and um kind of looking down the road at potential energy procurements um trying to diversify the potential companies that are bidding into those procurements they're also bidding credits So within the auction part of the overall bid that they put down on a lease area can be set aside um for initiatives that um are really important to the region in this case we've identified a 12 and a half% bidding credit for Workforce training and supply chain development um to really focus on that that local and domestic Workforce training and local manufacturing to help um the wind industry as a whole um move forward as well as a 12 and a half% bidding credit for Fisheries compensation um because we know as much as we have tried to avoid all of the the highest um the areas of the highest Landings and and revenues for Fisheries there would still be some impacts we recognize that some of them temporary some of them potentially permanent um so that's why there would also be 12 and a half% bidding credit for compensatory mitigation which would really just be sort of a first step towards that there's additional mitigation that is then required if a project reaches um project approval um later down the line so I know that was a lot of information I'm going to stop there hopefully that kind of gives you the lay of the land and we can go into further detail on anything you might have questions on thank you very much questions from the board um Shireen hi was it Luke Luke Luke or Zach who am I speaking to I'm Zach is also on hi hi I think we might have met in East Ham when you guys made this presentation before um uh I a couple of questions that I have um understanding that there has been some um some reduction in space an area that isn't going to impact the Fisheries as much I'm not saying that it's not going to at all um but when you're talking about the um the survey plans when when when the developer um has starts to do the surveys and the site assessment plans um I think I I I'd like to have some clarity on um process of how that works would any one of the developers during that time that they're doing uh their site assessments and everything do any construction not not wind turbine construction but would they be building any structures um out offshore that they would be then again using a staging or platforms that they would be um you using to just do surveying or anything else is that happening during this process at all yeah hi hi sh and and thank you for the question um no no structures uh would be authorized the one thing that they can um deploy as as part of the um issuance of of a lease is a meteorological buoy um so they can deploy a a buoy it we could probably find some pictures and and send those along um to you after the conclusion of of this meeting um but those buoys can monitor ocean temperature ocean currents wave heights um and then they also um have the ability to to capture wind speed um information um in the site and so that's that's pretty standard practice earlier in the kind of infancy of this industry we used to authorize um the construction of met Towers so that those essentially achieved the same thing but it was an actual structure um the industry has moved away from met towers that it's it's too much money and work for something that can be achieved by the deployment of a a buoy so hopefully that answers the the question anything that's once the developer kind of pursues the deployment of a buoy or they're conducting survey plans as part of those communication plan requirements um and other kind of restrictions and and requirements they have they have to put out a notice to Mariners and make sure that information gets out there well in advance of their activity oh excellent yeah there's a good example of one so there's a thank you so a couple of other things um that I I would love to understand a little better is the mitigation opportunities um the engagement that the public our towns will be able to have um during the process when those would happen how do we become involved in the mitigation process um obviously we as a town would either designate staff or uh certain um interested members of the community or committees to be part of that process I just want to know where do we step in to start to talk about that we have a a Fisheries um community that uh we represent and we want to make sure that everybody is uh fairly represented but also the other side of this is if there's any mitigation as to hazards that could occur similar to what happened in inet uh where do we start in the process of becoming engaged as a community to protect our own interests yeah again really really good question um so there are different pieces to that I think for the the Fisheries piece that's there are specific Avenues by which that occurs um so as I mentioned there's a there's a Fisheries communication plan requirement and that's spelled out in the lease um a developer is required to have a Fisheries liaz on um they attend the fishery management meetings um they hold office hours and dock hours um and really have to be pretty ProActive at at being in the places where you know members of the fishing industry are um to to kind of get that input and feedback and the way that our progress reporting requirement is structured is you know we're basically requiring leses to to do this engagement not just with um the the Fisheries but also with local communities so that they're the idea is that they're going to propose projects that are reflective of those comments and that feedback um to the greatest extent possible youan that's that's the goal so you know for the residents I think it depends on sort of we'd have to see you know which leases are actually you know secured through it through an auction what sort of projects are proposed and then through the kind of NEPA process you start to identify what the potential impacts would be I I can't guess at at what the potential impacts to to chatam would be but if there are impacts that are identified um there's a process by which um we would evaluate those impacts at boam and then there can be requirements um through the permitting process and then also oftentimes the developers will kind of negotiate directly with um potentially impacted