Good evening. Uh, welcome to the December meeting of the Ammeris Municipal Affording affordable housing trust. Uh, glad to have a quorum today. Good to see you, Bob, Carla, Rob, Algra, Alex. Thank you, Greg, for setting
things up as usual. Uh, why don't we go ahead and dive into our agenda? Um uh unless we have any public comment unrelated to anything on the agenda. Do we have anybody in the audience who has
any public comment before we get started? Um okay. Well then let let's go ahead and and uh start our first agenda item which is to talk about um Massachusetts public banking. Thank you,
Algra, again uh for bringing a ballot initiative to our attention um at an earlier meeting. I think that one thing that we have as a as a group and as a trust is uh voice to support initiatives that align with our uh commitments here
on the trust. And um I thought that the public banking initiative in Massachusetts is one such um initiative worth considering. And so um we have a member of the steering committee for that initiative um uh in the audience.
Uh Greg, can you invite a tool to uh join in? Okay. >> A tool incoming right now. >> So um I will um uh let me introduce a tool in just a second. I will say just at the at the outset that
what makes the public banking initiative interesting to me is that it is taking a resource and the resource is the taxes that we all pay to the state that go to bank accounts in Wall Street making
money for the big banks instead of being reinvested in Massachusetts. And uh as you'll hear um from the summary a tool will give what's exciting about this public banking legislation is that it would designate a percentage of taxes
paid in Massachusetts to go towards funding CDFIS community development financial institutions in Massachusetts that are committed to you know social investment including affordable housing.
So that's the um that's what makes me interested in in this initiative, why I think it's a fit for us to consider. And uh a tool is on the steering committee. He works with a very interesting CDFI in
Boston called the Eugima Fund that actually uh listens to the community to decide how to invest their funds. Maybe he'll he'll he'll say something about that. Um but uh Atul, welcome to our uh our trust meeting. Thank you for for joining and um uh it' be great if you
can you know introduce yourself briefly and just give us a a short capsule uh enough to get members uh thinking and and the opportunity to ask some questions. >> Sure. Thank you so much Gaston. Thank you for inviting me and thank you to the
committee members for you know taking the time to consider this legislation and also thank you so much for the u important work that you guys do uh you know for affordable housing in Massachusetts. Uh just a you know brief summary about
myself. Um I my name is Atul and I work with the Massachusetts Public Banking Coalition uh primarily as an organizer but I also work with the Boston Eugima project like Gastron mentioned which is a democratic
investment fund that invests in Boston and and that is also an active uh part of the public banking effort in Massachusetts. Um just a brief history about this movement. Uh it started off uh around
2015 when a bunch of uh activists, academics and financial experts in Massachusetts came together and really saw public banking as a way to meet the states uh infrastructure needs um
through flexible and you know affordable financing. And so the first iteration of this bill in 2017 which was filed in 2017 was uh primarily an infrastructure bank uh f
focused on uh infrastructure funding. uh but later on after CO happened uh the scope of the bill significantly increased to include uh priorities like small
business financing but also affordable housing uh financing in the state. Uh and that is pretty much how the current iteration of the bill uh looks. Um so where we are at the campaign is
as of now we have like we recently for this legislative cycle we recently testified in front of the uh financial services committee and we are sort of seeing I mean as in sort of waiting for the decision as to whether our bill
would make it out of the committee uh for for this uh legislative cycle and you know just you know being transparent You know, we have our campaign has had quite a few challenges with regards to
uh not only you know uh resource constraints in terms of funding as well as uh people uh you know actually working with the campaign but also significant opposition from the uh banking industry uh here in
Massachusetts which which has been a major uh obstacle to getting this bill actually passed. Uh but thankfully of late we've had some new uh folks getting involved and there's some new energy
within the uh campaign and hopefully we could sort of use this new energy to actually win this thing. Um and uh with regards to affordable housing uh I can say what is actually
written into the legislation is that um affordable affordable financing is actually a goal of the bank that's written into the finance in into the bill but also um a major priority is the
boosting of the lending capacity of CDF FIS and CDC's in the state. Um, and as far as I'm aware, uh, a lot of the focus of CDFIS and CDC's have been on affordable affordable housing. So, you
know, this sort of boost which is which takes the form of not only direct loans to these institutions but also uh actually participating in loans with these institutions. uh would significantly
you know uh boost their lending capacity and um yeah uh I I think I think I'm just going to leave it at that. >> Perfect. >> Yeah. Yeah. Thanks. Thanks. >> So I wonder uh what what questions do
you have? What would what information would be um uh useful to you to decide whether this is something that you think the trust should endorse. And the idea of giving an endorsement would
be to see if we can help get more um movement to, you know, help them get past the banks who are opposing this uh this this legislation and maybe give it a shot to get out of committee. Uh so any questions
or or thoughts here? Uh Algra, please. Um, thank you so much for coming to present to us. And I guess I'm just wondering kind of what sorts of support has already been behind it. If it if there are towns that have thrown support behind or if it's more like coalitions
of nonprofits or you know where where are you seeing support coming from so far? Yeah, so far so far a lot of it has been from CDFIS uh and also from community organizations uh that
uh you know that have been sort of on the ground uh lending to uh small business uh in underserved communities as well as affordable housing projects. So that's been our ma major base of support so far. But also we've had uh
endorsement from like organizations like the MAPC like the uh Metropolitan Area Planning C council um and you know a bunch of others uh that you would see on the fact sheet uh that that are
supporting the uh bill but uh we are also trying to do a little more outreach to the banking sector as well and get some uh credit unions on our side as well. So, that's something that we we've been working on as well. >> And and uh just to to read from the the
plan, we've got Metropolitan Area Planning Council, Metropolitan Mayors Coalition, uh Mass Budget and Policy Center, Boston Foundation, Eugima Project, Boston Worker Circle, Boston Impact Initiative, Environmental League. So, primarily nonprofits that
are, you know, supporting uh communities directly in in one way or another. other questions. I the the the public bank term is a little um it's like what is a public bank? And so the key idea
that I got was just that these taxpayer funds there it's a huge amount of um capital that is not being reinvested in the state. And so there's this opportunity
that we're not taking advantage of. And so that's the the angle here is to try to get taxpayer money working for the state instead of sitting in banks um and being lent by the Wall Street.
Um other other questions or or thoughts? Um does this seem like the does do you think you have the information that we would need to um endorse this initiative? Okay, Lego's got a thumbs up. Other uh
other thoughts? Uh has anyone heard of a public bank before? Curious. No. Okay. Yeah, Alex, you have. There's one in the country. Um, uh, North Dakota, uh, started in the 20s and has been going
strong the whole time, but that's the the only state level one right now in the country, >> but yeah. Um, I think I'd have a lot more to to sort of research in order to
understand it better. Um, Abdul, I'm just wondering in terms of uh the banks or others who are opposed to this, what are sort of their main reasons? I would guess it would have something to do with risk of taxpayer funds and possible
patronage or risk of patronage or something like that. Um, what what are some of the arguments that those who are opposed have been making? >> Yeah, I I think you're right, uh, Bob. That's primarily the points that the banks would make um with regards to risk
of of of funds. Uh but I think I think a lot of those concerns have been addressed. So particularly with regards to risk um I mean it is it is important to note
that when when we're talking about uh actually participation loans with CDFIS we're we're talking about sort of investing in models that actually
have been proven to work uh and have actually like CDFIS and CDC have actually proven that they're able to manage risk as well as meet uh financing needs that the current
market does not meet. So that is a major way that the risk argument is addressed is that we are partnering we are we sort of partnering with a model or sort of
boosting a model that already works and um currently you know a lot of like Gasson mentioned a lot of these state funds are simply just sitting there in Wall Street
uh banks, right? And a lot of those funds. So, currently there is something called the Massachusetts Municipal Depository Trust, which holds close to 30 billion of the state's funds, and that's managed by a Wall Street bank.
