Welcome to the uh community preservation uh meeting our uh city council hearing room one government center fall river uh it's November 17th uh 6:00 uh pursuant to the open meeting laws any person who make an audio or video
recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium are therefore advised that such recordings or transmissions are being made whether perceived or unpersceived by those present and deemed acknowledged and permissible. We'll start with roll call to my right.
>> BJ McDonald, >> Rick Manceni here, >> James Hornby, >> John Brandt, >> Kristen Canara Olivera, >> Alexander Silva here, >> Joanne Bentley via Zoom. Okay, we are missing Chris Benovites
and uh Michael Ferris will be joining us shortly. And then we have Sandy Dennis uh admin for us and then we have Craig from Power TV with us. Uh no citizen input. >> No.
>> Okay. Uh wanted to go project assignment. >> No minutes. >> Oh, approve. Oh, okay. Didn't see that. Approval of the minutes from October 20th. Can I have a motion? >> I'll make a motion that we approve the
minutes of the meeting. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I >> We have to We have to do roll call. >> Oh, roll call. Um >> Alexander Silva, yes. >> Kristen Canar Oliver, yes. >> John Brandt, yes. >> Abstain.
>> Rick Mancini, yes. >> BJ McDonald, yes. >> Okay. >> Joanne Bentley, yes. Then next uh project assignment. Uh I uh we signed a contract with uh Little Theater and the deed restriction last
Sunday and I was going to give that project to Rick and BJ to uh oversee that. That's okay with everybody. >> Is that okay with them? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, no problem. >> Okay. So that's okay. >> Okay.
I figure since Mr. Mancini has that roof knowledge. Uh be nice to have on it. >> Um let's see. Uh can I have a motion to take uh emergency funding out of order? >> I'll make a motion to take number seven,
emergency funding policy out of order. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Roll call. >> Oh, roll call. >> Alexander Silva, yes. >> Kristen Caner Oliver, yes. >> John, yes. I did. Would you repeat the motion? I could not hear it. >> We're taking item seven out of order.
>> Fine. Uh, yes. >> Rick Mancini. Yes. >> BJ McDonald. Yes. >> Joanne Bentley. Yes. >> Oh, thank you, Joanne. >> All righty. Alex was uh good enough to come up with a proposal there. Alex, did
you want to go over that with us? Uh, >> um, sure. So, I know um member Benovites had uh some thoughts, too. So, I don't know um how far we kind of want to get with this today, but I just put something together uh kind of
>> speaking of the microphone. >> I just put something together going uh over uh well, kind of summarizing what we had talked about at the last meeting regarding >> uh coming up with like a rubric for emergency funding applications. Um, if
everyone just wanted to like walk through it, it's essentially four components. Um, everything's up for editing. Uh, I have seven categories right now that can be scored. Um, and the scoring per category is 1 to five. And then you have like, uh, the
breakdown of anything scored 28, so max 35. Anything scored 28 to 35 could be deemed an emergency. That number can fluctuate however we would, uh, want. And then the other categories, uh, high urgency, moderate, low. Um, my thinking
is that wouldn't necessarily, uh, necess necessitate necessitate funding like emergency funding if it's not deemed the emergency category, but um, we can talk through that if we want. Uh so the categories that I put are kind
of what I had said last time threat to uh the asset or public safety which can include structural failures, safety hazards or irreversible damage that would occur without immediate action. The second category is CPA eligibility
alignment and this is um if the emergency directly affects a CPA eligible asset. Um so essentially it has to meet you know the eligibility categories and if it doesn't it's it should be zero to five points. I don't really see how that could be anything
other than zero to five. Uh then another category is historic cultural historic or cultural value at risk um which is the loss of historically or culturally significant features materials landscapes etc. Uh next category is
community impact which is the effect it has uh on residents, public access, safety or just neighborhood functionality. Uh then neighborhood appearance is another category. Uh number five which is impact on you know like the corridor
aesthetics, blight conditions, visibility of the damage could be anything under that. Uh category number six is deferred maintenance and cause. Um this is uh if the assessment of the issue stems from unexpected events
versus like long-term neglect want to apply for that. Uh and then the last category is risk of escalating costs or loss which is the likelihood of increasing damage or cost if delayed. Um so essentially we would use these
categories rate each of them one to five. Uh and then I guess anything deemed in the emergency category uh would be unequivocally an emergency. Um this is one possibility. Uh other components of this is just the
the scoring sheet, a draft scoring sheet that uh the committee could use. Um there's a little bit of a description in category three for what different kinds of emergency use under the categories could be. This could be very flushed out. It doesn't even have I think
everything I had mentioned or we had all talked about. Um so historic preservation would be like historic uh preventing emergency loss of historic fabric, structural elements, architectural details or culturally significant materials. Open space could be things like urgent ecological damage,
erosion, flooding threats or risk to protected lands. Recreation could be sudden failure of public facing recreational infrastructure posing safety hazards or loss of public access. Uh and then affordable housing, those types of emergencies could be threats to
habitability, structural integrity, or imminent tenant displacement. Um and then number uh cate the fourth component is just kind of like a flow chart. Um it I don't think it would necessarily be exclusive if one was a no
given scoring, but just kind of walks through um step one, is there an immediate risk uh or damage? If yes, move to step two. If no, non-emergency, step two, CPA eligibility, and so forth with each category.