communities um and and kind of work through um Community benefit um agreements Luke do you have anything you add to that I think the takeaway is that each project is is unique and each Community is unique and in this case uh as Zach was saying really need to find out what the project is that's going to be proposed and how your community um engages with that and then once that that is complete um there are several steps in the process where those conversations can happen and you know we're always looking to learn from other experiences and so um events you mentioned in terms of what happened offshore n Tucket and otherwise are certainly incorporated as we move forward in our process I think one of the things I'm looking for is exact like um where when is when when do we start to become engaged in this I mean uh for us as a as a maritime Community we've invested tens of millions of dollars in in in Fisheries infrastructure for our community and so the impact that um off um energy projects have on Fisheries are definitely are impacting to our community and so for me I I I want us to have a seat at the table to be able to um know where we can jump in where we can provide feedback that's going to be helpful for our for our communities um here on the cape um so I'm still not hearing where that process is um if you're saying it's during the leasing agreement side um how do we get notified and and you know when should we be engaging in with whom is it bom is it the leasy is it the permitting agency um is it the after the fact because once you guys step away it's is it Bessie that starts to jump in on the process so that's another government agency I mean we're talking about um you know issues that are could be potentially very impacting for for our community not saying all neg U negative it can be positive impacts as well but we want to be able to to exploit as many opportunities as we can as a community yeah I think that's a good followup there so I think the the most immediate action points that would be taken there is is when a lease is issued a lesie comes on board and they're um a really important part of the process and as Zach was saying some of those requirements um include a Fisheries communication plan for example so the members of the community that are actively fishing in that region there'll be a communication plan that um in this case a Fisheries leison needs to be assigned so so through that Fisheries communication plan we'll start to develop relationships if they haven't already um with Fisher folk in your community that's that's one part of it another aspect of that is is just the general engagement and the progress report so information about these leses will be made I'm certainly sure if you're a community that wants to be proactive and engage with these leses um as they get on board they they should be willing to have those conversations but if not I think they would also be approaching you um given your interest in this area um and your location particularly to the areas or lease areas that are located closer um to the Outer Cape there so uh those are the most immediate points there's certainly more formal points as part of the NEPA process uh but if you're thinking about what would happen in the next couple months I think the the development of communication plans and engagement with the Lei initially is is really the start and the idea there is that we have those early engagements so they have an opportunity to understand what your equities are and develop a project that's reflective of those and so um certainly if that's not happening uh we'd like to be made aware of that um those are Le stipulations that we I know it's our job to make sure they comply with those so just one more question I'll let somebody else go um it's about the transmission easements you you guys do um issue the transmission easement um and then all of a sudden it's up to the state to negotiate with the with the lesie uh on transmission to shore what town I mean that's the state and the and the town's process uh unless that's changed through any any state legislation at this point but uh um where in that process when you provide that easement is there is there a place where we can look at uh I mean you don't know where it's goinging ashore because you haven't gotten the proposals yet so it's sort of like we're at the mercy of whatever a wward is and then whatever is going to fit and then all of a sudden it's you know on the communities um it's the onus of the community to figure that out and there's a lot of changes that can occur in you know I'm not saying that trans Miss is going to come to chadam but if it did in fact come this way you know what what um safeguards do we have to assure that um we have it's not an impediment on our infrastructure and that we have a say at the table when it comes to um aside from the meepa and the conservation and all the other permitting where where do we stand with that yeah I'll jump in on that so um you know you're exactly right that you we don't know where um the project proponents are going to propose um the the transmission Landings um we at this point we have some idea of where um where some of those potential sites might be just based off of information from from ISO New England and information you can get on say the New England or the Northeast ocean data portal um however you know things can a lot of things can change in in 10 years and we're also we at this time we're not sure if we're going to be dealing with projects that are um that potentially sending power kind of independently project by project we call that sort of radial transmission or if there might be some kind of coordinated transmission system um that's proposed where there'd be like I described before a type of backbone and in that case you'd have sort of you can imagine there being sort of almost like a highway of transmission um offshore where several projects could plug into that that one Highway and that would have fewer interconnection points on Shore that's something that you know we've heard a lot of interest in um from from local communities and from tribes um who've had you know Lessons Learned From The Southern New England experience so there's a lot a lot unknown