And what we're talking about is just taking a fraction of that and transferring it to actually invest inside of the state and sort of boost economic activity within the state and
even you know increase the tax base significantly. And what we're talking about here is le leveraging the benefits of what it is to be a bank because there are a host of benefits
that come with an institution. uh like a bank which provides uh provides a state with the ability to lend a lot more than the capital it actually has by being part of of a
banking network uh which has a host of benefits to actually uh use the power of banking for the state's benefit. So uh yeah there are a number of other you
know arguments that they they would make uh and I'd be happy to go through that but I guess there's like a constraint on time as well but yeah >> thanks that's that's helpful. >> Okay. Uh well, I guess um uh I saw a
thumbs up from Algra. Um uh is there um an appetite to uh take a vote on endorsing this initiative at this moment in time? >> I would prefer if we could maybe do it
at the next meeting to give us sort of a chance to do a little more research and thought into it. >> Sure. Um, does that uh does that work for for everybody? Um, uh, Carla, what do you what do you what do you what what do you think based
on what you've heard? >> Um, I I think for uh the the initiative itself, I I'm very positive about. I just always question the scope of what we're going to
endorse. You know what I That's just and I'm not trying to be negative again and about this particular initiative I think is a great idea. >> Yes. >> Just always hesitant because I I can it's not that I can't see how it's related. I just um
>> you not very I think it's just it's not as narrowly connected to what we're doing. >> Right. So what is the nexus of of the things that are um kind of in our Bailey wick is >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. And that's that's an
important question and we haven't addressed it other than you know as things uh have have recently come up. Um so uh why don't we put that question itself at
the start of our agenda next time. Greg, what do you think? um this kind of question generally what what is our um kind of proper scope for the sorts of initiatives that we might endorse and
then we will um I guess why don't we include a few more uh materials in the next packet uh so that you can dig in and and do a little more reading uh ahead of that meeting. Does that uh make
sense? Thoughts? Algra, please. My only I guess question would be is there any um opinion from our local CDC? >> Oh yes. >> Um because I do see Laura Baker is on
and not to put Laura on the spot or anything but if if there is >> because I'm the list of sponsors so far seems pretty Boston centric. Um, but again, I'm glad that >> No, no, I think that we we should uh if if we if we could get any feedback from
uh from our audience. Uh Laura, I don't know if you have heard of the public banking initiative or have any questions that you'd like to feel or or respond to Alger's question. And uh Grace, uh same and and Mora, same question. Uh those of
you joining us this evening, any uh comments or questions from you? Okay. Doesn't doesn't look like we're um uh we're getting uh hands up from the audience at this time.
Uh Greg, please. Um, yeah, I was just going to say if you know if folks decide you'd like to push it to the next meeting, I've got some ideas about sort of tracks of exploration that might help inform a decision in a month. I could follow up with Atul about that.
Uh, you know, about some specifics that might help this decision. >> Uh, very good. Um, Atul any, uh, final final, uh, comment? Um, yeah, I would just say, you know, thanks for considering the bill. Um, you
know, I look forward to following up with Greg on pro possibly addressing a few specific questions that, you know, the committee might have, but really appreciate this opportunity. Thank you so much. >> Okay, very good. Thank you so much for for joining us at appreciate your time.
>> Thank you. Bye everyone. >> Bye-bye. >> Okay. Uh thanks for uh your your thoughts about that initiative. Let's uh go ahead and get some updates. Greg and I were in the
hot seat last week with the CPA. Um uh Greg uh the updates you want to give on this front? >> Um yeah, we basically kind of gave an overview of of the application uh you know which folks have seen I think
already. Um and you know they um um you know had some clarifying questions uh around um you know I I guess mostly um uh some of the ecosystem or what we're phrasing the ecosystem stuff uh as um
and then um uh a pre-development piece as well. Um but the cordial interested um and um also uh we heard them communicate a few times to a few different applicants uh the limitation of funds this year. So we'll see. I
don't know guest I don't know if there's specific you want to add. >> Yeah. Um I guess also on the that we also talked about the rapid response fund and we gave a few examples of what we've done in the past that fits that idea and it was both supporting uh
rental assistance was one example. The other example was the way we jumped in to help the community land trust purchased that home. So that was a kind of rapid response. Inflation has made this house unaffordable. they needed kind of $25,000 to get over the hump and
we we jumped in. So that was what we proposed to get support from the CPA. Uh on on that front um uh funding strategy research, what what what's that Greg? um
>> on the agenda. >> Yeah. Um um you know, I think that was a fancy abbreviation for something and I think it was too fancy because it's failing me right now. I apologize for that. >> All right. Um
um I think maybe just the um the work to bucket um you know to to to bucket different um uh different amounts of of money into different places and I think some of the um you know some of the the small group work we've been talking about um so
ecosystem stuff and that um >> all right well so I we really have one main agenda item it's an important one and it picks up from our conversation last I think it would be nice to maybe hear from you what your I know that we we had
a lot of, you know, positive responses to the proposal from the uh Ammeris Community Land Trust to redevelop this site on Amity Street, an existing property, plus a partnership with Habitat for Humanity to build two additional units.
The funding strategy that the Acl proposed to the CPA committee involves the trust both giving a grant and making a loan to facilitate the purchase and then making
an additional loan to uh facilitate the development. And the um the goal for our meeting tonight is to reach a consensus about what we want to
what information we want or what processes we want to have occurred before we formally vote on this. And then when we do uh vote on this, what what are conditions that we would want to put on actually dispersing
funds? And so, um, to, uh, put that in in another way, what do we want to know before next January's meeting if if, uh, the ACLT is
coming back to make a formal proposal that we don't already know? That's one question. And then if we were to vote to approve uh a grant andor a loan, what do we want to have happen before um
any check is cut? Is is that framing making make making sense? You see that I think it's important to get this right on both fronts. Um and I'll speak for myself. my uh I really want this project to happen,
but I really want to make sure that we don't uh write a a big check for a project that doesn't succeed and doesn't get developed. Um, and so for example, we uh I guess I would like
to know who's going to be the contractor. Um, before we um, you know, before a check is cut, we should know that there's a contractor lined up and ready. That's my my personal sense. That
might be the kind of thing that we would say we uh approve this grant subject to uh you know a a contract existing at that time before the check is cut for example. So uh let me stop here. Love to
hear some reactions about what you remember where your thoughts are now about this project. What would you like to know? Uh Carla please. Thank you. I I just have a question about um uh the the grant versus the loan. I'm just is
that something that we've done in the p the loan piece? I just I was trying to review the history of the Yeah. >> trust and is that something >> we haven't we haven't done uh we haven't done such a loan and what um what opens the door to the loan
structure in this case Carla is that it's uh home ownership. So that at the end of this project there will be sales >> and so the the any you know a br any bridge loan would be repaid by those sales whether that bridge loan is coming
from us or from another institution. >> Okay. But what you're raising is that there's a competency issue here which is we've we haven't been lenders before and that is a reason why it would be um uh quite
helpful to be partnering with an experienced lender who manages a transaction and we're just kind of piggybacking on that transaction. That would be um one uh structure. Another structure if we don't have such a partner would be okay well what
guarantees does the trust want um do we want what property lenders typically want and which is a mortgage that's you know securing the loan these are the sorts of questions that are our topic tonight
from all sides so you you know we we there's a lot there's a lot here for us to be chewing on and um and So I I hope that we have a rich conversation. >> He just just doing some really basic math.