Uh, so that's just kind of a base a base draft. Um, I don't know if anyone has any thoughts or comments on it. I just kind of threw it together so we'd have something to go off of. Um, I don't know if anybody had any alternative ideas. My
one other s possible idea I guess for how we could play this out and um it's not I'm not really in favor of this per se is doing away with um a timeline for applications and just kind of making it an open application period throughout the whole year. Some communities in the
state do this. I believe they usually have more funds than we do. So like that they wouldn't run into the problem of you know possibly running out and then some projects having to wait till you know reallocations. But one upside of that would be um you know no uh
emergencies. Everything could just be applied whenever it's ready sort of thing. Uh that's just one other idea for the committee to think about. >> I I have a couple thoughts if um if you're done. Thank you for putting this
together. I think it's super helpful kind of look through it um and see. So, thank you for putting it all together. My my thoughts are um if somebody's submitting an emergency application, it's an emergency to them. And I don't
know how much further we can define an emergency because if somebody deems it an emergency that their roof is leaking, they're going to come in and say it's an emergency. and and now we've kind of set that precedent that that's the last one that went through that has, you know,
evolved into this conversation where we need to look at it. Um, I just don't know. I I feel like we're I feel like it's the board's job to determine whether it's an emergency. And I think this toolkit is helpful, but I don't think it's going to necessarily solve
the discrepancy or the argument that is it deferred maintenance or is it an emergency? So, I guess my point is people can submit emergency applications whenever they want and it's always going
to be an emergency for them. And if I I know that this is our score sheet that we should be using. Um which I think is good, but we're going to be in this situation. I think as long as there is an emergency application, the board is always going to be the one to decide whether or not
it's an emergency. And what tools are at our disposal the end of the day is is part of it. Um and we didn't have this before, so we were going off what we were told. Um but I I don't know if there's a clear solution. Like I don't think if we had this I don't think it
would have changed the last vote. I guess is Yeah, >> it can I just I I think it might have it. I think one of the things when we have an emergency meeting first of all like when somebody comes in for an emergency we don't have enough of a
chance to look at the information beforehand. Sometimes we're getting it just that night and then we have to make this determination right then and there without, you know, having time to really look everything over, come up with our
questions, maybe go and and look at the the the um building for ourselves if if we have questions, things like that. Look into the history. It's like it it seems like everything is very rushed and we have to make a decision that night
and that's always been my issue with it. I think if somebody is presenting for an emergency then I think we should at least have till the next meeting to make that determination so that we can have like have time to look everything or we can
ask questions that night. we can have them come back with any other questions that we have and then to me that would make more and then we could also like you know deferred maintenance. Is it deferred maintenance? Can we go there and see can you show us the history of
how did this this happen? because I know the night that the last issue that we had, I had more questions than really got answered that night and I felt like, okay, we've got to make this snap decision right now. And I I did not feel
comfortable even with the answer that I gave. I had a lot of reservations. So, >> and I think that that to to me too, like the word emergency is like, no, we need to fix it tomorrow. >> Right. So then if we're saying it's an emergency, but now you still have to wait another month before we even
approve it >> now, is it even still an emergency? Because now you're a month away from it being approved. So I totally agree and understand with what you're saying, but when you use that word emergency, it's like, no, it's got to be done tomorrow. >> But I mean, realistically, they're not
going to do it tomorrow because they still have to get somebody to come in and do it and and approve and things like that. So it it's an emergent situation more than likely that can't wait until the whole next cycle, >> but >> we could always have an emergency
meeting for >> we could we could but at least give us time to look over the information, come up with our questions and and not um not rush a decision because I felt like that
last decision was way too rushed. Well, we've had years where we've haven't had enough funds in there for emergencies. We just started saving money for projects that might come up. Uh which
sometimes I look back and think we shouldn't do that because we have 27 applications in front of us and say we want to keep 800,000 in reserve. We're leaving out folks that put in applications this year for a project,
did the work, right? >> But we're going to stop at a threshold, even though we have money to not give them money because we want to keep that. And that's where I think we should change our thinking, too, is we should spend down to our last dollar. I mean,
folks are putting in applications, doing the hard work, >> and oh, I'm sorry, Alex. Go ahead. So all valid uh points and concerns. Um if we just maybe forget about the roof example and use like an example of
something that's you know an imminent threat to public safety that is I think an instance where emergency funds available would in a timely like a more timely immediate manner would be beneficial for the public. um the city
could, you know, uh mobilize something in an emergency situation like that quick enough where, you know, we wouldn't want to wait, you know, a whole month. We could do an emergency meeting. Like these are all situations that could happen. So, I would still suggest that
um having emergency funds and an emergency application process or just a process to to to hear it is is important for the community. And then also just to the point of spending to zero each year, um while that might be, you know, good
for some years and not others, I would just caution of just making it uh blanket um like operational standard because there may be instances like I know I personally like to think that maybe one year we'll get a very large project application before us and it
maybe it's so large where it would only be possible if we had saved some money over a couple years like I like the the time we've been saving community housing funds. I keep just waiting for someone to come with like a giant mill housing project where they just they just need
like you know a chunk of funds to get a really massive um impactful project for the community over like going and I think that is a situation where having you know extra funds not spending to zero every year would be a good thing. It might not happen, you know, because we're at the the discretion of our
applicants, but as a committee, it may be something we we still just want as in our back pocket is what I would say. >> Well, if we didn't spend any in housing, we still would put 10% away every year. >> No, I know. But like >> as long as we don't trying to spend to zero, like say we have a project in
housing that we don't really think is worth it, but you want we have to spend to zero, you know, so we award like, you know, would we award it, would we not? Like, you know, that's just counterintuitive. >> You know, that would be up to us, but probably I wouldn't award it if we didn't think it. You know, we just >> Yeah. Well, if you're saying spend to
zero, you're kind of implying >> saying if the projects call for it, not just to throw money. >> Well, yeah, that's what I'm saying. Like year over year, we may want to spend to zero because of what's before us. >> I just wanted to uh comment. Thank you very much for pulling this together. I think one of the uh things that I would
like to to mention on this one um remember that our funding cycles don't typically happen for another year, 18 months, two years. And so some of these projects that are designated as an emergency are exactly that. And so one of the caveats that you put in here that
um I thought was excellent was like the historical integrity of a building. And in particular, I I really pushed for the Little Theater Project because they've actually put money into that project and they actually spent a lot of money on that and they are a nonfor-profit
organization that has their act together. And so I've seen other projects. I've loved I'd love to see uh the dovetail of two different projects. One, you know, housing project with a historical. We had one of those and unfortunately they had none of the um
caveats associated with uh business accolades to put in together their funding and how they were going to pay for it. So those projects I agree with you like that would be a big project. Go for it. And the other thing that I would just kind of mention on associated with the emergency it's emergency. It's an
emergency. And again, you know, there are several even in our neighborhood, you know, a house, a beautiful historical house right near um uh right near the historical society that got caught on fire and it's sitting there with a hole in the roof and nobody that
that would be an emergency act of somehow someway that somebody could come in and not replace the roof, but at least put a tarp over it to temporarily um stop the degragation of the particular building itself. that's that's where I think an emergency is u
put into place for that. So again, if that that that building will eventually just come down if they don't do anything with it and and I know we had talked about uh you know the potential of using you know insurance money on this and unless you have a historical property I
pay for an extra coverage for historical replacement and that's that's costly and and maybe these types of projects have that caveat to that. If you're going to have a historical property, you're going to have a historical um ask for grants associated with historical that you have
to have the insurance associated with it so that if something like this does come up again that they have the funds to do this. Um, but thank you again for for pulling this together and um uh and and again I you know uh an emergency it's an
emergency and these historical properties um especially a nonforprofit organization that has a decent or or a good business plan you know uh and provides economic opportunities to the
city you know I think we should look at to you know supporting those organizations. I mean, we support a ton of other ones that, you know, um, constantly come back and we're looking at did you you gave you money, but no project has continued to move forward.