at this time but all of those things that that Luke was describing around the communication plans and the progress reports that explicitly mentions transmission so you know we they are required to do engagement with local communities and with tribes um and others and uh to basically incorporate that information before they even submit any paperwork to Bam on on an actual project proposal that's been a lesson learned for us we want to build in that engagement early in the process so that's really the first kind of entry point for for local communities is to engage with with um the leses um and to let it be known sort of what your your thoughts are around how your your community could be affected or could stand to gain from from different um aspects of of these projects and then after it kind of gets to a point where a um a company would submit a construction and operations plan um they will have one two you know they could have several different Alternatives that that they're considering and then through the National Environmental Policy Act we often expand upon those OP and look at even more Alternatives and then all of those Alternatives need to be assessed through the the permitting process um and that's sort of our side of it like you mentioned the the state has a lot of sway over how this plays out um and they can build that into their procurements so when they they go and sort of issue uh requests for proposals um they can kind of build in different requirements into those um rfps those procurements that that sort of specify how they'd like to see um that power brought to sh or interconnected so there there are a lot of different points um along the way the first part would be that engagement piece and then kind of years from now um will be the actual kind of consideration of Alternatives and and energy procurements okay well thank you very much and I just want to say to my fellow select board members that we need to stay engaged I know we'll have more bites here at the Apple but we really haven't had much of a say at this point so I think we need to stay D diligent thank you thanks uh yeah Jeff thank you uh thank you Zach and Lou for being here this evening I did uh catch the B presentation up in eastm it was fascinating to me then and it's equally as fascinating now um I want to follow up on a couple of themes that um select person Davis uh mentioned the first of which is the mitigation fund for fish for the Fisheries compens you compensation fund mitigation fund it's 12 a half% number one who came up with 12 a half% what does that mean in terms of dollars and who decides what's in the what's in the what's in the bucket what kind of 12 and a half% of what how how many dollars and that get spread up and down the coast without any any Coastal uh town that has a Fisheries component if you will so couple questions there and I have macro questions as well that I are burning but I want to hear that the answer to that one please first sure sure yeah so the the number um boam has basically decided um through kind of the general federal government experience and um auctions of this type so that you we have our experience with oil and gas and there's also a lot of interior experience on on public lands um that for these types of bidding credits they they cap the overall amount that can be set aside for a bidding credit at 25% so in our engagement in our review public comments we identified two major needs one was around the kind of local domestic supply chain and Workforce Development and the other was around Fisheries compensation so we took that 25% cap essentially and split it into two so that's how we got to 12 a half% um that 12 a half% is of the the bid price essentially for for how it the the amount in area goes for an auction so the the starting price for most of these lease areas is around $5 million so it would be you know if it went for $5 million it would be 12.5% of that that would be set aside um for that fund that is not the only source of Fisheries mitigation um it's sort of an earlier down payment on Fisheries mitigation if you will um ultimately as we've been discussing we don't know the extent of the project that's going to be proposed at the time of of of a lease right so once they actually a developer proposes a a project and we analyze the potential Revenue exposure um and and work with fishery service to do that take comments on it um that becomes a term of of Permitting and what we call cop approval that they then need to kind of pay the full balance that would be owed to cover that potential mitigation um so this is sort of the again the first sort of down payment towards that but it's not the whole picture um of of what is going to eventually be put aside for for Fisheries mitigation so so it's by each lease though 25% of the value of each lease that's paid is going to be set aside in in 12 12 and a half% yeah well 12 and a half and 12 and a half is 25 you're going to do a Workforce Development you're going to do Fisheries yeah right okay so uh your the the area has diminished in size a bit since since East Ham I I I think what what got me going there was were the transmission lines and how and I very heartened to hear tonight that you're asking potential leses to think about or you're asking them or demanding that they they share transmission lines if you have you have you know five leases in one area if you have five different transmission lines running all over the ocean or you really need to concentrate them I thought that was a no-brainer to me and I'm not an engineer but what really gets me going is that how are you going to get electricity back to Massachusetts to Mainland Massachusetts be it sandwich Plymouth which is probably the or Boston sandwich and Plymouth in particular I should say without going over Stell wagon and Stell wagon is a is a National Treasure it it it's it's it's a sanctuary so how how are you going to get those lines over Stell wagon with with who's going to approve that and how do we know what kind of impact that's going to be on one of the most treasur treasured sanct Marine sanctuaries on the face of the planet so I I I've got I'm an individual I'm a select board member I'm a citizen a taxpayer but I have real and a