Um all in all in for what was requested of the trust uh housing trust fund was 275 plus 575 which is what uh 800 I have the number in my head and I have
it 850 um with Greg's spreadsheet that he sent with with the latest total uh being at somewhere around 1.9 million and then thinking about um our goals strategies from the 2024
mission statement of developing up to 20 uh affordable homes in in 5 years, which is I'm guessing 2030. Um if 875 is the the expected amount that we need to make sure we have for
five homes, we we won't reach our goal. That's actually kind of a significant decision just on itself, right? Well, that that's why the the bridge loan structure is critical to the story because
the um a lot of that capital would come right back when the homes are developed and sold. >> But I'm assum yeah yeah developed and sold. So the timeline from if I remember correctly is like three years. >> Three years. >> Yeah. Okay. your point is that uh these
uh um we're out of this capital during this window and so um uh indeed. So you're you're wondering how we're possibly going to reach this goal which we adopted as an admittedly
stretch goal. Uh but yeah, your you know your your your points are are well taken. we should have all of this very uh clear clearly before us um in in making any decisions. Uh Algra um so I was just kind of thinking
I wouldn't consider 850 being the total investment that we'd be putting in if we're getting that back. Obviously there is a time frame with which it's coming back to us. But I did try and do some math, some math of the amount of money
that we've approved since I've been on the trust in 2021. And I think I'm missing two of two amounts, but um there was money towards Beluretown Road for maintenance um of
the properties that were there so that they didn't fall into disarray. There was um East Gables, Ammerst Community Homes, the Craig Doors rental subsidies, the ACLT property purchase, more money to Ammeris Community Homes, and then a
small amount of rental assistance to Community Action. And so that all from March 2021 to December of last year. So we have not made a dispersement this
year at all. um is $1,73,000 altogether. Um and I think I'm missing I think there was a request from Ammerst Community Connections at some point that I can't find. Um but there So just kind of
looking at how we have and haven't spent money over the past couple of years. I do think that this is a big number and a big ask all at once. But I wonder what it would look like to maybe approve the grant first with some conditions cuz that would
allow again the leverage that we've given to other agencies to then be able to maybe go finance in a traditional banking setting to say you know we support this project. We think it's really important
and we are showing that by giving them some money. They have asked for more. we'd like to see now you throw in some and then they can you know we can go back to this the discussion about more um but I you know I was looking at the
application process that we had worked on in 2024 too which I'm grateful that Greg sent back out cuz I actually like I was like do we even have an application like I don't remember seeing one in any of these previous things which which I
think is a good thing that we're having this discussion and having this greater discussion in the trust about how are we prioritizing things and how are we going to allocate funding. Um, and I do think that somewhere in that was
like a a percentage of what money we would like to see going towards home ownership and I believe it was at least 20% towards home ownership costs. Um, so I for me I think that this is a really important project. Um, and I
think that again it does hit like a quarter of our overall home ownership development goal. Um, and in terms of breaking it down per unit, I think it depends on if you're looking at the 275
request or the 850 request. I mean, I think the Ammeris community homes we ended up giving about like 50,000 to 59,000 per unit and this would be a greater cost
per unit. Um, but again, the perpetuity of the affordability is also an important key um in my mind thinking about well, you know, this isn't just I don't know this x I'm math. I'm not
going to math right now, but like whatever number 275 divided by five, like whatever that is. I apologize for not being on my game right now, but >> um >> over the course of 99 years, not just
like a one-time one-year type payment. So, I think that's something that I would strongly advocate for us if we are going to separate things out to at least talk about approving the grant quicker than
approving the loan. If there are also other areas that we are suggesting >> that they look for funding um because I I do believe that was part of the conversation last time. That's something that we're trying to help facilitate. I think that again having our commitment
could help those conversations with more conventional banks. Um if we decide that that's how we want to go about doing things. Um >> thank you very much. No, that's extremely helpful. So if I can try to uh
capture the the the the the core commitments, Algra, um you know, this is a very important project. Um the grant amount is well within the range of what we've given in the past and it should
maybe be adjusted higher given the unique features of this project. It would really be helpful to get other lending on board here so that our capital can go to other projects as well. Is that all consistent with your
comments? Good. Um uh let's keep the conversation going. One uh there is you know this is very the the there's a lot of timing issue in this in this whole project and um one one possibility
for addressing timing is uh for uh possibly for the trust to support the purchase of an option to formalize the seller's commitment to sell at a given price up through a given date which would start giving that commitment but
also maybe give a clear runway of how much time there is to get third-party lenders in the mix. Right now it's not clear what the window of time is to get thirdparty lenders. When would they need to be on board for this to work is a little hazy at this moment in time. Uh
Carla, >> um just just to clarify too because I was looking at um some of the same projects that Allegro was looking at. And so I I I had a similar um well just when I'm looking like when she totaled them up, you know,
it was like a million something and then now we're talking about 875,000 for this next project. I'm just I know I'm just trying to kind of um like make a ratio in my head I guess you know like we said like cuz we want to kind of reach a lot of different
um of you know we want to be varied in terms of home ownership renting you know middle income very low income low. So I'm just this is a big chunk and I'm thinking like I know in some ways it's similar to what we've given in the past but I'm thinking like when I was looking
at some of the documentation from some of the past things that we've approved I think and correct me if I'm wrong anyone because this is before my time obviously like East Gables our give was 100,000 I think combined with the town and then divided
by the units it ended up being 32,000 per unit. This is on one of the This is from a couple years ago, a paper I saw on the TR on the trust um website. And then like Ball Lane, it said we gave 250,000 combined with what the town gave. That's 50,000 per unit. So that's kind of in
line with what we're talking about like 55,000 per unit, you know, for this particular project. But that's even that's just from us, right? It's not even they haven't even gotten funds from CPA, right? They they can't ask until later. >> They've asked. We're we'll we'll we'll
find out uh in the next six weeks. >> Oh, six weeks. Okay. >> The CPA's position. It will be formal when the town council approves it >> uh several months thereafter and the money would appear in July. >> Okay. So it seems like with if combined
with that then we would be kind of I guess proportionally giving more to this project which is not a bad thing and again it's the project itself is a good thing and it's you know and home ownership is an important piece of what
our goals are. I just wanted to put it in perspective and please correct me if I'm wrong with what I'm saying or ask for clarification if I wasn't clear. So, >> I mean, uh, I everything you said is on point from my point of view. Uh, Carla,
I guess let's not forget that, um, the reason we have 1.9 million is because of the inloo payment. That's a kind of extraordinary thing. It it the trust decided to forego three affordable units in town or to recommend
foregoing. And so, you know, that the money that came in from my personal standpoint, we've we've got a kind of a very sharp moral obligation to make it work as soon as we can in at least a
proportional way. Um, HJ, >> yeah, a lot of really good thoughts tonight. I I I do agree with how Leger is kind of approaching it that like the the the staging it I think is a little bit easier of a pill for us to swallow
mostly because yes, we if we agree to the entire 850, yes, we'll get that money back. I don't know if there's an interest that's involved with this loan or not, whatever, right? But that's like at least three years of money being locked
up that we we will lose the opportunity to spend on additional units which again just the simple math does not allow us to if if if the products are similar to this kind of spend we will not reach our goals. And so that's that to me is like doesn't really matter to me like what we
have spent historically. We have a goal that we had set in 2024 and basically the ask right now as is is telling us we can't we we will not reach our goals unless we have seriously more money uh being poured into affordable housing which could happen but it's hard to have
that understanding by January. So hence suggestion of trying to stage it >> makes a lot of sense. >> Okay. Especially as the project's evolved, we might know a little bit more about the risk factor, the the actual cost of construction, which >> okay
>> always changes. >> So >> great. So indeed, so imagine that we're voting on 275 as a grant for the acquisition. What do we want to um know before we make such a vote? What
do we want to have happened before the money is released for acquisition? Uh are two questions that would come up. Algra, >> um this was just um to clarify on Carla's statement. There were two separate
um dispersals from the trust for the um Ammeris Community Homes. One was in August of 2023 which was 375,000 and then the second was August of 2024
350,000. I think that was the first time I remember putting any sort of like conditions upon a request which was like you're not don't come back to us for more money, find somewhere else first. Um, but I I think that
I like I mean we we have the information from the current homeowner that they're interested and that this is less, you know, less um like they're selling it at a lower than appraised value. Um, so I don't know
what officially more would need to be done in terms of like we want to make sure that the entire purchase price is accounted for before we release our
funds or >> well uh no at a minimum that um if we're not you know the land trust current proposal is that all the capital for acquisition comes from us in partly as grant partly as loan. So that's you know
something that we need to reckon with. Uh would we want the financing for the development of the project to be lined up by the time uh the funds that we grant are used to acquire
the property. For example, um do we want the contractor to have to be uh committed to develop the project at a certain price before we give money to purchase the property? I'm
asking these as questions because they remain questions. >> Um Alex, did did you want to you had your hand up. Do you want to jump in with your point? >> Yeah, sure. Sorry. I think my computer's being a little laggy, so I hope you all can hear me. I seem to be having Okay,
great. Um, so I would actually like to hear from our professional staff here on this um for Greg for what he thinks would be reasonable and necessary for anou to move forward. I'm getting the sense that it might be easier to react to an actual document with his
recommendation for what feels like the information we should have. Um, the other thing I wanted to say is I wanted to encourage my fellow trust members to remember that the decision before us now is not this project or another project. It's funding this project or not funding
this project. I think it's good to be thinking long term about goals and our own finances. But I think it's important to remember that there's a lot unknown in the next 5 years, including what we're getting from CPA, including some of the other revenue sources we've been
pursuing. Um, so while I think it's healthy to think about the cost of this and what we would need if we kept spending at this level per unit, I also think it's important to remember that holding this money doesn't help us achieve that goal either. Um, so our
choice is either work towards that goal with this or hold on to that money and make no progress towards that goal. Um, and that's all I wanted to add. And I'd love to hear from Greg on what he thinks would be appropriate for anou.
>> Uh, Greg, do you want to speak now or uh Yeah. >> Um, I'd be happy to if that's helpful or if other folks want to insert some questions in before I do that. I see HJ and and Bob. >> Bob, do you want to pose your issue? If
would your posing your issue be uh something that you'd like to hear Greg respond to as well? >> Um it doesn't necessarily pick up on Alex. It may be a little separate. It's in response more to your question about what do we want to know? What do we want to see happen? So it can go anytime.
