1.27.2025 Community Preservation Committee

uh welcome to the community preservation committee meeting being held at one government center we're in the city council hearing room it's uh January 27 2025 6 o' pursuing to the to the open meeting walls any person may make an audio or video recording of this meeting or may trans the meeting through any medium attendees are therefore advised that such recording or Transmissions are

being made whether pered or unperceived by those present and deemed acknowledged and permissible uh we'll start roll call to my left Michael f is here Chris benavites here Alexander Silva here Kristen Cana Olivera here John BR here James hsby here Rick mansy here BJ McDonald here and we have one Zoom member uh Joey Bentley here okay are you on a time delay do you hear us now there's a time delay okay she needs

to mention that she's attending by Zoom oh you need to mention you're attending by Zoom Joan Bentley attending by Zoom thank you uh no in and input no uh can I have a a motion for approval of the minutes from January 14th I'll make a motion to approve the minutes from January 14th I second the motion uh roll call Michael FIS yes Chris paves yes Alex Silva yes Kristen canow Oliver yes

John BR yes James Hornsby yes Rick Mancini yes BJ McDonald yes Joan Bentley yes okay next is the voting FY 26 projects uh how we get to our voting um we vote on projects one with the lowest numbers being the most favorable pro project so one two and three then we divide to come up with the average score the lowest score being the number one project um we um and this year with our

uh account we have um we're starting with a 1.8 one 1,81 2016, 443 we already deduct uh 347 250 for bonds which is the fire Museum the central fire station and uh res res um hiking trail at land purchase U that brings us down to one 1,469 193 which we don't have any open space so we got to put aside uh

$181,600 uh we also got to remember that um we're taking 625 out for deed restrictions if we put a uh both on we have to make sure we mention um both would be attached to the uh agreement uh we do have an extra 249,000 uh in housing and U no that's that's on space I was just saying the extra funds we had from last year okay uh okay I would like to bring up first the

uh we had two projects uh 12 1270 Pleasant Street and 1616 Pleasant Street um uh they didn't complete their application uh for some reason we were asking for financials and we didn't get the information a project this size we wanted to see the financing I mean mean we're just like any other bank out there if you don't provide financing and complete your application it's tough for

us to move the application forward and this was a project we were all looking forward to do but without the proper information we really can't proceed with this so if I could have a motion to uh remove those from the voting round I'd like to speak to the motion after it's read okay I'll make a motion that we remove that 12 1260 1280 uh Pleasant Street from the voting list do I have a

second no it's 12 it's 1270 127 it's 1270 1288 and 166 1622 that's the second building you want both both we're doing both because they didn't give for both okay do I have a second I'll second that and then James yeah I wanted to speak to the motion okay um I'm disappointed that not in the committee I'm in favor of the motion um I'm disappointed that the material that the material did not reach

us I was excited by it um all my voting is totally a skew because I lost 11 of my 33 points yeah uh it's the 33 I don't don't trust my math here um it's my understanding that that how that affordable housing can apply on an emergency basis is that correct correct yeah it should be then my understanding that should we receive an application an emergency application with sufficient

financials that we would consider it a as an emergency we take a look at it yes that's correct am I correct correct yeah we could consider it I didn't say we'd approve it I said simply consider it thank you very much okay generally though I thought when when it's an emergency it's more for purchasing the housing yeah it's more for purchasing and rehabbing at the same time but well that's why I'm I'm

checking now yeah see I think it's I see I think this is a a very important motion this is a very important progress um I looked I stood there in front of a rehab building where uh my son-in-law took me to a Christmas dinner and boy the the rehab building is just gorgeous yeah and the the two one across the street is about the same vintage and with the same kind of hope

and we're in the middle of a of a of a renovation effort in the Flint which is not not really part of our job to to do but it's it is the reason why the mayor has has one of the reasons why the mayor has backed it so strongly and so I hope that as you say we would take a look at it if it's and if it merits well it comes down the pipeline again we'll

we'll take a look at it but I just want to State something as well once you're done as on this and again uh I'm an urban designer urban planner I do this all over the world and um I'm blessed to say that when I saw this project I was thrilled it addressed so many different caveats it Ada accessibility it had affordable housing to it it had retail on the first floor and it and and it had

housing and it had historical components to it un fortunately unfortunately being on other boards of this nature and I want the community to understand this it's not that I don't think anybody at this table is against this project the applicant just did not put in what their financial resources were as required and the worst thing that you could do is give them a bunch of money and find out