former fisherman but I have real concern about any electrical transmission lines running over that St wagon bank that's that's unconscionable to me and and how are we going to protect the whales the Dolphins the the Herring the the the lobsters all the benic animals that are there that that is a treasure so I really think we have to be think carefully how we get those lines and get the electricity back to Massachusetts and and Maine apparently New Hampshire misses out even though they started this whole thing I didn't hear I didn't hear Hampshire get got any any any any electricity out of this but that's a big one and I'm sure you've heard it before but I just was so struck then at your presentation that I don't know how you're going to mitigate get through Stell wagon with electricity line so if you could maybe speak to that I'd appreciate I saw your comment about Jeff's ledge I scaled in Jeff's ledge it's a beautiful area as well so I appreciate your attentions your ongoing attentions and hopefully your future attentions to the fishing industry and whales and mammals and migrations and boat traffic um you know what just happened down in you know south of the vineyard does not help um in terms of even though we all know that we need clean energy we're not opposed to clean energy it's just how we do it where we do it what impacts it rots or not um is extremely important to to our town to this board to our citizens and to the Commonwealth so I said a lot but I I'm really stellwag get me going yeah no I mean great points and thank you for for the question on that so I don't can you see the screen again that I've shared yes yes thanks this is one of the the backup slides and couldn't get through everything um but thought that this might be a question that that came up I think we showed the same graphic in in East Ham but just for everybody's benefit um what you can see here the the lease areas that are up on the screen are the previous versions um these are the proposed lease areas so as you mentioned these have been narrowed down um by about 12% since since they were kind of put forward in this form but just to illustrate your point um this is still wagon Bank National Marine sanctuary and then there are also uh State sanctuaries that AB but either side of of Stell wagon so it is certainly true um that it you know it's essentially impossible to get power from these lease areas to any of the the Massachusetts points of interconnection um without passing through Stellwagen um you know or one of the the state s sanctuaries and I'm not positive on all of the the restrictions there I know for Bam's part that we do not have um leasing jurisdiction or the ability to Grant an easement in an existing Nation Marine Sanctuary um the Stellwagen Bank ntion Sanctuary itself um is is well aware of this and they've provided language that is was in the proposed sale notice and also in the final sale notice and they also participated in our task force meeting in Plymouth um in May of this year so I'd encourage folks maybe Luke can drop a link to that in the the chat um but we had a really great panel discussion about about transmission and some of the um opportunities and challenges um that you know include Stell wagon but also around coordinated transmission and using a backbone system so i' encourage folks to to dig into that in Greater detail but what I'll say for for Stellwagen is that um you know they they they're doing some preliminary work um to sort of understand what would what would be entailed with allowing um a corridor to pass through Stell wagon and if they wanted to allow that but that would be you know under their jurisdiction and not ours so I just want to make that that point clear um and you know kind of would refer you to to Stellwagen um Bank Nation Sanctuary to to answer additional questions on that um but that's something that that they've begun to to look at but this would all be you know much further down down the line you know once a project proposal is actually kind of comes forward okay well thank you that that's helpful and I won't prolong this too long too much longer but um I I had issues you're in 700 feet of water correct is it 700 water I think the the deepest one yeah around 700 and you have floating platforms how does that work and are the floating platforms is uh have they ever been tested built used anywhere else on the planet so yeah the answer to that is yes um so there there are a number of kind of pilot demonstrations and those are at that the turbines are at a commercial size but the number of of turbines within the array has been limited so I think the largest existing array um is I want to say 11 floating turbines off of of Norway it's the the high wind tampen project um and I think those are 8 megawatt machines so they haven't gut to the size of some of the machines that you know are being constructed off of Southern New England but certainly um you know larger than the machines that we're accustomed to seeing on land so it is a um it is a technology that has been deployed has been proven there are different ways to do it um and you know we could we could do another presentation on that although Luke and I aren't the engineers uh but there there's essentially a a spar a floating submersible you can have systems that that are under tension systems that are you know kind of looser catenary system so that there are a lot of different ways that it's that it's been explored um and yeah most of the work to date has been off of uh Norway Scotland um kind of France and Portugal although Asia is is quickly catching up and beginning to deploy their own floating systems thank you just in my concluding remarks I just really do appreciate you being here and I Echo uh select person Davis's notion of staying kind of on track here there are awful lot of unanswered issues here that that again in favor of of clean clean energy but with with at least impact to our environment the the bottom of the ocean the fishing community and the citizenry lots of concern I'm voicing a lot of concern a lot of unanswered questions here I'm I'm fearful that we give up power to less ease and now we're starting to negotiate with individual Les EES and it's going to be very difficult