>> Yeah. Greg, why don't you take up Alex's request, please? >> Sure. And and you know, if I could too just maybe go backwards a little bit and you know, point out a couple historic and and environmental realities, you know, for the folks who are newer as a
reminder, in some cases other folks might be new to this. Um, one of the unique dynamics of of of this proposed project is um uh for a few different reasons, there's likely not like formal state money available. So unlike our our
regular practice um where our goal is to leverage other monies and put in a modest amount here the opportunity is entirely on us. So what's interesting is the per the proposed per unit costs are quite a bit lower than we've seen uh for other uh developments. However, the
proposal is at least as of right now that we cover the entirety of those unit costs along with CPA. Um so um uh and so it kind of depends how important leverage is to you when maybe when you're when you're weighing that. Um and
the other thing uh too, you know, is yeah, I guess that was kind of the main environmental point as to the specifics um and what might belong in anou. Um I've got some notes um uh and Gaston and I have chatted informally about a bit of
this. um you know one um concrete uh thing you know which is like a lot of this stuff is is is somewhat pro- fora some of it takes might take time um some of it might shake out more significant concerns for
example um right now we've seen uh an informal letter from the owner committing to a price and we have a more formal um appraisal so we know the you know what that price you know what that delta is as far as the donation, if you will. Um, but I'd probably prefer a
legal version of that letter. Um, uh, you know, that was that represented more a formalized site control for ACLT. Um, you know, and, uh, and in in turn, um, you know, something uh that that an attorney has reviewed, uh, from from
both parties and that the town can then show to our attorneys. Um, I think we probably need something more formal than we have at the moment. Um, another one that stands out um is simply um um sort of clarity on you know sort of what the timing of the deal as we
talked about a little bit. Um it at one point it was sort of informally posed to us maybe even before this got to the full group that uh acquisition would come well before uh bridge financing. Um but more recently we heard perhaps not. Um if it's a possibility for these
things to happen all at once, that might relax a lot of stress. So we should get clarity on that, the timing and uh sequencing of funds. Um uh clarity uh confirmation that uh ACLT will will get
zoning um uh permits um for the entire project and not simply their three. We definitely don't want to do two separate zoning hearings. There would be probably two different building permits, but that's okay. Um and then we want to see a completed phase one environmental
assessment um which is pretty standard. Um we also need to connect with um uh between us and ACLT and some different matters with the executive office of housing liberal communities on on two
separate things. Um uh one is that ACLT needs to confirm and figure out their plan for an affirmative and fair uh uh marketing plan um and lottery process for these units. Um they have proposed that they want to self-certify in that
which if they can pull it off could be great. Um but uh they need to uh communicate with EHLC um and understand what the um you know what the hurdles are to that and if it's possible. It's in my understanding not something that
one can just easily certify in. Um but that is going to be a necessary uh step that we want to have a plan for um before we get too far forward. The plan doesn't need to be totally written before we vote. Um but there needs to be clarity in my mind from EOHLC on whether
or not they're going to approve ACLT to do that themselves. Um if not, it's a budget item that they need to account for with, you know, partnering with somebody else. It's not insignificant. Um and then another sort of UHLC related matter um is um uh is is pricing. Um I
believe um and I think we might have lost Laura unfortunately she came back but I believe um because the goal is to put these units like most units we do um on the SHI list and uh to use CPA funds in all likelihood if if it's successful.
Um I believe EOHLC therefore would be on the deed restriction and therefore possibly involved in pricing the units. Um and we need to understand what the um we don't need we don't need the final price. That's impossible until you're in
the contemporary rate environment and income environment three years in the future. But we need to understand what EHLC's um sort of timeline and formula is for pricing to confirm the uh you know the sale prices that they have now and
figure out really what those because the sale prices are going to be a window um you know really even even at the time of we release even even as a construction loan whether it's ours or somebody else's is released it still won't be clear precisely what those sale prices are so we need to understand the window
um and that's probably I think a little more significant here than it might be for a bigger project because some of the variance might come out in the wash with 25 units. But with five, the potential uh variance in sale prices based on
household sizes uh you know incomes, you know, where rates are uh you know the variance is uh I in the mathematical sense possibly a wider variance. Um so EOHLC can help us figure out that um that window. So, those are some of the
kind of things that I'm thinking about be that seem like short-term deliverables. Um, I've got some longer ones, too. Maybe that would be more about release of funds. Um, which is a lot of legal permits, um, you know,
insurance stuff, balance sheets, this sort of thing. Um, uh, you know, and and some of this gets sort of swept up by the town standard contracting procedures. Um and uh you know some we might layer on. Um and then a final
thing too and more of an unknown is if the trust wanted to go forward with a loan um you know as as as a separate uh channel of support um we would uh need to do some internal design on that. Um
and we've got as of at the moment two different possible tracks. one would be partnership with a potential CDFI and another would be just doing it ourselves. And the latter case uh we there'd probably be a fair amount of navigation to do with the town's
attorneys um who have shared with me that they have helped other housing trusts do loans um which is good. Um but uh but the the specific steps and all the ins and outs um uh I assume there are plenty but I don't know what they all are. Um, but that's well a lot of
that stuff would happen before uh release of funds. >> Sorry, that was a lot. >> No, no, no. That was very uh very well organized. Thank you so much. Uh, Greg B. >> Yeah, thank you, Greg. That that answers a couple of my my questions as well. Um,
terms of administering the loan, for instance, if we go that way. Um, yeah, I would just say that, you know, sort of like Gaston said at the beginning, I'd like to see this succeed, but but have, you know, want to make sure that um we're doing it right. Um in terms of the
acquisition, I think I think that's kind of a safe bet or a safer bet. Um and I like the idea of sort of phasing it um phasing it in in that respect. Um it's just such a prime property for um
affordable housing, prime property for anything. Um so I think even if this particular project runs into difficulties at some point um eventually it it will get there. Um but my concerns
are sort of in that risk of of if it does run into difficulty. I did have some questions last time about the um the land trust's um sort of capacity to manage um a multi-unit building like
this, you know, even after they're sold because there's some issues of sort of common um management after that. So, um I'd like to see a little more from them about how what that would look like. Um
I think um also in sort of a a plan B from them about financing if they can't get the financing all the financing that they're seeking from us. Um so uh you know with with a a construction loan for
the development um you know could it be some sort of um you know matching loan where you know we could commit or give an indication that we're willing to put up you know 50% or whatever percent of of the total loan
package is if the land trust can can get similar commitment from another another lender. I do like the idea of of being able to do loans not only for this project but thinking with some of the
ADU stuff as well. Uh but Greg's last point about uh if we're not having uh a partner who's doing this that you know to to have the city resource or the town resources to be able to develop those systems I I realized is is
involved. So that's a couple of the things that are swirling around but um um yeah I'd like to see it go forward and you know one kind of resource is also um legal counsel for the ACLT is also a resource that will be helpful for
them to pull in he >> actually Bob made a really good point that that I was I was uh trying to get my head around as well. So like I I I think the project does really good. I think you know funding the acquisition through the grant it it it actually shows a lot of commitment from from this
trust uh alone um regardless of whether the loan happens or not like that that is that is a very big statement to make. So I I do want this body to actually realize that that like we we will be product committed and that that's great. I think that's that's where we want to
be. Um I think there is if we are the primary lender in in in essence uh for the the the length of the the project um it does make sense from an accountability perspective to stage that loan in in a in a way that makes sense
for the project instead of just going all in from what uh you know and it's not a set it and forget it kind of deal. If we are the primary lender, it it there is a sense of responsibility we do have to wield uh uh because this is this
is hard to earn money for the town that we we want to use responsibility. So So that's that's kind of how like thematically I'd like to think about it. >> Yeah, Alex. >> Yeah, Greg, thank you for your incredibly thorough answer. Sorry for
putting you on the spot. Um, I want to make sure I understand the process here a little bit. Um, so from my understanding, so I'll say what I think is happening and then please tell me where that's not accurate. From my
understanding, we can ask you, Greg, to write and draft aou between us and ACLT that would be approved by our town attorney that would say that basically we are committed to
funding this project in this way if these conditions are met and thereby basically empower you to enter that contract on behalf of the trust as at such a time as you deem that those
requirements are met. Is that correct? >> Um yeah, Alex, I I believe it is. Um, and you know, and so basically like you know that laundry list I just listed, you know, that would, you know, we could put in a memo, you all could vote on it, you
know, and then um my comfort level would be more in sort of, you know, reporting back to you all on the the process on that, you know, and and probably having another vote um uh you know, once, you know, once those