And so that's kind of the other scenario as well is that we have funded projects that we that have gone nowhere and we give extensions and extensions and extensions and I they're all they're all worthy organizations but it it's um you
know because they don't have a very good business plan or whatever or organizational structure that these things just don't get done. But >> yeah. Well, first we've got the economic part of it is not us. We're strictly
preservation. So, it's nice to have the economic side, but when we look at it, we look at the preservation side. And I mean, bygones are bygones. The uh little theater does a great job. It's over. They're going to
get a new roof. So, uh, you know, but, um, but a but an economic one, we do have we do have a responsibility to find out where we're spending our money because we had a project, I believe it was, um, uh, on Pleasant Street where it was historical, it was affordable
housing, it was, you know, um, firstf flooror retail shops, that type of scenario, but they they really didn't provide us >> housing. Yeah. >> Yeah. That Well, that was both housing and historical. And, as I say, that's a win-win. There's two categories there. That's, you know, 66% that you could
potentially I would love to support, but again, they didn't really have the accolades to be able to pull that off. And so that that's the thing that I concern when I talk about an organization, whether it's public, private, nonforprofit, you know, they
they have to step up, I think, you know, just giving money willy-nilly to to something that may or may not get done. and and there there are several projects that >> let's just stick to the emergency part of it. So, >> okay, >> can I just say we don't give money willy-nilly. So, I just want to put that
out there. We when we make our decisions, we base them on what we think is best. So, to imply that we might give money willy-nilly is the money. >> No, we Well, we didn't give that that particular applicant the money because of specifically
that particular applicant withdrew. No, they didn't. No, the one that he's talking about. No, but we base it on talking about two different places. We base it on what we think >> are the best projects. We base it on did they hit everything in the application
>> and then we vote. So, it it doesn't have to do with it. It had nothing to do with their business plan. I don't think their business plan is we we've never given money based on someone's business plan. It's based on we are preserving this. We
want to preserve this building. We think that this is going to affect the most people the the where we're going to get the best bang for our buck. But it's not about who has a better business plan because realistically if somebody had that that good of a business plan they
wouldn't have had deferred maintenance on their property. So >> unless they had no money >> could be a new owner. No, but I'm saying you know other when it's not a new owner there's >> so there's a but my my question is if we
didn't have emergency funding which wasn't always a thing people still had roof leaks people still had all these other emergencies and they didn't come to us they had to find this money from somewhere else it's this is just
something that we decided that we were going to do but it's not something that we have to do because a lot of other communities do not have emergency funding. We just happen to do it and people still in the past always found ways to fix their buildings.
>> And I think as long as there is an emergency component, there's going to be a conversation and a question of defining the word emergency. >> Yeah. >> You know, and there's however many of us here, we're all going to look at what is an emergency a little bit different. And
whoever is applying for it, it's an emergency to them, >> right? So, we still are always going to have to make that decision. But >> no, I know. But realistically, if we didn't have this, they would still find a way to get the money
>> or not. >> Or not. That's the point. They they don't have the And in this in a particular case that we're talking about, they put in tens of thousands of dollars to fix this problem or try to fix this. they had a windstorm that continued to escalate the problem. So
it's not as if they didn't try something here. But I but again there's something completely independent once once a structure historical structure as I say we own properties that are historical if you don't take care of something it the right solution to it and maybe it's not
as high uh value as I mentioned the the home that caught on fire that has holes in it that's coming down unless somebody does something and and the simplest thing is to put a tarp on it that would be I would say you you would say >> it's a private property.
>> Yeah. But you know, it is a historical property though. And >> yeah, I I think we can also get off the little theater because >> the day before it wasn't an emergency, but they missed the final day, then it
was an emergency. So they got their money, let them >> sleep away because I think we should. >> So this this doesn't depend. Could I >> Yeah, go ahead. This doesn't depend on one particular
thing that's one particular project that's happened in the past, >> a project that might come up. >> It's a future thing. >> Um I was fortunate enough for emergencies to do emergency work for about 10 15
years at the mental health center. And um clearly the policy of the mental health center and of most social service organizations is to put a good deal much a good deal
of weight on the selfassessment that this is my emergency. More so than that than than just coming to the committee and
having the committee uh decide it. Um, most of what is said is is about buildings. Um, and I'm going to get away from that. It I'm concerned with acquisitions.
>> Mhm. >> And I mean, there are two areas of acquisition that I'm concerned about that I think we should figure out a way to do whether it's emergency or or something else. We could just say these
are special things. One is one is uh in both cases it would be a ca it would be the case of losing losing the uh property. I think of open space we have of open
space that we're trying to fill in on the bio reserve. uh it might come up and then it might be that we could preserve it. It would be a terrible thing to have 200
houses built on a 200 acre lotund I think it's 228 acres. You could conceivably putund 100 plus houses in the middle of the buyer reserve if something happened with it with an act
with the hus reququisition. >> Yeah, >> I'm not making it up. I'm just >> really concerned. Um the other and the same is I think true perhaps to a lesser extent
with building acquisitions and property. I'm not nearly as familiar with that, but it strikes me that somebody might want to acquire something for affordable housing in the middle of our funding year. Um,
I also think that we need a some extent a two-step process. I had thought this, by the way, when I came before the committee. Um, step one, is it historical? Is it open space?
essentially the application >> step two is the um is the the substance um the what else would I say to these comments? I obviously think we should
find a way to to to deal with emergencies some of which have been mentioned. Um um we will still keep however we're not going to give away. >> Yeah. Um
>> Yeah. Uh the categories will still remain. So the green space% we won't give that away to to an emergency for for a house. >> We can vote on that that we don't touch
the 10% money that we was important. It probably was some other things, but >> um I also, by the way, I think I'm not I I've only had um this is when I came in tonight,
this was the first time I'd seen this. It makes it hard to comment thoroughly, but that's those are some of my thoughts. >> Oh, yeah. the so that we need more categories down at the bottom that would
apply to Yes, that would when the scoring sheet thing. Um, we need categories that would apply to green space. We don't have any. >> I think those do apply. Those can apply. >> I don't >> I was thinking I I was looking at this
through that lens of >> I mean I don't see how they'd apply. Maybe I'm not u >> Well, a threat to an asset would be one. The first one, eligibility is obviously one. Um, cultural value would be another way.