they are not capable financially of doing this I I've looked at the re the drawings over again they they try to um uh Institute the historical component to it I I I I commend them but the reality of it is you just can't just like a construction loan you have to show that you are capable of doing this project and so that would be and again I think everybody would be in support of this

pro project this is what this these kinds of funds are here for and I know that the administration the city council the mayor everybody else is in support of it the reality of it is I don't know why they could not come up with at least bank statement or a construction loan or their own personal assets to this but they didn't and so again I voted one on this particular project for both of them

finding out that none of this none of these finances came to fruition I wouldn't want to I wouldn't want to jeopardize the tax dollars of giving them funds that you don't know whether they can U fiscally do it so that's as I agree but but I will ask a question and it has to do with the emergency fund associated with this I know there's some deterioration of that building and um

part of that emergency fund can that be allocated or we don't have we don't have F I really want to get into that after because we got the funding round going so okay just point of information there's no emergency fund currently associated with this okay it's all hypothetical at this point yeah so we have to look at that down the road so uh just can I just another point of oh wait we have to vote

first okay um okay so we had a motion second roll call vote um Michael FAS yes Chris Benavides yes Alexander Silva yes Kristen Kara Oliver yes John BR yes James hinsby Yes Rick Mani yes BJ McDonald yes Joe and Bentley yes okay and then I just point of information um now that these two projects are withdrawn there are no community housing projects so we do have to allocate 10% to community housing so that 10% same as

open space would be

$181,600 5,95 I could repeat that too could you repeat that thanks yeah so the new Total and feel free to check my math is 1 million

$15,995 all right so we move on to the uh first project which was s an uh preservation um they're under the aor category um uh they are looking for 100,000 uh when we make the motion make sure we include what they would be going for if we do move forward with it uh if we do move forward with it i' make sure we include in the agreement that no funds will transfer till uh the uh de

restriction is signed uh because we've been kind of having a hard time with the last one so I'd make sure we put that in the agreement that funds do not transfer hands to speed restriction so what's the board's pleas I I motion to approve it um the project I think they've done a really great job overall they presented themselves well uh the funds they've gone in actually um campaigned under their own uh

fruition and came up with some funds for this so can I just cover exactly yeah and that uh you make the motion uh I mean you can read from what they have uh Edge the roof uh gutter Box new copper lining uh just include what they're going to be doing the work that so when we go look at it that's what we're paying for okay so so I would way that I would

motion this um I would say verbatim What the applicant has asked for for what their service is going to be needs to be fulfilled um and that uh a copy of that can be uh identified in their application and you want to include the the deed restriction in that motion too on but in the application we want that to be can I just can I just add language

to that I can't I was going to read the whole thing forba I just can't find it 625 um I just wanted to add uh so just for those of you who don't know there's uh supposed to be already a 30-year a 30-year preservation deed restriction on uh the property but it just hasn't been signed yet so the caveat uh I wrote this rough language the grant reward is contingent on the owner's signing of the

30-year preservation deed restriction required from the previous fall of community preservation Grant which was originally awarded in fiscal year 2023 in addition the grant award is contingent on the owner signing a supplemental preservation deed restriction to start consecutively after the expiration of the 30-year term of the first agreement with the term of the second agreement totaling the number of

years lapsed from the first agreements award in FY 23 to When The First Agreement is was physically signed so essentially it's the original 30-year agreement and then however many years it's taking for them to sign it so it's that bonus years that we I spoke about I think at the last meeting um so it's like the additional deed restriction to make up for the lost time uh and then

just adding the language uh for I added this for all of the historic preservation ones but feel free to challenge it all exterior work must comply with the Secretary of the Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties with guidelines for preserving rehabilitating restoring and reconstructing historic buildings with all work contingent on Final design review and approval by the Fall

historical commission I mentioned that earlier in the process I think that's just a really good check for us to start putting in the deed restrictions that the final review uh is actually done by the historical commission to make sure everything meets those

standards

language with the uh the funding for 100,000 and 625 for deed restriction the 6 the 25 was previously allocated in during the last award agreement so we don't have to allocate an additional okay unless we do because of the secondary consecutive D restriction you probably would so maybe we want to get an opinion on this I've seen language that says we can't do more than a 30 year but I also saw that same language

saying for only small projects this being a larger project perhaps we could just do the 33-year deed restriction if that is uh allowable and and agreeable to the committee it's been 3 years essentially unless it takes you know another year to sign it was my thinking attorney and that3 original we already has one done already so this is going to charge us another one so we're g to have I would put it in