things were executed. Um >> um you know so I and I think you know a lot of those things um I mean like site control in particular you know feels like a um I think I think it's everyone's informal assumption that this
is this is good. Um but I want to you know one one filter I want to ensure before things get much further at all is that the seller um has um you know you know has a hands a letter to an attorney you know um you know that that is a
little more formal um because sometimes in that scenario the attorney will say no no no don't do that and then perhaps something that we thought was stable is not you know so that would be an example of a thing I think I'd probably like to see before the trust votes at all. Um uh
but um but yeah, I mean I think that's but you you could task me with with some of that stuff and I might in turn pull some of you into it, you know, if it's a lot. But um yeah >> uh my my uh reaction to your question to to Greg Alex is that the we are in
effect have already reached that memorandum of understanding and you can't uh bank um on anou the question is when we say yes
subject to x y and z it's it's delineating the structure of our vote. of what we would be approving. We would appro be approving this grant or this loan with these conditions in the same way that when you
get a um a commitment letter for a mortgage, the bank says, "We promise to lend you the money so long as X, Y, and Z." I don't know if you want to follow up. Okay. U Rob. >> Yeah. So just to kind of I guess clarify
where where I'm at at the moment. So um very much uh Gaston I agree that I'm in that same boat. It's like I really want to move this forward. Everything sounds great. This sounds like exactly why I wanted to be you know a part of this trust is to help approve these kind of
projects. But um it's again doing our due diligence is really really important and I think that kind of working with with others to try and see how we can structure you know a potential loan um is important but then also um Algra's
point I also agree with um I'd be very happy now to you know approve a grant um but then taking some time on thinking about how how we're going to move forward board with a load. Um, and just with the this, you know, project in
general, I'm a big fan of, you know, where it's located, what kind of statement it shows from us, um, on behalf of, you know, the town and also, um, just it shows, you know, the the work that we're trying to do and the
support we're showing by the action of, you know, going forward with the grant, but then taking that time with the loan to see if it's something that is um, best, you know, for all parties cuz we don't want to, you know, commit to something that, you know, is bigger than
we thought it was. So, um that's just kind of um where where I'm at at the moment. >> Thank you, Rob Algra. Um, so I think
kind of echoing what Rob said, I I the location is so important and I think also the location in such proximity to where we lost the three units but gained a million plus dollars is also
important. Um, and I did see that it was actually placed into like the unrestricted funds bucket on our balance sheet. So, I think that just from a standpoint of flexibility, we would have a little bit more wiggle room with those
funds because they're not CPA restricted. Um, and I I think, you know, I to He's point as well, I do think it m it would make sense, you know, when you hire a contractor, you have like various stages and payment, you know, structure. You're
not going to pay everything up front, but you're not going to wait until all the work is done to pay all the money either. So, maybe that's a a question that we can, you know, once we know that there's a contractor on board, like what is your fee structure? What is your like
do you charge 30% up up front, 30% mid- project and 40% at the end or what you know how do you do that and how would how would it make sense for our if we are approving a loan to stagger our
payments so that we're not, you know, putting all of our eggs into one bucket at once necessarily if there's a way to make that work. So, we want to see I mean I don't know what we would want to see because I'm I'm not building it but you know we want to see certain a
certain amount of progress made towards the construction before the second installment of the loan goes out or something. I know just >> Greg as as you're taking the floor now I I want to just I guess bring back the
spirit of what Alex's comment as kind of where we might end up tonight is in effect deputizing Greg to pursue some things on our behalf. Um and so anyway, maybe Greg, you can we can start kind of
getting that list right if that's where we might end up tonight. Um that sounds good. Yeah. And I just want to sort of briefly respond and I that's what I understood Hij to be proposing as sort of um you know tier
releases of of of loan funds. You might have been talking about staging some some other more meta thing. He hijack Algra you were definitely talking about that. Um and um yeah and so that's a bit that's kind of generally how um development loans work. um you know is
is they come in trenches based on um pre-established milestones and that's a pretty key part of the process. Probably this one would have certainly fewer milestones than something like um Ammerst Community Homes because it's smaller. Um, however, um, that that
would be one of the things that were we doing this loan by oursel, for example, that I'd be, you know, leaning on our attorneys and probably looking for best practices and, you know, chatting up various lenders on, you know, how to do it. So, you know, there'd be some leg work in in designing that. Um, so that
would be one very clear example of like what's the appropriate way to do fund releases, you know, we'd have to figure that out. uh you know and um less ownorous if we were partnered with another lender. But if it were just us, that would be a fairly um just one
example of a a technical thing um I've never done and would have to learn uh and have all of you approve and hopefully we'd be right. >> Yes. Thank you, Greg. Alex. >> Yeah, Geston, you were completely correct on where I was suggesting that
we were going tonight. Um, from what I'm hearing, I know there's a lot of questions we still have and it would be really helpful to start seeing some things written down. Um, I also would like to be able to give something back
to ACLT sooner rather than later. It's going to strengthen their case as they're pursuing parts of this project and it's going to empower them to start moving forward with things that might require a larger financial commitment for them if they have some sort of formalized intention from us to move
forward with that. Yes. >> So, I guess I I hate to keep putting things on Greg, um, but I'd love to know what feels reasonable for a timeline for if we like had a motion tonight to direct you to prepare whatever you're
more comfortable with inou a letter, a statement, something um saying kind of that we could vote on at a time you feel is appropriate that we could send to ACL that says we're interested in moving forward with this. we want to see these pieces, but we're basically expressing
our support for this project um based on getting these other things together. >> Yes, Greg, please go ahead and respond. >> And and Alex, to clarify, are you asking how long will it take to compile that list or how long will it take to work
all those things out? Because I think the answer is is fairly different. Uh >> yeah. Um I was thinking to compile the list. So my hope was that at a meeting sooner rather than later, we can have something before us that we can vote on
as a first vote, even if it's not a funding release, even if it's a letter on our behalf saying, "Here's the questions we still have, but generally we're supportive of this project and interested in moving forward." Um, I'm trying to think of things that might be helpful for ACLT to keep this process
from dragging out forever. So, >> sure. Yeah. I mean, I think I could, um, you know, I I could begin to to draft that and have a a draft of that ready for our next meeting in January. Certainly. and you know and and perhaps in some cases you know I mean I think
thinking out loud here and you know if there's a downside to this but if there's a way because it may be that you know that I could transmit some of these things to ACL some of them might be easier to do in the short term that they can just knock off the list before our January meeting some of them probably are more
complicated and you know and um but you know but yeah I think so I guess I maybe I'd ask for um you know, permission to write that memo and then also permission to bounce some of those items off of ACLT. >> Yeah. And and so I um I think to kind of
retrace my own steps, I was suggesting that we might together work out that those lists tonight, but really what we've worked out is how we all feel the same way and what we share in common about uh this project. And and so uh
your points are very well taken. I um uh let's hear from HJ, but I I would like to see what you all think about the idea of a of a of a purchase option. Uh but let's please let's keep going. Uh Greg is your hand up for something fresh. No,
DJ. >> Yeah. Yeah. I was mostly just trying to understand what we're actually trying to like what would we actually vote on in January? What do we feel that we could actually be ready for a decision on? Um, and I do want to just not lose track of one of Bob's ideas of a matching loan, I
think, was was kind of the terminology he used for the the the loan part of it. I I would I would say like I it's it's a lot easier to make a decision stepwise in this in this fashion because it is really complicated for all of us to to
chew on. If we can focus on the acquisition and get that get that squared away, it is a very big commitment um to vote on and I think we all are aligned that this this is something that we want to happen. So if we can get that
at least going then then actually that this gets the project going in in the same way that Alex has been asking us to consider. So I I that's my suggestion for for the initial focus. >> Okay. Um uh Alex. Yeah, I was prepared
to make a motion to direct our town staff support to prepare a memorandum of understanding with conditions we'd like to see met from the trust and to authorize Greg to send a letter on our
behalf to ACL to communicate some of those before the memorandum is signed to give them a heads up and time to prepare for some of what we're looking for. Um, and to add a time limit on the back of that, I'd in the motion I'd say that
this should be ready by our next meeting if at all possible. >> Uh, does any uh do we think the is the motion uh clear enough? I mean, it's it's a in effect a kind of a a delegation and
request for Greg to move the ball forward. um consistent with our discussion tonight, >> can I add like a friendly amendment um at the end to say with um the goal of
having a vote um regarding >> not dispersal of funds but like commitment of funds at our January meeting >> because that is >> we have discussion about the I guess we didn't have a second yet and >> yeah I was going to say We need a second.