Community impact like these are all these all can be >> we could just put >> we can expand on it. It's >> this is just a list. >> This is just a start. >> We could put land in there. >> Yeah. But well, those are all those all are applicable for land, too. You know, >> I would like to see land in there.
>> Okay. Uh because this is so important. >> Mhm. I mean, just go tomorrow night to the historic commission. >> It says landscapes and not in category 3. It says landscapes already. >> Three.
>> Mhm. >> But we can say we could just make it more definitive, too. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Just put landscapes and properties andor properties. >> Yeah. Number three, other suggestions.
So, we want to give everyone a chance to review this before the next meeting and then we can vote on whether or not we're going to adopt this as the emergency process. >> From what I've heard, there are maybe three options. Um, one is getting rid of emergency funding, one is getting rid of
a timeline, which I don't think I heard anyone in support of, and one is adopting a form of rubric. So, that's probably the first question. And the second is like the any improvements on the rubric. Do you know what that looks like if there's no timeline as far as like how does that money get allocated?
>> It just that'd be a headache. >> Yeah, it seems like it. >> I'm not saying I don't I like this way either. It just it would kind of like to your point remove the discussion of what is an emergency for future committees. You know, it's kind of like removing removing that argument entirely. Um John
and I I think we're speaking in Quinsey has an open no timeline application process but they also get awarded like multip multitudes more than we do. So they have a bigger base you know to work with that not that's not necessarily prohibitive to the idea. Um, essentially
we would just have, you know, an application start date whenever the funds are supposed to be allocated, which changes because of, you know, political and and staffing reasons and stuff like that, but it's supposed to be, you know, the start of the fiscal year, I believe, at the end of the
summer. So, it would kind of start at the same time and there just would be an open an open period. Um, it's probably more work throughout the year versus accumulated at one point. Um, but like I said, it
gets rid of the emergency discussion. So, it's an it's an idea. >> Um, removing emergency applications entirely, I think, was what >> and then using the rubric. >> Using the rubric like a rubric. >> Yeah. I don't I'm not sure city council
would love it if we were peacemealing all of our projects. >> I'm just saying it's not their call. >> Yeah. >> No, I know. But I'm just saying >> it would get approved the same kind of way. >> Yes or no? That's all they got. >> Everything would like it just get sent to them. It would vote on it just be another agenda item. Um
>> now the if we did adopt an emergency uh say we went with this this plan right here. We tweaked it a little bit. Uh, and XYZ comes in with an emergency. Before we put it on the agenda,
every member has to fill this out and hands it back to Sandy to see if it qualifies to make it on. >> We won't know until we discuss it first and get all the information. >> Yeah. we would get all the uh it'd be like when we uh
>> I think similar to normal applications we should have a time >> a set time to review like we should at least have a week it shouldn't be >> yeah we would have the applications then we do our scoring and we turn it in >> and if for some reason it didn't meet the scoring possibilities
>> it would probably in my head play out where they present the application and we kind of do a eligibility and full kind of review hearing at once. And then a second meeting would be our scoring, our discussion and our scoring. So it'd be like a two meeting process
>> depending on time frame. We could bump up a meeting or it could be a month, you know, it could be a month depending on what what it is. You know, if it's a land sale and they have a couple months before, you know, a decision has to be made. It could it could be normal agenda.
>> Just ideas to think about. I know um committee member Benvites want probably wants to weigh in so I would probably suggest tableabling it and then Joanne if you've been so >> Jo you have something >> yeah I just have a question on um to me
an emergency is something you need funds immediately to get something fixed because the asset or you know something bad's going to happen or something bad did happen that you're asking for the emergency funds based on how the funds we have are
distributed, people or uh agencies wait for a long time to receive the money. Would we consider ratcheting that up so they get the money sooner? Because how do you how do you have an emergency today and then wait
five or six months to get the money? >> Well, no. Emergencies uh are approved. We went down to city council and they approved our emergency funings. Yeah, I think it was. So, uh, >> we just had those done last week, two weeks ago. Uh, the contracts already
been signed. We already submitted the bills. They're already a go. >> Want me to come and explain it? >> Yeah. You want to, please? >> Okay. So, can you hear me? Can you hear me, Jim? >> Just say your name for >> Sandy Dennis. the admin for CPC. Um what
happens is the organization comes down to CPC for emergency funding. We'll say that the CPC committee says yes, we vote to recommend emergency funding to the city council. Um I then send a letter to the auditor's department to draft an
appropriation order which goes to the mayor. The mayor sends it down to the city council to get on their agenda. Um, I try to get it on their next agenda. If it doesn't make that next agenda, it goes to the next month, which is what
happened with Little Theater. Once it goes down to the city council, they either approve the emergency or they don't. If they approve the emergency, I then need to go to um do a requisition. I have to draft the contracts. The
contracts have to get signed. uh if it doesn't have a deed restriction, the deed restriction has to get signed and notorized. Then it has to I have to do a requisition which then produces a purchase order. That purchase order
>> is when the money is available. >> What is the time frame to something? >> Well, I still um I still don't have the purchase orders for little theater. Yeah. >> So, that'll give you an indication. It just depends if someone's out sick, if someone's on vacation.
if they have a heavy workload. It it just depends. >> I do it as quickly as I can because it's an emergency. >> So, um it just it just depends, Joanne. Like little theater. Now, we're going
into 3 months uh that they came to this committee for that emergency. >> But they're starting work already. >> No, they can't stop work because well, they can technically because they got approved by the city council. I don't have the money yet cuz I don't have a purchase order. >> As soon as the contractor might not
start without the money. >> Yeah. Your contractor, you have the money. You just, you know. So, >> which goes to your question about having projects throughout the year. So, if every month you get two projects that then I have to do this process every
single month. Um, so yes, it is a lot of work. >> Uh, and it gets complicated. It gets confusing trying to track it, keep a record of it. Um, but typically in all honesty,
you approve it or you recommend it, it usually gets on the next city council agenda cuz I mean I do it like that next day. So this is a unusual situation that it's this long for this particular project. It's not usually this long.
within a matter of weeks or a month, I I've got the PO for the money. So, it's not typically as long as this is. >> And it's my understanding that they already have significant funds that they've raised for this. At least that's what it was stipulated in the Herald News is that, you know, how much they've
already gathered and they're doing more fundraising. in order them to get into the construction window. Um, you know, if it's going to happen this winter, so you're basically looking for spring of next year that you're either finishing
up or it's been buttoned up at least to a point where it's not leaking into the building. And so, and again, a lot of this has caveats associated with the fact simple fact that who when when is a construction, especially on a building, happening, especially for the exterior. And that's what we're typically talking
about with a historical property is that you know uh middle of winter they're you know January, February, March is is gone. And so u but that's why I think an emergency might be an emergency just for let's get this thing so there's no
degragation of the particular structure or the building and adding more cost to something that you could have fixed simply at first. You know that >> thank you. Did I answer your question, Joanne?