to do that to focus on those Les e that may be most impactful to Cape Cod and shadam in particular but Cape cot also so but I do thank you for being here and uh I really do thank you for your efforts and um more to come I thank you bye thank you very much yeah Dean yeah thank you Mr chairman very quickly since Jeff actually addressed a question that I was going to ask um about the these floating platforms but I'll just just ask one sort of sub question on that are they Tethered to the ocean floor how are they just anchored how how how do they stay in place yeah they they'd be anchored um and the anchor points I think range from at least three to I think I've seen some designs that have six um and there are different ways to deploy the anchor depending on the benic environment you know what the the actual kind of substrate soil structure is um so they're they're different ways to do it there are you know suction buckets you can um install pilings these pilings would be much smaller of course than than what would support uh you know a foundation like you you see off of Southern New England but um then there are other sort of drag anchors that are you know much larger versions essentially of what we would see you know um a vessel use so there there are a lot of different ways to do it um and it really just depends again on the the type of floating platform um that's being proposed the the soil type um where the the platform exists okay the second question um this I I did skim the material skim through the material that you sent um there's an addendum C which is Le U the lease uh and conditions and S stipulations it it it refers to a specific lease number 0562 may I assume that's a sample of yeah yeah that's right there there are eight separate leases um and all of the addendum C's are identical the addendum some of the other addendums vary a little bit because it they they focus on the actual areas themselves and and then just following up on something that Shireen talked about and I think Jeff touched on it so what what protections are there in the lease itself I I don't recall seeing anything against the type of breakage of the apparatus that you know we we've seen happen recently uh in the Nantucket situation yeah yeah good good question Luke you want to take the first cut at it yeah sure it's a it's a great question we get a lot I think it has to come down to what the lease is authorizing so in this case the lease is really just thinking about the site character site characterization um activities that would happen or or would be proposed to happen so there's not any construction that's being authorized as a result of the lease issuance it's simply the Privileges for them to submit plans to bomb to continue to pursue additional survey activity that would inform a plan um the conditions you're looking for for blades or any sort of apparatus will be put on the outer continental shelf would be part of the approval of a construction operations plan and that's a um much larger document that is the result of consultations and the the 2-year Nea process to evaluate the project that's being proposed so the stipulations you see in the lease are really referring to um measures we put forward to mitigate any potential harms from the biggest one is is or biggest potential for impacts has to do with um survey activities from geophysical survey activities which use a relatively low amount of sound to gather information about the the Ben the characteristics of this the lease area so so I just to clarify the construction plan is something that would also be subject to the approval of your agency correct correct actually we're at a point now where um we have several projects that have gone through through that and um have examples of what those conditions would be um floating is floating offshore wind turbines is certainly a different world so we don't have examples for that particularly but um happy to share some more information about example projects and you can see the I mean the one of the projects I work on is has 80 Pages or so of conditions associated with it to uh ensure that the project they're proposing is is properly mitigated just to give you a sense of um the level of of detail that's being put forth by not only us but the whole Federal family as these projects are permitted how tall are these turbines it's a great question um there's not a a particular turbine that is what we're assigning right we basically allow the exporation of um R Ral energy from wind so so offsh wind in this case but typically we're seeing um a a blade tip height um and anywhere from like I'd say 700 to 12200 ft um but it really depends on the foundation type and the size of of the machine that would be proposed often times what we get in a proposal is is something called a constru a design envelope or construction design envelope and um they will Pro propose a range of Heights or a range of um design parameters that we'll analyze because often times at the time of that um conr struction operation plan submission the final contract for the actual turbine will not be executed right so they're uh want some flexibility there um and there's it's not just the height but it's it's the height of a certain attribute of the turbine so you can talk about the the blade tip right which you only see when the at the at the complete Revolution um often times folks are interested in the Nel which is the the larger piece of the top of the of turbine that where the the generator is located where um is a little bit larger piece of equipment so that's at at a different height there but there they are large machines and there's not really a way of getting around that um but that gives you a sense of of the size does the construction plan allow your agency or another Federal agency to regulate the number of turbines in a given lease lease area yeah absolutely yeah we they'll propose a project for a number of Foundations locations essentially and we go through the process of evaluating that to determine not only are those locations um appropriate are they feasible to to build something right so do the environmental conditions exist and then have they proposed a technical solution to install something there that would