>> We need a second um to the motion before we can have the friendly amendment and a discussion there on. So >> I will second the motion. >> Okay. And you want to move to uh uh uh and so now we're in discussion and um and so seeing
is your hand for the discussion. Alex, go ahead then. >> I was going to say I accept Algra's friendly amendment because she suggested Okay. Uh so here's my concern. Uh, everyone, I'll I'll my concern is that
if we're we're I that we could be in April just like are we ready yet? Are we ready yet? As opposed to like I I think this uh Alex's motion is I think meant
to not uh get us not have that happen so that we're all clear about where we're going and how. And I um I guess I'm um the reason why I personally like
the idea of a purchase option is that it gives everybody a clear time frame instead of like this idea we just have to do it all, but we know we can't do it all at once. Um we need a we need a we don't have a clear runway right now.
to do everything that needs to be done is my feeling. And and so I I don't know um I I don't know what um I don't know what vote we
can be ready for in January. I'm I'm trying to um uh I'm trying so because are we are we open to funding
the whole acquisition with a grant or do we want to because that's not the proposal on the table. Do we do we want to lend part of the purchase money and grant part of the purchase money? Um I
guess I'll stop here. Uh, Alex, your hand. >> Um, I'll let others go first. Sorry, I'm trying to write more formal language for my motion on the fly. So, >> yeah. Okay. So, um, Algra, I understood that your your
friendly amendment, which Alex accepted, was being ready to vote on something in January. >> So, I guess I'm a little confused because I thought that's where we started this meeting saying >> it was. It was. So, so you're rightly confused. Um, but I guess also my
question would be isn't is is what your concern about the purchase option is that something that might be addressed by Greg's work that we may or may not direct him to do.
>> Uh, well, I'll let I'll let Greg answer that. Sorry, I was looking at some numbers. Um, so Leger, your question was would I be exploring a purchase option with with them? I I I think is is that correct?
>> Well, I guess my question is I feel like we're piling on a lot and a lot and a lot of conditions that I just as a member of the trust haven't seen us do ever in the past. So I guess I'm confu from my perspective. It sounds like
Alex's motion and maybe I'm misunderstanding is to have you explore some of the questions that we already had which I guess in my understanding might have included
some different options that we would potentially look at and maybe I am incorrect in that understanding of the motion or the scope of work we're trying to put on you. >> So no. Yeah. So I I think the you know the and and I guess you know I think
Gaston was kind of going in a slightly different direction around the uh the idea of a purchase option. um you know and I think one um but how that fits in you know is you know for example like clarity on you
know when is um is acquisition really expected right I mean because they they haven't really been clear with us and they may not themselves yet know is is it actually a priority to execute acquisition well before uh they um close
on a construction loan. Originally, we I think we were we understood that yes, it was informally in sort of verbal communication with them um kind of before it reached the full committee. Um but then at our meeting last month, um Linda didn't
affirmatively say it can wait until August or or whatever, but she kind of raised the idea. Um you know, and so a thing I might do is is say, "Hey, let's just get some clarity on that." you know, when when do you actually like is is the acquisition timeline really a
pressing concern or not? Um, and then if it were, I think a thing we could explore then is, hey, could we um uh put the seller at ease if we funded some sort of purchase option um uh
that ACLT could in turn execute with the seller or with the prospective seller. Um uh and a purchase option is basically like you know there's different ways to do it but um you're basically paying for the right uh to buy uh a property at a at a
named price down the road. Sometimes it's significant amounts and those monies uh execute or transfer into the sale when the sale executes. Sometimes there might be more modest, but it's just a fee you're paying um uh separate
from um the eventual transaction. Um did that answer your question? Sorry. Or did that clarify at all? I don't think my question was like are we doing that or what is it so much as like would that are all of these things
under the umbrella of what we're asking you to do if if during your research and your conversation something comes up and it says oh that's really a better way to do this >> I mean my my personal idea would be like if if that's
the work that you're already doing and this is what you come up with and that's what you come back to the trust with then that's But I >> and part of that depends on what we learn from them, you know, or what I go learn from them from ACLT. Y >> Okay. But what I'm hearing is um the
delivery, the purchase timeline and site control as things that fall into this request for Greg to pursue the conversation. Alex, >> yeah, I have language ready, I think, if that's helpful. Um so in Algra we'll
need to agree to this as the seconder but I wrote um to direct our professional staff support to prepare a memorandum of understanding to be ready for a vote of the trust for ratification at our January meeting to express support for the ACLT project with details of conditions to be met for fund
dispersal. The requestedou should detail timelines and phasing for funding with an option to separate a grant for land purchase from the requested loan for development at the discretion of professional staff and legal advice. We have further moved that the housing trust staff is further directed to
communicate with ACLT to provide a preliminary list of expectations for fund dispersal to aid ACL in expediting the process of receiving funds. Yes, I I approve of that change in language. Of >> course, it you know, it takes two to
tango. So, um, just because Greg works on, uh, specifying anou doesn't mean the ACLT agrees to it, >> which is true, but the hope for this is that we would be in a position to
authorize signing this at our January meeting and then it could go to ACLT and hopefully they would also agree. >> Um, Alex, thank you for that. And I um uh will ask for the text. Um but I think
one and I I I lost I lost the thread a little bit midway. Um but one phrase you had in there was dispersal of funds. Um which is not where we'd be. It would be kind of a commitment of funds. Dispersal is going to happen after contracting all
that stuff you know down the line. Right. I understood Alex meant that you know if we see if we know what our condition will be down the line that should be in theou now is what I understood you to be yeah yeah okay >> and and so and and uh Alex and Allegress
and you know you're the sponsors of this motion do you contemplate or are you uh okay with Greg trying to talk work with ACLT ahead of our next meeting to get this right >> yes >> yes okay good um yes uh Bob, uh, uh,
comment, please. >> Oh, and this would also indicate that if Greg's able to speak with them in advance that we'd have some indication, >> Yes. >> at the January meeting about whether it's in line with what their thinking is, right?
Um, and is a focusing question is uh would this memorandum be narrowly focused on a grant or be inclusive of a grant and and a loan? >> Um, the language as written says that it
can be separated at your discretion, Greg. So, with what you're comfortable with. I just emailed you the text if that would be helpful. It might actually be helpful if you can pull it up and share it on screen if that's possible. My my my um I guess my reaction here is
if we're going to talk about anou if we want to formalize anou um and I see that the value of doing that being structuring our work right now then it should be for the whole it should be a memorandum of understanding of of the involvement that we you know
would like how we would like to be involved in this whole thing is how what I think should be the scope and Um, I am not hearing anyone uh opposed to uh
our lending and um uh what I've heard is, you know, HeJ and Bob suggest the idea of making a lending commitment that is based on getting a match. But that's, you know, that's on the on the table of what Greg can work with is what I
understand our uh motion on the table would do. Um, uh, Bob, do do you have a followup there? >> Yeah, just I I think it can be the whole thing, but um, but as far as the loan goes, I I think it's in January, it's
not going to be a commitment yet. it can be maybe an intention um and it'll you know these are the things we want to have done but I think at that point also in terms of leaving it at the discretion of at Greg's development the discretion
of professional staff and legal advice um I think it's really at the discretion of all of us um but you're not wrong to say that we need the legal advice and Greg's sort coring everything together. Sorry, Greg.
Um, in advance. Um, >> what what I'm what I'm hearing Alex requesting is in effect that we can get something concrete upon which we can concretely opine. And so I think that addresses your
concern, Bob, if we're all reading it the same way. >> Yeah. Um okay. Is there any other discussion on the you know the the motion that we have
on the table? Um uh uh he I see you I see you uh puzzling here. >> I'm just a little confused what as to what January is going to look like. And it sounds like it's going to be kind of at the discretion of what Greg's
conversation with ACLT is, whether or not we're going to be voting for the the whole package or just the grant or or does that have to be preached today. I uh
>> that's that that I I just I'm just really not getting >> the the um I what I understand that sentence that second sentence to be addressing is um
how many times we vote on giving money. >> Okay. Got it. Um c can I just note too just for for purposes of clarity um we've mixed some
language here specifically regards to the the term acquisition. Um acquisition costs $475,000. um they have requested uh a total of $275,000
in grants from us and putting I think $175 of that into acquisition uh was their their original proposal to us. So that's okay, you know, but but I guess what I am wondering, you know, do we
have consensus on um how much of a grant we're talking about? Um, are we talking about the 275 or we talking about the acquisition amount? >> Okay. Uh, Greg is asking for feedback
from us. Um, uh, do we want to keep working with the grant size number that the ACLT chose? Alex, >> yeah, apologies. I was writing this on the fly. Um, obviously, Greg, I think
the more direct answer from my intention was that it should probably read um with an option to separate a grant for land purchase from the requested grant and loan for predevelopment and development activities if that clears it up. So, so the thought was yes, that this gives
Greg latitude to think about phasing that makes sense and where we want to start to lay out a timeline um and start to set that up. >> Okay. And okay, that makes sense. So, but so I guess just to be clear with the rest of
the group, um you know, if we were staging it and doing a grant first and making a decision about that first, that would not represent a full commitment to acquisition. It would it would represent our portion of what they're asking us in
equity for for acquisition. Um, a follow-up question to that clarification is are we uh where where are we on this concept of um a lending partner? Do we want to
continue? We we members of the trust last month gave informal encouragement in that direction. I don't think we made a formal directive with a vote. In fact, I know we did not. Do we want to keep that on the table? you know, should does your guidance to me? Um,
>> let's talk about that point specifically. So, everyone, just to be clear, the ACLT is not proposing a lending partner. It's they're proposing that we're the sole lender and they're hoping to get these other grants. That's
their financing package. So, the idea of a lending partner could be a request, could be a condition, could be any of the above. Uh, reactions to just that point. Um, Alex.