>> You did. Yes. Thank you. It's just like in my world when I have an emergency, something has broken, I've got water pouring everywhere, and it needs to be immediately dealt with within a day or two. >> Um, so just with this one lingering for 3 months, you know.
>> Yeah. >> Again, going back to what BJ said, everybody's emergency is different depending upon your point of view. Mhm. >> You know, >> and >> what's an emergency to me might not be an emergency to someone else. >> And nothing in government happens quickly.
>> Exactly. Right. >> True. >> Yeah. >> Well, so actually it sounds like the little theater project happened pretty fast. >> It sounds >> Yeah. I think uh when we were talking to them, I think they were scheduled to
start December anyways. Uh contractors. So, >> and you could do things like procurement over the winter, too. >> Yeah. Yeah. The other thing I wonder just thinking now um we have an annual application process.
>> Now I don't think we want a monthly application process every 3 months, four months. >> No, that's a lot. >> It could be quarterly. It doesn't have to like you know there could be two two times a year instead of one
>> come in. So you're right. you know, 27 for us with our funding is is a good amount. >> Okay. But that's >> I'm wondering if we it would be easier now. I don't think it will work for emergencies. That's what I was trying to
figure out. Can you hang on to your emergency for for 3 months? That does not make a lot of sense. >> Yeah. Well, like I say, we can uh table it because uh we're not going to be taking any emergency applications uh right now because we don't have the funds and then
we got the hearings coming up January. Um so we can table this till March when we're done. >> Mhm. >> Yeah. I think you did an excellent job here. I think maybe just add little comp. >> Yeah. too much when we get everything else
done because we >> Oh, we've got all that. >> We won't have any necessary funds for emergencies. So, >> we've got all the >> We can still settle this before >> Yeah, we can. Well, >> so is the next meeting. Are we reviewing applications next week?
>> We can make a motion to put it on next month's January's agenda and if we have time, we'll hear it. If not, we'll just take >> well, even if we just continue the discussion so we kind of get stuff set to approve, you know, in March, you know, so it's just ready rather than >> we have to remember everything, new
ideas and stuff. >> All right. So, how about we just table >> make a motion to table emergency funding policy >> to January. >> Till January. Do >> I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Roll call. >> Michael Ferris, yes. >> Alexander Sylvia, yes. >> Kristen Caner Oliver, yes.
>> John Bray, yes. >> James Hornsby, yes. Rick Manceni, yes. >> BJ McDonald, yes. >> Joey Bentley, yes. >> Okie dokie. >> Before we move on, would it be um maybe worth it to put the draft of this on our website and invite public comment and
feedback for ahead of the next meeting? >> We can do that. >> Like if anyone wants to see it and send >> I think that's a great idea because I think everyone has something to say afterwards. Let us know now. >> Give us just let us know. Yeah. So Sandy, if we could just put in just make
sure it says draft, you know, so >> you're probably better off putting it on Facebook. >> Well, we could do both. >> Yeah, >> because when we did open space recreation, we only had 500 comments over the course of a year and a half. So >> people don't
>> Well, we'll put it both places. >> Yeah, that what I'll do is um I'll send it to it to be put on the web page. >> Thank you. >> We'll put a post on Facebook. I can draft a press release and send it to the paper. See if they'll publish it.
>> Thanks. We go. Sure. >> That's you all. If you want it >> like a public notice sort of thing for public comment, we could do that. They'll probably get it wrong. >> Okay. You know what? I'm just >> going to be wrong if we send it wrong. >> All righty. Uh, next is a discussion of
protocol for public comments and committee members. Yeah. Take it back out of order. >> So, can I I'll make a motion to um go back to our original order to number six. >> Second. >> Second. >> Uh roll call.
>> Left. Roll call. >> Uh yes. >> Alexander Silva. Yes. >> Kristen Cano. Yes. >> John Bray. Yes. >> James Hornsby. Yes. >> Rick Mancini. Yes. BJ McDonald. Yes. >> Joey Bentley. Yes. >> Thank you, Joanne. And uh I'm going to
let uh Miss Alabar uh go over this uh agenda item. >> Okay. So at the not this past city council meeting, the one before we had a committee member who uh presented during
citizen input during public comment and there were comments. I I think we we need to clarify what what can and can't be said. Um, so if anyone here is going to present at citizen input at a city
council meeting, you have to make it very clear that you are presenting as a citizen only, not as a member of a committee. um you do not discuss what like when you're when you're talking you have to
make it clear that it is your opinion only and not anything that the board had discussed to make it sound like you are speaking on behalf of the board. Um it it has to be made very clear and this is
this is not our policy. This is actually with the state that you are speaking on your own behalf only, not as a member of whatever board that you're on. And I mean, this is for anybody out there that
that isn't aware of this. Citizen input is citizen input only, not group input or anything like that. So, >> I'd like to address that. I I think that's a direct uh um shot to me. But the reality of it is I'm a citizen
before I'm on these committees and I made it perfectly clear. I was asked my address. I was a city uh a citizen of the city and also the several different committees that I do sit on. I've sat on other committees above and beyond just this one uh outside of the city as well.