just in case and then if if it's not going to happen then they just give the money back so yeah the total would be 10,650 and it's for 615 right 6155 615 615 oh and it's to complete the repointing and repair of the buildings Vermont marble area okay yeah so we could could you just we just make excuse me make that motion over again I would rather have Alex make make the motion on because

you um I make a motion to award the St an preservation Society with uh Grant under the historic preservation category totaling the amount of $1,615 to complete the repointing and repair of the Billings Vermont marble exterior um the grant award is contingent on the owner signing of the 30 or 33e preservation deed restriction required from the Pres uh previous farer Community preservation committee Grant

which was originally war in FY 23 um if the grant Grant is the 30-year term and not a 33-year grant in addition the grant award is contingent on the owner signing a supplemental preservation deed restriction to start consecutively after the expiration of the 30-year term of the first agreement with the term of the second agreement totaling the number of years lapsed from the first agreements award in FY 23 to

When The First Agreement is SL was physically signed all exterior work must comply with the secretary of the interior's standards for the treatment of historic properties with guidelines for preserving rehabilitating restoring and reconstructing historic buildings with all work contingent on Final design review and approval by the far of historical commission okay we have a second I'll

second okay we'll do roll call vote Michael FES yes Chris paves yes Alexander Silva yes Kristen can Oliver yes John BR yes yes James H Yes Rick maning BJ McDonald yes Joan Bentley yes

okay next is the dery block uh dery block is on 8084 North Main Street um it's under histor preservation they're looking for $548,000 uh they did get us all the information in uh all the financials uh drawings a letter from the hisor commission so uh what is the board's on this one I'm in favor of this project I think it's a very good use of c community preservation act funds to supplement a

private project to bring it up to the standards that the community deserves uh historic building like this to become um as far as the amount I wasn't leaning towards awarding the full requested amount I had slotted 300,000 for the project myself and my numbers but um feel free to challenge me on that and then I uh also had similar language uh regarding the work complying with those

standards that I could read at the end um and then I didn't know if the committee wanted to make this also contingent on a final design review and approval by the historical commission since this one is going for historic federal or state tax credits so there is a uh official review process already in place um at I'm okay with it also being reviewed by the historical commission but if the committee thinks it's an

imped to the project we don't need to require that I keep it in there a good idea yeah I'm in favor with that I also wrote down two Mark two markdowns on the CPA funds to 200,000 did anyone else make that Mark as well I have in two spots in my notes Here what do you mean like they changed their request to 200,000 I don't know if they changed it specifically but I think

in deliberation the costing for window replacement was noted to only be 200,000 or that we were recommending 200,000 of the funds that they requested so maybe the ballpark is somewhere between 200 and 300 yeah we might have talked about that yeah I had mentioned how a good way for um the committee to kind of ascertain the value of the upgrade from a normal window to a historically

accurate window that number would be the good number to fun I believe and we didn't get an estimate for what a non-historic window was I think Mike might have thrown out some numbers um but uh it's all hypothetical so so so I just have a few comments I'm in support of this project as well and I again um they are receiving some Tiff money associated with it what was a break

uh for those windows because uh when I was tabulating the funds to it that's kind of what I came up with so all right but uh we have the motion on the floor before we get discussion no he didn't make the motion he just was discussing it all right in in discussion I tend to agree with our other members that 300,000 seems like a fair number for this project uh it takes some of the bite

away from having to put in the better Windows uh and again uh we cannot afford to pay for complete thousands for complete project but that 300 adds adds to the bite a little bit it's about where we fall in when we do window replacements you know I just have a few question or I have some recommendations um I had put some uh some deed restrictions I'm thinking associated

with this one is um a full depth of what they're going to actually do what you're getting not just purchasing the windows but the installation up to the standard that the uh historical commission will accept and then two the other thing that I put into here is and I I apologize these notes are small uh deed restrictions you know um shall State the project shall have a 10-year restriction

uh if sold within the five uh five years that uh the applicant would pay back 100% 80% if they if it's after the sixth year 70% after the seventh year 40% after the e8th year 20% the nth year after the 10th year they would not be obligated the reason I say that is I work in an industry working for developers and sometimes H um ownership switches hands and so you can make take

the money get the money and then not commit to seeing certain things through so but I do um support this project that would be the only thing that I would maybe make a recommendation on a u a deed restriction that uh if they sell the property within five years um that they have to pay back the funds I think that should be the new Norm in all of our deep restrictions for somebody