work um but you know is the layout safe uh from a navigational perspective uh there's all kinds of analysis that goes into that to ensure that every location we put forth that that we do permit has been adequately reviewed U there have been several instances where we've received projects um project proposals and and either through the process as as projects have been refined we've dis discovered attributes of the site that wouldn't facilitate that so for example areas that really couldn't accept a pile to be driven through um so those areas were removed uh from from consideration um or for environmental or or uh mitigation measures there areas that were taken off the table to allow for more coexistence just one final question the construction plan process is that uh subject to public input the type that um my colleagues have been talking about yeah it's all subject to the National Environmental Policy Act so uh there'll be at a several public meetings associated with that that have to do with the scoping of of what the what the realm of the analysis will be um we typically then will publish a draft environmental impact statement public meetings associated with that as well as at a minimum thank you very much thank you thank you any any anybody else uh I think that was a full vetting I I agree very impressed by my colleagues tonight absolutely and M Davis you're taking the lead on this and I very much appreciate this no seriously well done thank thank you gentlemen appreciate your input and uh all of the background and and uh willingness to share the evening of this thank you thank you for having us appreciate looking forward to the next time we're able to speak with you have a good night good night thank you okay next case uh Town Projects public engagement procedure first read shaa welcome thank you NE your Communications manager um in recognition of the time we'll try and be brief uh so this is not a policy it's a procedure or a process that's been developed in recognition of the select board's goal of in commun of improving Communications with the public um in recognition of the Public's interest in our town projects and in recognition of the mutual benefit that we have in having a well-informed community um proposing this procedure it's um for staff to follow for communications planning on Town Projects uh basically the procedure includes an evaluation of the scope scale and impacts of a project on the community and matches the appropriate level of public engagement for the project um that would include raising awareness um conducting educational Outreach uh identifying opportunities to involve the public in the process including like public meetings or surveys or workshops that kind of thing and then providing an appropriate close out to the project which could be anything from an open house from a new facility um the vetting of an article for consideration at town meeting but some way to show that the public input was received was heard and was in somehow incorporated or not if it's not able to be incorporated but incorporated into the final product um in essence the level of Engagement scales up with the broader scope and scale of projects and greater impact to the community um I think we heard a couple of occasions tonight where something like this would have been helpful to have in the past such as a butter is receiving a notification after a land has been cleared for a project that's obviously something we would try to avoid by having this procedure in place um also I think it might uh it would it will um address some of the concerns that select board Davis just shared with the the boam team about opportunity unties for public engagement and opportunities to provide input so we would in essence just be baking a Communications plan into our project planning process from the start Shireen I'm really happy to see this sha I think even when I was chair we were talking a little bit about how important it is to um you know be proactive about that engagement process and not just rely or be dependent upon people you know of course people showing up to a meeting is important but that's not always the people that are getting you know the information so everything that we're doing as a as a community um uh in in our Communications I think is enhancing enhancing the better understanding of projects one of the things that that um sort of sticks out but doesn't really I I'm I'm think it's an assumption is um on the level of community interest in the projects that paragraph and the you go over to the next um page and it sort of lists stakeholders that you would want to engage um I don't really see the public at large as like a broader stroke so people don't feel like we're not you know might just add it in only sure for the idea that uh It Won't Be Misunderstood that because you don't belong to a group that you won't be able to hear the information sure of course so and I know that it's more broader than just um you know meetings but it is the other communication pie so um that we have in place so I I'm really happy to see this and I don't other than that have any other comments on it at this point Thank you thank you Cory thank you Mr chair no I have no problem having this discussion you know being able to to figure a way to engage the public and get a clean procedure policy people understand what steps we need to take um what the expectations of those steps are and timetables etc etc um uh timing on this this curiosity only because doesn't this I feel like this is something that Mr Buckley brought requested several years back and it was kind of in the same general concept I I I don't know details because it's been such a long time but I don't I do believe Mr Buckley did have a public engagement um you know concept or discussion he was going to bring forward think dates back a couple years so um just wanted to see if that's more in line with that potential agenda item which might be on the list um or any coincidence or um I I think hearing that input about needing to improve Communications is certainly from all as from all corners of the community is something that helped to um get this going if you will no I'm happy to have the conversation so I'm good yeah we're thinking