And so what is public knowledge is and it's recorded and it's on FRED TV. We made a uh as a group a decision on this emergency process and when I got to the
meeting I felt as if lots of talk were happening sideline talks were talking about what our 7 to2 vote was and what they were going against and so I felt pretty strongly representing the entire group and again this is all on public
television I would make the recommendation as I'm somebody who does this all the time on public um processes to this is that what we should have and again you'll see it in even with the federal news um a lot of the information
is relatively not misinformation but didn't get it 100% correct. If we're going to make a a statement as an organization especially on emergency fund you should have a one-page sheet of here's what the project is. this is why we voted for it. This is why we voted
for it. And and you have all of the facts right then and there. And you hand that sheet out to anybody that comes here or anybody that's reporting on it because that gives the the true indication of what like true indication
of what was talked about, what was the outcome of it, and basically what ultimately is what we're trying to present on a project of this nature. So, I didn't feel that that was fair. Again, I was just going there um to go and
support uh John and the rest of the board and Alex and myself. And when I kept on hearing like, well, wait a minute, we're going to shoot this down. Like, there were several people, seven of the 10 of the nine people who voted for this and you were going against it. That's how I felt. And again, that's a
misrepresentation. So again, I I made it perfectly clear what I the the boards that I'm on and the boards that I'm not on. And I was not representing the CP the CPC at all. I was a citizen and then I sat back up
there as a CPC member and to explain again how seven of nine of us voted with this as an emergency project. But when you were talking as a citizen, you did bring up the fact that we as a group decided on this and this is why and as a
citizen during citizen input, you can't speak on behalf of the >> and I reiterated that as the CPC member that was sitting up there as well. >> No, I understand that. But I'm saying at citizen because that can that can come back on us. that can come back on us as
an as as an >> I get I get that it's publicly recorded but there are things that you can and cannot say when you were up there at citizen input and that is one of the things you cannot speak like on behalf basically of the committee unless you're
up there like with John and Alex and you're talking you can't do that you can say my personal opinion is da da da da da but not we as a group decided or this you you can't do that because then you're speaking on our
behalf and not everybody as a group >> I represent myself as just one member of this committee not as I I I think I specifically said I'm not speaking as the group I am speaking as one member of this as a professional as a licensed professional who has to deal with this.
So again, you know, when we vote on something and then we go to the city council and hear something completely different, that's not right. I mean, I would be upset anybody else who voted a certain way on this and and then you're seeing something else represented to the
to the city council. So that's >> Well, wouldn't been the first time that a chairman of the CPA went in front of city council to have a project taken off the board. It's been done before. And to tell you the truth, when I heard it
happen, I was mad. >> But to this date, it's the best decision he ever made because the project would have went nowhere and it saved the CPC money. But in my heart, we voted for this project to go through. >> Mhm.
>> He saw best not to go through. I went up because guidelines. One day you miss it, that's it. I just follow the rules >> and and that's what and the city councils voted yes voted no. I asked
them I didn't throw the board cuz I did say the board >> was it a good vote for them? >> Yes. I could see their point in voting yes for it but the guidelines is what I stated. >> Yeah. I I think >> so they open the floodgates. I >> I think it's critical with what Alex
just prepared for us to give you the caveat and and again Joanne she's in this type of profession where emergency is an emergency. And if I had thought in any case that this this organization or any organization did
nothing to help prevent this, then I would say it's it's on you. Your lack of of maintenance or preparation or whatever it might be would be on you. But the reality of it is I think we have to come up with a scenario where um and again I think this is an excellent guide
or at least a step in the right direction. Um and so that's why I was uh very passionate about um I have no skin in the game with with Little Theater. But at the end of the day, if in two years that that building is starting to uh deteriorate to a point that you
cannot save it, then that's kind of on us. And you know, that's what I think we're here to to try to prevent this type of scenario. I mean, that's why a third of the uh the money and the funds go to historical preservation. So, that that's that's kind of where I'm I'm staying on that component of it. And
that's I I'll make sure that you know if I ever represent and speak as a citizen I will let them know the organizations I'm in but I'm speaking upon myself you know and I thought I perfectly I mean even Joe asked me you know he didn't
realize I still lived in the city and so gave him the address told him what you know what we do and he knows what we do and stuff so but >> right but again my point is you can say your opinion and how you
feel, but it's not to bring in, well, the group decided this or the group decided that because there were still two members of the group that did not feel that way. >> And that's exactly what And that's how I presented it. And that's exactly how I presented it. And and if you are looking
on the outside looking in and your board of nine people, seven people said this is what I voted yes for funding this. And two said no, right? They should know that. And I don't think they did know that. I don't think the city council knew that seven out of the nine people
voted to have this project funded. So >> can we just perhaps move this away from a specific instance into a more general policy moving forward? I think uh the crux of the matter is that if and what um is trying to be said um is any
committee member is free to speak during citizen input. Just try to clearly state that you are speaking as a citizen and not behalf of the committee. um just as clear as possible right off the bat. Um and I think that's all that's all that's
is being asked for. Um if it was done not so clearly, perhaps we just do it a little bit more clearly next time. I haven't seen any of the citizen input, so I I honestly don't know. But um it's just about distinguishing because even if a even if a a board vote is
unanimous, I mean you can't really speak to the opinion of the the full committee unless it was an approved vote, I think is generally how it it goes goes forward. I mean you could say like the vote was unanimous and speak your opinion onto your interpretation as to the board's will and just clearly define
that. But there you just don't leave any room for interpretation that you know it's a it's a full it's a full board comment that wasn't voted on. Right. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> Sounds good to the point. >> We end it on that. >> All righty.
>> All wrapped up with that. Okay. Um next uh project dates. We have the list there. >> Project updates. >> What project updates? That's what this is. >> Any project updates? >> Um, nothing.
>> Did you just want to maybe >> speak on the yards association? Uh, I think they're pretty much holding off on the remaining of the painting. I noticed that the back porch ramp has not been started at this point. Uh, but the deck has been completed. It's all been shored
up. They've replaced all the pillars and pylons on on the on the structure. Uh the spindles are being uh all have been removed and they're being reconstructed and and be repainted. Uh and they're due in very shortly and they'll be
installed. Uh and I at that point I mean that that's where we are with the arts association. Uh have you heard anything on the coffin school? >> I don't. >> Okay. There's been nothing on the Coughlin school that we're aware of. Uh
and the uh the property I was around that probably less than a week ago and the building is still uh full of materials. So they're definitely not working on the sprinkle system or
proceeding at all uh with that aspect. U >> so do they did they have a certain timeline that that was supposed to be done? >> December. Yes. >> Okay. few weeks. >> It wasn't the project wasn't supposed to be done by December. The plan, right? The plan that we wanted. Yeah. Just
distinguish. >> And and haven't heard a thing on that at all either. So, >> and and we were Rick and I were out there this summer and uh they hadn't contacted anyone to start that process or, you know, figure out what exactly
needed to be done to make it look historic again. Uh, so you can speak to that better than I can, but it was they hadn't done taken that step to contact whoever needed to be contacted to come out and analyze the building, what needed to be done and what didn't. And
then the other piece of it, there was, you know, there's stuff everywhere inside the building. So even the sprinkler contractor had told them at that time, you got to get this stuff out of here before I can do anything with the sprinklers. There was too much stuff. But it doesn't I don't know if there's been any movement.