sellling you know any any private entity I I put that on I put it that on the other two housing projects as well um here today gone tomorrow and you know uh a typical project of n this nature even if it's a huge developer they'll create a LLC and you know um adjust their portfolio accordingly so I just want to make sure we're protected can I just pause it a situation that

might occur one day uh where we have granted money to a building that we want preserved and then it is sold and the owner does intend to pay back the uh grant money but then we also lose the deed restriction and maybe the committee's preference would be to have the deed restriction carry over to the new owner um in which case we would have undone that possibility um does the committee think that this should be a

looked at on a caseby casee basis perhaps um it's just a kind of what if situation I think that should be offered first before paying us back I thought the deed restriction carried over regardless yes it's my understanding yeah that the deed restriction covers for 30 years on the property it goes with the property yeah okay it's very similar to like if this this is not an affordable housing project but if there

was a component of it they can't all of a sudden change it and say we don't have this so that deed restriction should carry over just like you said and okay whoever the owner is you're you're buying you're buying that deed restriction so okay that's but it should be noted I I think it should be noted in no matter what but I think that's an excellent the de restriction is registered with the registry of deeds so

that it is public record when the property does get transferred because I've heard I've heard City officials talk about uh the possibility of paying back deed restriction uh CPA grant money to get rid of Deeds restrictions so I just want to make it clear to everyone then that's not a possibility that's not an option okay good all right so with no discussion do we have a motion um before any motions made Mike

you uh Committee Member FIS you said 10 year and then five year uh by uh sell restriction did you have a preference you heard it said 10 in five year oh so um so what I had suggested on the deed restriction that uh the applicant or not the applicant but the owner has a five-year deed restriction of ownership and if they were to sell the property within the 5ye they would owe 100% of

the funds that we gave to them the CPA funds and then for every year after that it would decrease so after um let give you uh at uh the 80% for six years um 50% for uh 7 years 40% for 8 years 20% for 9 years and then zero out at the end of 10 years so if they sold it after 10 years they wouldn't have to uh pay back anything and then just the point of

clarification on that is that would apply like the clock starts once the money is allocated or and the deed restriction is filed so it would be 10 years from then yeah that it would when they get the money five years or five years the clock and then 10 years they would be they wouldn't know anything that's correct and and usually it's usually uh contingent on the fact that um once we write a check that they're

done they're completed I I would say that's a that's a good starting point to this because what they'll end up having to do is um most likely this will be a phase project but they have to get their certificates they have to get you know zoning the zoning planning board all of the inspections and the most important thing is they need to get their occupancy but the reality of it is our

Windows is are not going to um have any really impact on their occupancy so I would say once we allocate the last check to them that that's when the the the time clock starts all right do you want this in the award agreement as well as the Deep restri I would put that in both gu or they know do we have to say his whole sliding scale in the motion because I just need

to we're just going to put that in the standard agreement okay I I I provided these comments to Sandy so you could just cut and paste it right from that so so so I'll I'll make the motion that um we allocate uh the funding uh did we vote on it a number I would recommend 300,000 for uh the dery block 8084 Main Street and that we use the sliding scale uh that you recommend to cover the

windows and to cover the windows well to cover the windows I wouldn't pick a side I'm just saying cover the windows because most of that building is visible can can I can I make the motion because I I think we need to be very specific about what they're purchasing for the 300,000 the reason I say that it's because I was reading some other applicants like it didn't include cocking it didn't include any masonry

work it didn't include any flashing it didn't include so it needs to include all of those both interior and exterior to the uh to the cost and so um and again this is a project that's under the historical uh standards like they're they are obtaining or they they are receiving historical funds for this so I think this the simple caveat you would know better than I is that they need to

make these these windows installed need to include um the fact that they are going to be to that standard of installation this this building yeah is required or will be required to follow the interior of standards and all of these key points that you're mentioning they're all encompassed in that particular work I mean it it is very very stringent the interior Secretary of interior standards are very very very

stringent and they follow up on on the installation thoroughly so as when we put that particular uh sentence in there that really locks the project up for being historically correct and installed properly good points only if they're going for historic tax credit it is a lot stricter as far as they foll Follow by someone outside of the historical commission so it does it's not really

not every project is going to go for historic tax credit this this particular one is okay so those guidelin in fact they have oversight they do they they have very very very tight guidelines and they're enforced very well okay all right okay we making a motion you can you can make the motion I just wanted to make sure that was clear that what we were getting I'll make the motion that we award $300,000 to the