Yeah, I think that I'd be the intention behind this was not to take that off the table, Greg, to leave that as an option for thinking about what language you would be comfortable with in thatou
that could still be open enough to discuss the possibility of a loan based on them filling conditions, but also us either finding a development partner or somebody with the legal expertise to facilitate on our end.
>> Yeah, right. >> Um, so I guess from thinking about like where is the grant going versus where is the loan going perhaps that's something that could be talked with them about because I
personally think it makes a little bit more sense to put all that all of our grant money towards acquisition since that's the first step of the process anyway. Um and then >> and and that is their proposal. That is
the right the ACLT is proposing that all of the grant money that we give be towards the purchase. >> I thought that Greg just said some of it was towards purchase and some of it was towards >> Oh, really? Am I Yeah. Yeah. >> I I missed that. So they they they they
have two stages of grants. I I got confused then. >> Um hold on. >> Yeah. Can we have that up in the visual visual please? >> Yes. >> And and while you're bringing that up Algra, I just want to go back you you raised an important point which is you know we we haven't been in the business
of doing all this kind of conditional work before >> and there we haven't had a proposal like this before and the the the differences that are material are the fact that this is their first rodeo of this sort of
project, right? um ours as well and um and the scale of the commitment being asked. It's the combination of those two that I think gets us there. But your your whether we should be and how is still is still a very important
question. Okay, let me let me refresh my memory here. Aha. Okay. What do folks think about that? Do you do do you do do you share Allegra's reaction that uh if we're going to give
grants, we might as well focus the grant on the acquisition. >> EJ, >> I think I think we're assuming that there's no redevelopment that's happening at the same time, right? They they didn't have any buckets for something that they wanted to spend at
the same time as acquisition, right? I guess >> you vanished >> maybe be a question then. Um >> to address why how how did they come to put those buckets where they are because again I don't I've never lent people
money to purchase and redevelop houses before but I would imagine that you can't do anything without acquiring the property first. Um, so I don't know if the redevelopment upfront would be like the environmental
study like if if they're putting money towards that or if it's kind of pre-development type things that we would generally see. Um, but that might just be a question of would they be willing to reconsider what buck or able to reconsider what
buckets go where if other people feel that perhaps a grant towards acquisition makes more sense. >> You know, it honestly I don't think it if we're talking about a 0% loan, it I don't think it ultimately makes any
difference here at all. Um, I think they they were probably We We have to ask. Greg, you should ask. Um, I think they were probably just trying to make it more palatable by splitting it that way in some way. Um, but I don't think it
makes an economic difference that I can see yet, Bob. >> Yeah, I don't think it makes economic difference. that probably just um administratively would take longer to pull out together >> tax differences that who knows.
>> Yeah. Um no, I I kind of like Algra's thinking in this about um focusing on the grant. Um whether we could do the whole 475 as a grant, which is what they need for the acquisition, I'm not sure. But um
you know at the least if we took that 100 from the grant for redevelopment and shifted it to the left that's 275 and you know possibly a little more than that but um and that goes back to he's point too about it is quite a statement
if we do that um you know supporting the acquisition. Um, yeah, I I would I would uh lean towards looking at that. >> Thank you, Alex. >> I just wanted to be clear that the
motion on the table does not mean we're committing to any dispersal of funds tonight. It does not mean we're committing to support this project. It is authorizing our staff, Greg, to start moving towards that so we can have a more formal vote on it in January. So, I
just want to make that clear. And the intention of the language was to be broad enough that as he's working towards that, Greg can split this up as he sees fit. So, we can actually have something actionable on January, whatever that feels ready for
>> um from Greg. So, if that's if he gets magically everything done and he's like, "Here's all of it. Here's the phasing. Here's the loan terms, great." >> And more realistically, if that's not feasible, at least coming forward with here's a rough outline. I've started talking with ACLT. I've started
interfacing with our town attorney. I just want to make sure that he has authorization from us to start doing that work so that we can move in that direction and actually have something actionable come January. >> Okay, good. So, yes, we we're getting uh talking about it fatigue. We want more
action here. So, um uh I'm going to take a a roll call vote here unless there are any further comments. Uh, Rob, >> yes. >> I Okay. Uh, Carla, >> hi. >> Uh, he
>> hi. >> Bob, >> yes. >> Uh, I Gaston say yes. Algra, >> yes. >> Alex, >> I. >> Okay. So, uh, mo motion passes unanimously.
Uh, we want to see something clear to, uh, to vote on. We're all clear that what we see on the screen is not enough and we want something more and and so it's a big ask uh Greg. Um uh but I think the most
important thing here is um you know the ACLT takes our time seriously. They're going to listen to our conversation. they're going to know exactly where our heads are at and uh understand the um the goals that we have for uh the the
work o in the month ahead. >> Uh well, thank you. I I'm really grateful that everyone got in the mix here and we we got our uh our hands uh in the mix of conversation and making this real. Um
uh what else do we have on the agenda? A little quick roll call from any um updates from uh committee or education work. I know that uh Bob uh Greg and I have have a couple things to share. Any
other updates? >> Um I have I was in touch with somebody from Wayfinders. Um we talked and she sent me the link to the Pittsfield community conversation that they held. um so I can send that out to the trust.
But um we kind of they think that they're looking at probably April for the Hampshire County um wayfinders and um Don Hugh Institute report to um have their community conversation for
Hampshire County. It will probably be in Ammerst potentially at UMass. Um but they're working on those details. But um I'm also we did talk about the fact that there are some ammer specific issues that don't necessarily apply in
some of the hilltowns and so she was in conversation with um Keith Ferry over at Wayfinders as well as I think Carrie Spitzer from the Donna Hugh Institute to see if they might be willing to come to one of our trust meetings or to have a separate meeting with us to focus more
on some of the Ammerst specific data. um and potentially looking at February or March for that to happen. Um and if that is a go per if people have specific questions if I don't know if everybody's looked at
the report. Um it's pretty thorough and there's a cool data dashboard where you can go by town and kind of see what you know what the vacancy rate is, you know what this and that. So, um,
again, that is in the works, but not nothing is nailed down yet. But if is that something that you would as a trust would be interested in having them come kind of go into a more deep dive of the data >> for Ammerst specifically?