>> Have you heard from them recently? No. >> Okay. >> No, maybe we can send a letter and have them on our January agenda. >> Yeah. >> I can, but if you look at your meeting schedule, January, you starting here. >> I mean, I don't think we need to.
>> It's up to you all if you want me. >> I don't think we need to send a letter. If you two feel a need to reach out and get a status update and they don't respond, they don't respond. That's their prerogative. I think the committee would just do well to remind that if a application a grant funding renewal
comes forward like we've been telling a lot of the applicants >> in the past >> because I forget what the stipulation was after 6 months if we didn't get anything >> 6 months which puts it about the 1st of January from the date of the signature on the
contract to somewhere around the first week or so January their six-month period will have ended. Okay. >> So then we can make a decision at that point on what we want to do because Yeah. >> It would probably be after the funding
rounds and stuff. So it would probably be our February or March or anything. Then we could decide how to proceed. >> Yeah. >> All right. That's good. >> Uh new business. Well, did could you just
go over the meeting dates at least for January for people? >> Yeah, I was going to uh put that under the new business. >> Oh, okay. >> Um, could I interject, Mr. Chairman, on the update on the CPC meeting dates, there's a January 20th, uh, I'd like to
have that removed from the 20th and change to the 26th. >> I'd like to make a motion and get an approval and have that moved. I'll second that to move the meeting on the 20th from the 20th to the 26th. >> Okay. >> January.
>> All in favor? >> Uh roll call. >> Well, okay. >> Are we going to be able to get the room? >> I'm going to I'll send her an email tonight. >> It's historic meeting. >> We're just trading with We're just switching dates. >> Oh, then okay. >> Oh, that's then that's fine.
>> I thought you were giving us more time to review. >> I was like, I like the sound of that another week to go over it. So the the 20th to 26th is that >> I'm going to check with city clerking. >> I'll just I'll just read these in. Uh so our our 2026 meeting dates would be
January 8th, the 9th hearings. >> Uh the 14th deliberation, the 26th would be scoring >> and voting >> and voting. And then February 17th, uh,
>> because Monday is a holiday, so we did it on a Tuesday. >> Okay. >> Does that interfere with Rick's? >> No. >> Okay. >> Shouldn't. >> So 17th and March 16th will be our next uh our lineup for the next four months.
>> Regular meetings. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> No December meeting just for >> And we have no December meeting >> for July. So, you'll get your uh packages in December. Uh start looking them over. That way,
you'll be ready for the 8th. >> December 2nd is when they're due. So, I should have everything calculated for you all by that the end of that week. >> And I'll have them all at John's office for everybody to pick up.
>> Okay. >> Calculated as far as what funding will be available? >> No. What projects? Okay. >> How much they're asking all that. >> Okay. >> Detailed information. >> Okay. >> Yeah. We did get an update. I don't know if you saw the uh from CP CPA the
update. We had I think we collected 156 and there was like 290 collected in the first round. >> Uh it's the lowest amount we've ever gotten. It was 16% but we're up to 206 CPC communities. Last year the housing
market dropped. So uh uh from the uh deed uh collection is really down. Uh so that's money. >> It is. >> Yeah. So >> tight year with more applications than usual. >> It's surprising the number of 3%
communities that uh voters in 3%. >> Oh, the max. >> Cuz they get 100. They get, you know, which is 78 communities. >> Mhm. >> I I don't think we'll ever see 3% here because but it is amazing. Can I ask a question on the um deliberations and just because
there are 27 applicants, do we have some type of guideline for like how long each person has up here to speak? So, we're not I know we don't want to limit it, but >> deliberations is just the board talking about it. Funding hearings, >> the hearings. So, when the hearings when
they come down, I just um if we could make sure that we kind of can >> move them along a little bit. We we don't normally but I I think part part of the problem sometimes is people get too nitpicky into the minutia of asking
questions of things that really we don't have purview over >> so I think if we if we like keep it to the basics of these are you know the basic questions of what we need to know instead of like you know every little detail then it generally goes smoothly
like in the past, we haven't really had that many issues with it because we kind of know like >> and sometimes I just feel like it might be a little repetitive when they're they're submitting the application with the the scope of the project, >> but then for them to come down and almost read it. >> Yeah.
>> You know, if there's questions that people want to ask, I'm all for it. But I just >> I if we can stay away from kind of reading the scope, it's our job ahead of time to understand each project. Yeah. >> Um, so if we can move towards that, I think it would be beneficial.
>> The better the application, >> the quicker >> the quicker we get turned around. Yeah. Cuz if the application has all of our questions answered, >> during eligibility, they did already give us a synopsis of what it was. So, we don't really need to do it again.
It's more like, okay, these are our questions. This is what we want to ask. and just to to be mindful of what we really have purview over and what we don't like. We you know we don't choose who they're going to pick for contractors and and we don't like we
don't micromanage. So I think sometimes when that comes into play that's when everything is dragged out more. So like if we're mindful of okay this is our responsibility this is their responsibility then it tends to go quicker. So
>> I'm not saying to rush it. I don't want to. >> No, no, not at all. I think we need to >> Sometimes I think it's repetitive when, you know, they come up and they just kind of cuz we have the same thing with the park board. They have their what they're looking for and then they come up and just okay, we read it. We know what you're asking for. If there are
specifics that we want to get into, I don't know what is >> but like usually like if we go through all of our applications ahead of time and then most of us in the past, we'll like write our questions. Okay, these are the Yeah, these are the points that we want to get. And then >> another thing that's might be useful is
if when you go over your application the applications and you notice that there's, you know, a vital piece of information that you think would be helpful or missing, you can ask them to bring it ahead of time. Be like, "Hey, we're I'm going to plan I'm planning on asking you about this. Can you just bring it ahead of time?" So you could
just answer it that day versus, you know, having to wait. And >> a lot of good thing with that too expanded is uh have them email it and they could email it to Sandy and Sandy could forward to all the board members. that way might be a question that somebody else would answer, >> right? Ask. So,
>> but one thing too that that I was thinking about, remember in the past we've had it happen where when something comes in and like say they they're supposed to get a letter from the historical commission or the park board or or whatever it may be and it's not in
the application on the date that it's due. We have said to them in the past that your application is not complete. So you're out of consideration. I >> think so. We've said that at scoring. I think we've given them up until scoring at least since I've been on the
committee. >> But the >> we did want to start changing it because we've had a lot of >> just for clarification. Things like things like a letter of support. I think you're right. I think things like that. It was if it was on the agenda, you
could give it to us >> a specific section of the application and they don't have it filled at home. >> Yeah. >> It if they're missing a section, they're not they should not be able to submit that application. >> No, but letters of support are part of
that. They because they're told ahead of time by this date, you need that. And a lot of people wait. And it's it really isn't fair. And I think we need to hold people to to those standards that we used to. >> Yeah. I'd be okay if it's on scheduled
on an agenda for before approval, but like I'm I'm open to >> you. >> Well, if it's >> if we get the uh applications in December and we see something in there that we want as a committee >> and they can get it to us before the end of the, you know, I'm okay with that.