about more of a standardization ation so that there's an expectation by the public of being informed and participating but also with so many of our division heads and the the numerous projects that we're working on we thought it was really important that we mapped it out for them and also withana in her not to new role but certainly being effective and expanding our communication Outreach so that was the purpose of putting together a procedure uh Dean yeah thank you uh thank you shaana uh for submitting this I I guess these are my my comments about it I I think it is important to engage the public uh and to come up with creative ways of achieving that um I think um some of us might recall that when Peter cus I think was chair of this board uh we talked about keeping the public and the board a prize of the progress of projects um and I think we sort of lost sight of that um I I was wondering where the um um was this drawn from a particular model I you do refer to the um International Association of public participation if I recall correctly uh Steven Buckley mentioned that Association some years ago at a town meeting they really are the the gold standard if you will in public engagement so um um multiple policies and procedures that I looked at referenc their spect spectum um so certainly is incorporated into this as well did you um take a look at other communities as well in Massachusetts as you usually do yes um the only thing my only um you know I guess I'll put this in the category of constructive critique and there's a page that wasn't copied but I we did see it online um that's all right is it there was two but go ahead yeah I thought that the breakdown of the of the levels of concern was a little bit complex and I wondered you know obviously to me a policy that's more simplified is always better sure so I I think what I was trying to be able to capture in those in those breakdowns were things that were um uh trying to compare say a a project within this room to upgrade microphones or something was going to have very little public impact general public um but there's certainly internal public that you know um people using this room for meetings committee members maybe having you know difficulties with the new upgrades so that might be a level one because it's pretty confined to who's impacting compared to say the sewer project in West chadam which was disrupting traffic disrupting businesses disrupting The public's you know access to to certain areas of town you know how do you really compare something that's really Limited in scope to something that's really big in scope so it's just trying to break down that um the level of interest in the community the number of people or geographic area impacted or say um you know impacts to health and safety obviously elevate it even more so it's just trying to come up with a way to to Really scale how do we slot different projects into into a spectrum there yeah you also don't want to have a policy that is triggered by every action I mean every decision of this board or the town manager is quote a project sure uh so you don't so this is really geared more to capital projects I would say yeah so that should be clarified I think so we're not going to vote on anything tonight this is the first read those are my thoughts thank you yeah I and I I'm glad to hear that I I obviously the principle is um more than uncontroversial IAL it's it's it it who can disagree um communication is an iterative process with the public or with particular constituencies um I think this is a very good effort to sort of uh create some structure around what we think about all the time when we're thinking about how to communicate what we're doing or what's important or or responding to um uncertainty in the public public Etc or a desire for participation I I I'd sort of like to just think about this a little bit but I commend you on the on the on the first effort and uh we should keep it on the agenda here until we get to a point where we can say yeah we'll we'll we'll vote on this and approve it okay so thank you thank you okay uh next case uh I think it is Judy Georgio um opat opioid settlement funds update welcome welcome thank you um thank you for having me can you hear me okay we can thank you very much all right great so um I'm just going to give you a brief uh um outline of how the town and spent the um opioid settlement funds um up to as you know this uh the town um signed on in 2022 to receive the opioid States the state opioid settlement funds and up to um over the next 16 years we're going to receive about 300 greater than $350,000 and these funds must be used in um the areas of prevention education harm reduction recovery and Recovery efforts um to date we've re reached uh We've um received about 161,00 ,000 and in fiscal year 2024 uh the working group awarded um two small grants of $5,000 each to um to two organizations that work across the cape in the area of farm reduction prevention and education uh the first group is behavioral health innovators and the second was the fishing partnership fishing partnership Support Services um you have some details and reports from them on how that money was spent in your in your packet um we also uh signed on to a three-year contract with the Outer Cape Health Services for an in town recovery coach um this recovery coach um has been very successful uh she works very closely with our new town U adult Behavioral Health clinician as well as other Town staff so that's been really great we have a three-year contract we're one year into that um so for fiscal year 205 um bhi has requested let see let me just scroll down here has requested um and and we granted them a a grant of $20,000 um that's Behavioral Health innovators um they want to they're going to use this fund to uh continue their work in the schools across the cape but especially to expand their uh program programming which will include monoy Middle School um it's a great program and we're happy to support them it was unanimously agreed upon by the committee um I guess I just at this point would want to just answer any questions you have uh about the program and what we've been doing and uh if I can give any more detail on anything be happy to uh