dery block building at 8084 North Main Street and that within that we just specify that is to follow the installation of the windows will follow the interior Secretary of interior standards it's plus 615 for the deers plus the 615 for registrating of uh de all the windows they're applying for all their Windows well I would I would not will cover up too yes many windows you could do a payback thing so

so so one of the things I would maybe add to that caveat and I and is that the the priority prioritize the windows that are on the Main Street and on to the South because those are where the public realm is going to be because what I would hate to see is well we put them all in the back you don't see them the doesn't see them well can we have some

more money to do the rest of it and but that's not all the motion the motion is to prioritize the visible Windows yes the ones on yeah so you make a motion that made Rick so you want to second that but you need to make a motion to amend his motion now and then second that amendment can I make a motion to amend uh coun Committee Member manini's motion to revise the

total to 3,6 $15 um and also can we clarify the length of the deed restriction I am a personal preferer of 30 years but on I didn't know if I heard something different okay 30 years and then also add that all work is um that all work is contingent on Final design review and approval by the Far Over historical commission as well and that's all well and good I just

want to add that I have seen the drawings of the building and the windows when it was presented to his commission and they're all following the standards they're great windows it's a nice installation and it's being encompassed completely around the building all windows okay I will second that motion I don't think it's been seconded yet okay so I just want to be clear with the motion the motion from That's So we can

amend it the motion from Rick is to um award 300,000 for the block 8084 North Main Street for the installation following full Secretary of interior standard then Alex made a motion to amend that to include um all work is contingent on financial review of the commission final review final design review not financial review final design review design review and the amount be changed to 300

65 s next time can you just come for the mic have the is the is the payback thing all in there it's that's included okay so I couldn't fine that's all includ so there's not doesn't there doesn't need to be a third motion to talk about the fiveyear 100% payback no that's in the agreement just want to make sure I didn't know if they had to go into that or not I actually like that restriction

and I wish it could be a standard restriction that we could use practically on every every Grant we are we actually rescinded a grant once we found out it was being sold after I don't care if we voted or it's in there all right when I just following we threw it this one no we get it second I did I seconded it okay and vote Michael FZ vote Yes Chris Benavides yes

Alexander Sil yes Kristen kwer Oliver yes Grant yes James Hornsby Yes Rick mansy yes BJ McDonald yes Joan Bentley yes okay passes U just one quick comment on the the other commission I was on the Conservation Commission U we had a developed a series of sort of standard restrictions ways that you didn't have to go through them every time you just said standard restrictions and it was really

helpful well we actually it's in our standard uh which their attorney has the deed restrictions and stuff so yeah but not just deed it could be other things like the payback and yeah so forth I just don't want to work on it now just so next on the list is uh Far River historic Highlands local 40c historic district I will be uh recused myself okay and I'm also recusing myself as a board member of the preservation

St all right this is uh and I myself Mr chairman Aion yeah but voted you don't have to you can't I thought only just fting great I love it okay uh let's see this is um aor histor uh preservation uh they're looking for $69,700

uh 69,6 plus the 615 plus the 615 okay uh this is put nice restrictions in uh on the two block area and uh get additional funding possible so I think this is a nice uh uh project to do so I have a question do you need a deed restriction on form B's because it's not a piece of property no no no not on for oh that's right so we don't even need the that's right I

was even think that want clarify okay move approval uh we make a motion to fund the 6 yes okay you got say that though I move approval to fund for $69,000 67 607 670 whatever the the requested amount is my apologies I okay do we have a second no second all right roll call Chris benav is yes Kristen can Oliver yes yes James Hornsby Yes Rick Mancini yes BJ McDonald yes Joan Bentley yes this one

okay there it is uh guys you can come back in oh I don't know I don't want it back

okay 6356 okay so uh next up is the St John's um Holy Ghost the coffin School uh they're looking for 225 um thousand to put in the uh sprinkler system suppression system um I think this would be a good uh project since we didn't get to do the other two projects in the Flint um but I would put in there if um we do do funding that uh we would want 120 days uh um an

architector well like I like good comme go uh RI go ahead and uh yeah um what I'd like to do is within this motion place the worded verbage that a qualified certified historic preservation firm do an evaluation of the property a Form B to validate that it is still considered a historic piece of property is that an is that an amendment that's that's a motion that I'm making so that would be like almost a condition of