>> You're getting you're getting yeses all around here. >> Good. So yeah, and and then also just I think the regional piece is also helpful to think about because it is a regional report. Um so once they know that date, I think we would probably be able to
support them by getting it out to our network. Um and then I I did reach out to some of the other, you know, some of the other trusts in Hampshire County just to kind of introduce myself. So, I think letting them know about it as well
would be helpful. So, that's all I got for now. >> Okay. Thank you, Algra. Um, uh, uh, Bob, you want to uh take take the the lead kind of reporting on the conversations you you Greg and I have
had? >> Sure. Um, and I think Greg, um, that information you had about just very recently with, uh, with Governor Healey and ADUs, but we've been sort of, uh, following up some more on, uh, that
subject. Um, still have some more work to do. Um, we're going to, uh, reach out to to MHC and also get some clarification from the town regarding procurement laws. Um we are also talked
about um uh possibly having some kind of a call for ideas from the community with respect to maybe getting a focus group of sorts for uh people who are considering ADUs and and trying to get a sense of how uh we as a trust can can
help encourage and facilitate that. Um, we're also going to be uh reaching out to some local lenders and and getting a little more um information on sort of where they're at in terms of any
programs uh with ADU lending. Um, you know, basically right now it's it's pretty much the Cape Cod area that has experience in that, but there are also some um somebody mentioned Pittsfield recently. there's a credit union out
there that's just recently introduced something. So, we have some outreach to do with that. Um, and then we talked about really just sort of, you know, call for for proposals and sort of a a general call and and what the parameters
of that might might look like. Um, what have I missed? >> No, no, very good. Thank you so much, Bob. So the um we've talked about kind of focusing our work and not just waiting for stuff to show up, but to try
to invite people to bring us great things. And the um a call for proposal seems like a great tool for that. You know, Greg has spotted the question does uh depending on how we frame a call for proposal, it may raise procurement
issues and you know, fair bidding and and and all that. So, we need to find out more. The call that doesn't raise those issues would be this kind of call for ideas. And we wanted just to see if you all
like this idea of trying to basically tell the community. We we'd love to hear your best thoughts about how we can increase affordable housing in town and uh you know bring them to our attention and then we would decide based on what
comes in who we want to invite to our meeting and uh it's just a way of trying to um you know activate the community as a source of of ideas. So what do you all think about this um this strategy idea if you know how would we frame this
effectively? Uh um other any comments uh along these lines? >> Well, any any opposition to this approach? That's no. Okay. So, um uh then if there's no opposition, you know, your your your
feedback is solicited, um let us then kind of come back with something concrete, a draft, and and uh then you can you can comment um on on something that's a little more worked out. Um and and the comment all of the
thinking about ADUs that the thought is that there are a lot of different sources of funding right now where we think it's realistic to be in a position to provide write the kind of check that we would feel comfortable with and get to uh a genuine affordability
commitment. That's our um you know that's the the that's the vision that we're we're exploring. And so, you know, Bob's effort to reach out to banks would be to see about banks working side by side with a grant of ours as a way of
getting to this um affordability commitment. One question um you know one technical question is if we're using nonCPA funds how long of commitment would we require or need to require
um if we gave some money and we have seen examples where people were asked to make what was it five or 10 year um I >> think we saw 10 and 15 perhaps >> 10 15 so uh we're we're just curious
curious what the law requires and and and um and and then think about that um a little further. Um okay. uh Lerra
>> I don't know if this is something that has come up but is there any way you know whatever the law says say it's 10 years but then there that's like the bare minimum we would require but we could incentivize further longer affordability >> time periods
>> uh for for for for sure um um uh so question then would be you yeah how how we might do that um maybe it's a question of kind of coming back to us again and we kind of give another help
for the next period >> and Greg you want to respond further? Well, yeah. I mean, I think just the one of the basic dynamics we're exploring is like, you know, if there were a way if there was a way to do work like this,
presumably per customer or per per loan or grant, it's the idea would be that it would be a relatively modest amount of money paired with some private financing. And so, a commensurately more modest commitment of affordability. If
it were a more substantial investment, probably there would be a more a commensurate, more extended affordability obligation, I think, is sort of the principle we're working with. So, if we're giving you, you know, a little bit of dis a couple points off the the loan, it's not that significant, maybe it's 10 years. If it's a big
$50,000 equity investment, maybe it's 20 or 30. You know, I think that's um the matrix to be worked out. EJ, >> just wondering if there's a way to think about um the types of like the portions of
projects that would be helpful to actually maybe just offer as a package. That way it's like a little bit more understood for like a given project that we're expecting this amount of cost. like if it's like some sort of pre-development cost to to understand
like we we can help kickstart the pro your project by by doing this much and that that's like an understood amount that's like a little bit e like a little bit more efficient for us to then help >> okay >> the process rather than >> doing everything ad hoc >> understand every project like
>> I think that would be the goal is is to get to where it was a clear uh certainly by the time it was on the street it would need to be super clear along the lines of what you're talking about I think Yeah. >> So, what what you're saying, EJ, is, you know, apply for a $20,000 grant or apply for a $50,000 grant. Here are the
conditions. Here's what you need to show. That's what you >> kind of like, you know, if there's like parts of projects that that are a little bit more understood and the costs are more more like predictable that we can say, hey, like we'll give you this to do this.
>> Would that incentivize you to build an ADU? >> Good. so that people can start exploring and know what they can count on and and be able to Yes. >> Good. And you know, the other angle on
that same outcome that we're looking at is the standardized plans as a way of knowing what it's going to take and and having a streamlined path there. >> Yep. >> Good. Well, the Yeah, the you know, just to comment that the initiative from the
state is really ambitious and exciting. They're doing design challenges. They're um they've got money allocated for uh for loans. They've got money um for grants. Um so we're kind of going with the grain here. And so the notion of
supporting ADUs that are affordable becomes that much more realistic if they're state money and other sources as well. Okay. any issue, any item not um you know not on the agenda that you have identified. Alex
>> um I see Greg's hand is up so we might be going for the same thing. Some big housing updates from the town. So Greg if you want to talk about that from the last council meeting or I'm happy to. >> Um sure. So Alex lives in city hall now.
Um uh no I um uh we are uh now uh proud owners of an approved housing production plan in the town of Ammerst. >> Wow. Okay. >> As of Monday evening. Um so um now both the planning board and the town council have approved the housing production plan which
>> uh ends uh well it doesn't quite end now. Now now it goes on. We send it off to the state um uh who we would expect to receive approval from uh presuming they approve it uh between 90 and 120 days or so. Um hopefully faster than
that. Um so um so yeah, that's thank you all or I guess some of you weren't here when we did a lot of feedback sessions. Um but the trust sort of helped seed some of the early ideas in there and um uh and um it is um uh unchanged from the
June version that the planning board approved. Um uh so and among the uh strategies in there in fact are pre-approved um I'm not sure if it says ADU but pre-approved housing plans uh syncing with what the state is doing.
Um, so maybe there's a window for us to find a way to be in front of the line and be early collaborators with some of those state initiatives which were just announced yesterday by the way. Um, so that's uh um that's all coming pretty fast. Um and then also at the council
meeting on Monday, um the council uh took an action to declare the VFW property surplus um which is um ultimately like a ministerial action which needed to get done uh but and and had a fair amount of bureaucracy before it
could get done um but um uh but is now done. So now the next step with that would be to release an RFP uh of the um the VFW property. So um I think Alex did I miss anything uh
significant on the housing news or is that it? >> I think that's it unless you want to talk about articles 18 and 19. >> Oh yeah. Yeah. Sort of a bit a bit further off my plate. Um but there were some proposed zoning petitions um uh which both the planning board and the
council rejected um uh um including this Monday night. >> What were the substance of the petition? >> Um uh to um implement a housing moratorum uh in the downtown area um and
to um define and tightly regulate um a student home concept. >> Oh, right. Right. Right. Um and and so that was that idea was uh rejected by the town council >> and and the project in South Amherst is formerly off the table right now.
>> Oh. Oh, sorry. The you mean the archipelago project? >> Yes. >> Um they have withdrawn their application. It's not clear. I'm not aware of of what their plans are on resubmission. >> Yes. >> But the South Ammerst School is still
>> Yeah. So that that's that is still in process and and and early in process right we will wrap up our engagement with the narrow gate I'm sorry with Joyce squared uh which is the architecture firm their presentation should be linked from the housing trust
website I hope um um so you can kind of look at you know some of the concepts that they floated there um but then there's going to be both a sort of staff level and then presumably a a council level discussion on the best path path
forward on that. Um, uh, I know that it was in a draft version of of the town manager's goals, um, to come up with a a proposal for how to get development done there. Um I don't know um when those goals are finalized and if
it will remain in there or not but um it is um an interesting property um you know with a lot of advantages and um you know and some some challenges around size as well you know so I think it's um you know there's still a lot of
exploration to do and one of the things that the joy squared engagement didn't uh wasn't designed to focus on um you know was the realities of financial viability for different developer profiles. Um and finding the right match
there would be pretty key if we were to go forward. Um it's not the kind of property that um any uh you know tax credit affordable housing developer is going to jump on without giving a lot of consideration. Is that because of the historical
>> a combination the the capacity um of for for units? Um it is the the of the three options Joy Squared produced uh the one with the most units. Um which on that site you know looks pretty healthy you
know in size. Um um it could work but it's it's you know it's pretty sizable you know context wise for the neighborhood. Um that would probably be the bare minimum of what a tax credit developer would want to pursue. Um and
you know and and one strategy would be to find ways to derisk the property, find a way to do some sort of advanced permitting before an RFP. Um if it is determined that the school absolutely has to go um one approach might be to um
you know to demolish the school before it was RFPD. That would have downsides as well. So, there's a lot of open questions about it. Um, you know, but the I but I think the tax the issue with tax credits is it's at the very floor of of what developers want. Um, and
and and there wouldn't be a whole lot of um income for them. So, one strategy to derisk it might be to find a way to do some pre-development support. Um, which is a thing we talked about at the trust. So, that might be a connection um for how a trust conceivably could play a role there down the road is with
pre-development um uh funding. So a developer is not taking all the risk themselves. Okay. Well, um here we are. We've gotten through our agenda. Thanks for all the updates. Thank you all for being here and uh for the great conversation. And
um you know, anyone who has further thoughts should feel free to reach out to Greg directly and and you know, share your thoughts as he um takes uh the lead on our behalf. >> All right. I'm always happy to receive emails and postcards. Um Gaston, can I
just request that we um invite public comment before we close the meeting? >> Absolutely. Absolutely. >> Thank you for reminding me. >> Uh so we have we have one attendee remaining in the audience. would you like to uh join us to say hello?
No pressure. Uh thanks for being here. Uh thank you everybody. Um we're keeping our uh trend of finishing on time. So have a wonderful uh rest of the month and see you in the new year 2026.
We're getting through 2025. All good things and bad things come to an end. >> Thanks everyone. >> Okay. All right. 26. Bye. >> Great work.