Dean yeah thank you I I don't have any questions about this these programs I I think these are terrific I you know you you're doing what you said you were going to do and I the the proposed contract for bhi I guess you're going to go forward with that that looks like a good program to me I just really had a kind of a tangential question about six or seven years ago um the uh cap and Islands um as it was then called select selectman's Association heard a presentation from um um one of the senior staff at the the uh abcc about alcoholism on the cape um and I there's a there is a sort of a tangential mention of alcoholism and some of the materials you sent and I know that's not that can't be funded th those programs I don't think can be funded from from the these opioid money opioid monies but I'm just curious is I what I remember that person saying was that alcoholism was the biggest problem was a bigger problem than than drugs and then this is a while back and so I just wonder what if anything are the local Boards of health and County doing about that issue we we can use um the funding uh that we receive for any types of substance use disorder um I think a lot of what our recovery coach is doing is is working with people with alcoholism issues um and we also have our our mental health clinician in town who uh works with folks that are afflicted um in all kinds of different mental health and substance use disorders um we are as health agents uh collaborative we we are working on hopefully getting an online platform called credible mind um we're applying for a grant that's it's a portal that has um a lot of mental health support and uh folks will be able to click on and get information um not just mental health but also diet and exercise and yoga and mindfulness training um little programs that they can do online on also where to get more information and it'll be tailored more towards our communities here on the cape so we're really looking forward to working on that program moving forward so there definitely we work we're definitely interested in alcoholism it is a big issue on cape card if you're correct thank you for that information Judy thank you Jeff yeah thank you Judy uh great report I'm very familiar with the recovery coach model and it's it can be very effective and it does treat alcoholism as well as substance abuse opioid substance abuse so I really appreciate your effort I I think you have a dream team there in your work group and uh I think you should keep up yeah you do you do so keep up the good work and I thank you very much uh Corey hi Judy can you just go over the numbers one more time I don't know if I misheard part of it because I think you said over the next 16 years was it $350,000 Town might be expecting um because I believe you referenced that currently well in the package say 190,000 uh I think you said 161,000 to date um I just want to make sure I understand the numbers um currently please yeah um I I double checked the amount that we've received to date um with Carrie melli and um it says she said 160,000 so I was going from a a spreadsheet that the state put out that we've received so far um and every year we will be getting uh 12,000 or so um and it looks like at the total will be somewhere around 350,000 at the end of the payouts um some of that number numbers are changing as they've come up with different agreements and some people are paying out earlier instead of waiting till the end so those numbers will fluctuate perfect thank you very much Shireen um just to clarify I I need to say that I um have a family member that works for an organization that receives some of these fundings um but needless to say um we're not voting on anything tonight and I really am um I think this is a wonderful program I hate the idea that we needed to receive opioid settlement funds but the fact that the community has um organized and and put together a program that that's covering from prevention to recovery is really important um across the board so I appreciate the work that your committee is doing and you're doing as well Judith thank you thank you yeah I'm just going to add my um you know endorsement of everything my colleagues have said I I think it's a terrific program I'm delighted that we're getting together and and making use of the funds in what is obviously a very effective way so thank you very much for that thank you I think that's it have a nice evening great thank you have a good night thank you um and next we have um three um committee appointments to consider uh the first is the Independence Day Parade committee on September 10th we interviewed Susan Wagner for a seat on the Independence Day Parade committee she's also a current member of the cultural Council and I will entertain a motion Mr chair I move to appoint Susan Wagner as a member of the Independence Day Parade committee until June 30 2027 unless sooner revoked or a successor is appointed second um all those in favor Mr Shell says yes Mr nastro hi uh Miss Davis hi uh Mr um dykin hi and Mr Mets hi uh energy and climate action committee we have one open seat on also on September 10 we um interviewed Martin flusberg for a seat on that committee he's not currently serving on any other committee board or Commission in town a motion just chairman I move to appoint Martin flber as a member of the energy and climate action committee until June 30th 2027 unless soon a revoked or a successor is appointed second uh all those in favor Mr Mets I Mr Dyk hi Miss Davis Hi Mr necastro I and Mr Shell says I a Lydia's Cove we have three open seats on September 24 we interviewed Sam Lenell for a seat on the anus Cove committee he's not currently serving on any committees boards or Commissions in town of the three open seats two have terms ending in 27 and one in 26 um Mr chair I move to appoint Samuel lunell as a member of the ant lyia Cove committee until June 30th 2027 unless sooner revoked or successor is appointed second all those in favor Mr Mets hi Mr dykens Miss Davis Hi Mr necastro hi and Mr Shell says I I will take another motion motion to adjourn Mr chairman second Mr chairman all those in favor Mr Mets I uh Mr dykin hi Miss Davis hi uh Mr necastro hi and M shell says I we are adjourned at 9:06