awarding the grant they'd have to get that done and have somebody sign off saying because of the alterations that they've done it still qualifies as a historic building and we're looking for a third party to tell us that it still qualifies right is that understanding correct and and and you you need to you need to acquire a a certified firm that that's qualified to do that and certified do these form BS and to submit

them uh to the National Park Service up so they they would do that and we should get that within 120 days from the time we award the funding are we paying for that or is are they paying for that well that's entirely up to you Jim small a small Fe do do that's what I don't know I mean do you know how is this like a $55,000 job or a $50,000 job

or a $500,000 job we have we're finding that the fee runs anywhere from $250 to $500 for get it so so just clarifying is your is your intent um to have us receive the Form B before their project can begin is is that is that like your check for this release of this funding not unless another member would want to do that my main concern is that we validate the authenticity of the

building and that it is still historically categorized so there is no Form B already for it the Form B that was done is when the when the state did all of the form bees in this city back in 18 in uh 1983 right and but the building has changed been changed drastically right but I didn't think that it would still that it would lose its historic designation because even when a building burns down and it's

not there anymore the the historic designation is still there with the building so I didn't think that it's going to lose its well does it qualify as a historic piece of property at this point we don't know that because it's been changed and the the state does not make these changes unless because they don't have the money nor the people to do that so buildings stay on the on the on the uh National Historic list

forever because there's no one that goes out and does a check on it well as you just stated a building can burn down or can be destroyed and turned into a parking lot and it's still on the historic register see I thought it still would be just because of the fact of the building is still standing it's still intact well and I mean I know cosmetically some things have changed but that historic building is still

there it's still intact the reason I'm asking that's the reason that I'm asking that to be verified okay and then they'll tell us yes it is or no it is not and will they also tell us what needs to happen uh to make it historical uh I would say yes they because we spent a lot of time talking about Brown pain on gutters last time I don't want to get

into that one again no we're not talk about that if it's that kind of thing what I mean could we just stipulate on this and I I agree if you need verification to this and verification but this particular application is all in inside interor it's it's for the sprinkler system uh and it's to basically benefit this group so that they can have bigger outings and create more uh funding opportunities but what I

would I would like to see is is that the caveat be that going forward any type of uh restoration needs to meet your review process strict review process and and just make that as a caveat in in the deed like as part of this the Restriction is any future projects going forward need to go in front of the historical commission for approval and as part of that maybe um that'll keep the Integrity of the building

uh at at State and also perhaps give them an opportunity to find an Avenue of fixing what has been removed um for a future application perhaps or something of that nature so another another thought we approved this to go forward we decided as a group that it qualified under historic preservation so we can't change our mind now that say well it doesn't qualify now because I'm sorry I'm we had said when we did it

in the first place to to move it to the funding round it did qualify they didn't do anything different between then and now and we agreed that it qualified on historic preservation and and my intent is if you notice once the funding is awarded then we giving them 120 days to just have the building looked at what it's going to do is it's going to give us a window is that building still

historic building because there were going to be there might be other opportunities where there's requests for funding on this building or liking kind situations but what if the state says no that it's not and then we've given money toward historic preservation that is not well the the one thing that I would say is that the applicant and the applicant's representation had pretty made it pretty clear that they

won't and or are not looking for the interior design standards associated with getting funding from that Source what they that that was my understanding and I hope everybody else got that understanding because that was pretty clear as day um they're never going to get to that point where it's a different type of um animal at the end of the day their development or what they're doing

they're proposing on the project um so I don't know about your form B's associated with it are you is a for B associated with trying to obtain those types of funds at that higher level or is it just for what we're what what we're trying to propose on as the his historical commissioner yeah we're not in it yeah we're debating here and we've already gone all through this we should have went through this way before the

funding exactly it's it's it's listed as an historic building so we're taking it as a historic building do we want to fund it or pass on it that's what we're voting on tonight okay all our other stuff we've already should have covered and all I want to do is add a caveat to that that it gets looked at to see if it's still categorized as a historic building but my question on that is what

if they come back and say it is not it is not but we'll fund the fire prevention anyway no we don't fund for fire prevention well what do you call the it's if you're trying it's under the The Heading of historic preservation that's why you're still funding the fire suppression system so you save a historic building but that's but that's my question is if we do that and the

state comes back and says no this is no longer historic I don't think they will because you still have the standing building it's still mostly intact even though some of the outside was changed but if they do then what do we do because you still have it the fall of a historical commission still has it on the Fall River register of significant structures can and it's still technically it is on the state Register

can I ask a question in a in a different way but under that same um theme say we say we don't add that provision and we provide the funding we all say okay we agree to this they use the money but then something happens later on the road where it's not considered historical for whatever reason what happens do they owe us that money back like how do how do how does that get adjudicated after that

they would have to follow his they would still have to follow Secretary of material standards for the outside of the building for what for the outside of after money that they've already spent go ahead yeah so the deed restriction would that's a question though before before you um is that question relevant to sure for as a new member um so the deed restriction will still be attach to the property and what

that does is it protects um all work done to the exterior usually of that property during the 30-year period so say something were to happen like let's say the police station for example and a car would drove in and like broke a column right their future work to do those repairs have to meet the historic standards okay I guess but I guess my question maybe a little bit more Nuance

to me this feels like a cash problem they they have a cash problem as far as being able to continue to keep up with cuz we all ask the question around how are you going to continue to fund maintenance over time they they don't have like a idea problem they have a cash flow problem so if they we give them funds that they use they're out of cash at that point but if you see where

I'm going with this but the whole point is they can once the building has the fire suppression system they can actually use the inside of the building to do more things than to fund raise who's checking that down the line one of us is going to be assigned to each project and what we can do is we can put in a thing saying all work done on this building before prior to doing any work

it must be approved first by the historical commission that we can say we put in we can also put in that we would like to an update on their uh fundraising just so we know what kind of money they have com that would make sense right yeah we did that with yep as many words to your point uh uh chair uh member the um the system is presently listed on the National

Historic register we're all in total agreement with that we're go we're basing all of our funding based on that correct information that's even correct with through the state historic commission so so we all concur with this not an issue so we are valid in allocating money to the building for this particular work and I'm all in favor of it myself I'm in favor of saving what's there and helping them proceed so that

they can Rectify and really change that that neighborhood I agree I'm in total favor all I'm asking to do is because of the tremendous amount of work that's been done to the exterior of that building is that they have within four months of the a once we give them the award within four months get that building evaluated now if it gets changed it's not a problem to us because we gave them the money when the building

was still considered historic etc etc so there's no issue there we're okay but what we'll do is will get then a new evaluation of the property which has to be done by certified right for yeah that's what I thought you were saying originally so are we going to give them the funding extra to do that sure is sure like so so besides the 225 we can just include and then the 615 plus it could

be a nerve are you are you positive it's only 22 $ go through the process of certifying that we've gotten quotes between 250 to $500 and and that's that's that's a cost right now that you you're seeing through the historical commission to have that done okay as as long you're as as long as you're comfortable with that because if if I was a consultant on the looking from the outside in you're basically

holding you know them to the F to the the candle uh to to get this work done we're having some done right now in the city okay uh for $350 per property and and it's extensive because they have to do a lot of research gotcha uh just a couple things but before I move on to my idea I don't think we have the purview to change the scope of services requested on an

application um generally when an applicant comes with a change of scope they have we usually ask them to submit a new I don't think we can just write this formb requirement into their funds um however hearing what you're saying um and kind of building off of the idea I think I threw at the committee last time I had written in a language that as a condition of the grant award the St John's Holy Ghost

club uh would agree that before acceptance of Grant funds its board of directors and members will ratify a 30-year Capital Improvement plan that commits the organization to making sure all future work and repairs to the coffin school complies with the Secretary of the Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties with guidelines for preserving rehabilitating restoring and

reconstructing historic buildings with all work contingent on Final design review and approval by the Faller historical commission and I think we could easily write into that Capital Improvement plan that the first step would be updating the Form B within 12 days especially since you're not viewing it as a restrictor on the funds I don't see why we don't just add that in and then the 30-year plan that they had

already said they were agreeable to adopting perhaps that form B would inform them of the aspects to restore um I think that would be beneficial and a $200 to $500 request I think would be fine I think for a nonprofit um considering they're getting a large grant for the fire suppression that'll unlock in their own words further fundraising ability yeah again I have no no no concerns with the property I'm all

in favor of that I'm just uh and adding that to your 30-year provision is is fine that's not an issue you you you're just enhancing actually what I'm recommending thank you and making it a condition rather than all right Jo has a does she I could tell if she was fixing her you anything Joan to add no I'm all set I was just trying to hear better that's all I'm all set thank

you so one question uh for the board it sounds like that the language that Alex just mentioned would be advantageous for all of our cases so for at the end of the day if you're going to do a historical component of it and you want the foreign B's figured out that it's all conditioned on exactly what he just said I I would think that would be applicable to any type of historical

preservation project I don't I mean well some of them already have the form BS updated because if they're going for historic tax credits The Form B already has to be in place yeah so so what I was saying is like if it's just a standard standard language adopt that that if you're going in front of this that way they know that they have to go get the forign bees if they don't have them

already and so that I think would help the city in general and get every up to the next level and the inspections and such and such not so but part of the uh Secretary of interior standards is already taken care of that for us so when these historic projects generally come before us they're working with the secretary of interior standards and that's already taken care of I'm not objecting to your recommendation I'm

just adding a little insight into yeah for the the tax credit ones correct yeah so do we have a motion um I can make a motion make a motion right ahead the amount 225 615 um I make sorry I make a motion to award the St John's Holy Ghost club uh with a grant totaling

$225,600 with guidelines for preserving rehabilitating restoring and reconstructing historic buildings with all work contingent on Final design review and approval by the far of historical commission as a condition of the grant award the St John's Holy Ghost Club agrees that before acceptance of Grant funds its board of directors and members will ratify a 30-year Capital Improvement plan that commits the

organization to making sure all future work and repairs so the coflin school complies with the secretary of interior standards uh for the treatment of historic properties with guidelines for preserving rehabilitating restoring and reconstructing historic buildings uh with the first step being the updating of the properties Form B um by a uh certified historic preservation consultant um within the first 120 days

of of funding of Grant Award of f of receiving funding of receiving funding technically that's at the end you remember like it's at it'll be at the end of the project so upon Grant award gr award technically it's awarded when the city council approves in this and the award agree it basically starts when the award agreement signs all parties so on award agreement do we want to do four months

or do we want to do six months just to I'm okay with six months give them time it no maybe just say not completing the formb but initi uh hiring or a firm to update the Form B just like a letter of commitment or something first step would be to complete the form B's to hire a consultant to update the properties Form B within 180 days of the grant being

awarded okay so we have a motion we have a second second second chis Chris slightly right but my amendment is to add $500 to the grant to cover the Form B we already said we can't can because it changes the scope people said a lot of things I but I think we can CH the scope no we we can't we've never done that fine then don't second the motion that's all no problem all right so have

a motion in a second Michael far so yes Chris Benavides yes Alexander Silva yes Kristen can Oliver yes John brt yes James Hornsby Yes Rick Mancini yes BJ McDonald yes Joan Bley yes okay excuse me um kisten do you have 31043 I have 409 453 wait let's all let's all let's all pull out our calculators and pull the one more time okay I'm minusing from what we've spent from the original this was my

here's my scrubing if you want to see it's starting with 1,15 905 I don't I I refused myself what did we uh we're total we're to well we're total that sorry we're total that so far and I'm not reading that one and it's spending $696 $452 so far a total of four projects and that's from 1 10595 so my I end up with 49453 so my my question Alex and I were

recused from what the vote was for the historical district was 69,7 69607 s said that repeat that one more time 69607 okay thank you 49453 yeah that leaves us with approximately 409,45 in the general Reserve category um so I think we should make a motion here probably what I'm just going to do yeah I was I was actually just going to make a motion to stop funding here so that we do have something left

in our reserves because inevitably we do get people coming in um during the year for either cost overruns um emergency funding and that and we don't want to be left with nothing in reserves so I think that this is this is a good amount because like based on what we've we've uh done in the past it seems like this would be a good number to stop at do we have a second a

second roll call vote I vote Yes Chris Benavides yes Alexander Silva yes Kristen can aliv yes John BR yes no James hn pleas Rick manen yes BJ McDonald yes Jo Bentley yes okay motion passes with eight votes mhm um the projects that were left there we kind of bypass them because the city has uh water has five on hold just say what they are maybe uh they were the uh Narrows gate house uh repair uh complex

15 and then they had the uh the Watershed work uh um shed work uh complex 12 um they do have few projects out so we figured they're not ready for shovel ready good projects hopefully they'll be back next year uh the night owl again not shovel ready uh they did provide all the information a little late that's why they scored down uh uh at the end uh but hopefully they will come back next year after they've

already started the project and uh we'll take a look at it um so that concludes the funding round do we have any new business can I have a motion to adjourn I'll make a motion to adjourn second call Michael fares yes Chris Benes yes Alexander Silva yes Kristen can yes joh BR yes James hinsby Yes Rick manen yes DJ McDonald yes all right Jo Bentley yes meeting ads