>> Yeah. But that's not the same thing as like this is we've asked for this specifically on the it's one thing to say well can we get a little more information put it put it think of it from the applicant's point of view um when they're starting this you know uh truth
they could do things super early okay that's a caveat of course but they would I in theory be starting to try to get their letter in the summer boards don't meet as often in the summer then you're rolling into holidays so there's a lot of schedule things that get messed up in
this time frame. So, I wouldn't be as strict um when it's like dependent on like another board's schedule. >> Yeah. But in the beginning of September, they came before us and we said, "Make sure you have your So, they've had >> two plus months of >> this is what you need." So,
>> saying there situations come up where, you know, >> it could happen. >> I mean, I I know you do public sector work. I know Joanne does public sector work. And you know, when you submit your application, even if you and I and I and I applaud the city of Fall River for
doing this, you can watch it on Fred television where they have two applications. One's your your qualifications and one is the price. But they literally go through your qualifications. Did you submit everything that you were supposed to? And if it you did check, we move on to
the next level. If you didn't, then it kind of gets pushed to the wayside. But that's that is like any public public procure procurement um makes you makes you do that whether you want to adopt that and that procurement process also
like you were talking about the the time frame associated with it. So each candidate has literally if they get to the next round, they have like 10 minutes of of presentation and they have five minutes of question and answering and and the reason be like the the
cities that I work with that do this is they wanted to show transparency of okay which firm are we going to hire to do the engineering or planning or whatever it might be and then what firm are we going to you know award the contract to because they they do a ton of CP CPA uh
work and then you know which contractor you're bringing at the end of the day. So I mean you could you adopt that act you know that aspect of it into this and um they the city has actually done I've noticed a much better job because you
never knew where the money was going or what the project was going or who it was going to and they opened that up. So, um, but and I can give you an example of those and we see it from other cities that that's what you want. But, >> um, >> I just I'd like just just to make one
short comment. Um, nonprofits, people who do not usually do these kinds of things. for example, me and the church or um I got the feeling with the several of our
applications that they were people who were sitting on boards or who were volunteering as directors and they were desperately trying to fix up a school or something. Mhm. Mhm. >> Um it may not occur to them
to ask for a letter from the historical commission, >> but we have when they came before us, >> we told them very specifically if you if your project is this, you need a letter from this board. If it's this, so in September, they knew and it's very clear
on it's very clear on the checklist. So that it's very clear to everything. >> Yeah. >> If we want to really kind of get um Okay. What just I missed it. I can tell you that I consulted with people on the
historical commission, but I didn't realize I needed a letter. >> No, but I'm saying when they came before us in September, we told them they needed the letters and we also said you need to look on your checklist and everything is there. Right. >> So, but the thing is you've got to
realize too, people are coming to us for a lot of money. And if somebody wants money, they they also need to do their due diligence because it's not fair to all the other people. >> I'm not objecting to the due diligence. I'm not objecting to
>> um any anything you're saying. >> Yeah. >> I am saying that it's not totally clear and I've been through this book. >> Oh, no. within the application is it's clear. So the checklist and a couple spots.
>> Okay, let's let's you know, we've got another year to look at it >> and clarity for the first folks. I don't want to spend an hour on this. Let me tell you, go ahead. >> Yeah, thank you. I just have a comment
in that I think the application we have is very clear of what's needed. I think it's also stated at the meeting in September what's needed. Um, we have these rules in place for a reason and uh
my opinion would be if you can't follow the rules that we give you then you're nonresponsive to what we've asked you to do. It's it's made mention multiple times what is needed with the applications that we have. I think it's very clear and um obviously open for
discussion but I think if if somebody comes and they don't have what we've asked them for I would consider them nonresponsive to our list of uh asks >> and most of these people have applied for other grants so they do know the process >> in line with like other grants a lot of
things uh a lot of other grants sometimes they'll host like a webinar to go over the application ahead of the time ahead of time so like We could host like one at our August 17th meeting. We could do one the June meeting where we
just have it be an open webinar for anyone who is thinking of applying and has questions. Like a lot of state grants do that, a lot of other grants do that. That way, you know, it gives people an opportunity to just ask these kinds of questions and then it's just another way to uh be clear about it. And
if we're already meeting, >> you know, it's interesting. you can tell which proposals are almost professionally done. It's it's somebody who's done that before, whether it's an architect, an engineer, or a uh a grant writer. And so I and I and I apologize.
There was one individual that was taking off taking up the duties of uh I believe it was the arts association uh helping them with their grant writing process and getting this because there was a little turnover of directors and such. But th those are the types of people or
folks that you know um they stand out when their applications come in. And so if you think it's a nightmare going through and reviewing, you know, um submissions like this, think about it when they start asking for payments and
looking at whether the work was done. And again, there's a certain level of professionalism. um you can see it whether it's uh appropriate at the beginning when they're asking for the money. They're asking for money and if they can't get those things correct,
it's a living nightmare when they're starting to do construction and why isn't why aren't they meeting deadlines or why isn't, you know, um whatever it might be. Why aren't they getting permits? Why aren't they pulling why aren't they meeting with the historical commission? you know, so um but I agree,
you know, um there is uh there are opportunities and I think what uh Alex just mentioned, you need a little workshop on this one, then that's that would be great. And there's several different organizations that have those free workshops as well. >> Oh, just following up the CLC,
the cultural arts group, they have a workshop and it's very helpful to go to it. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's something similar is what I mean. Yeah. >> And it could be just it could it could not it could be remote. You know, it doesn't need to be in person meeting. Could be fully >> and we get a lot of calls for advice
before they put applications >> this way. Maybe it would condense it. >> We could include that with our annual meeting, >> you know, just to set aside. >> Hey, that would be a good time to do it. >> Mhm. >> The annual meeting >> actually
>> because basically every time we do something like this, >> if we get a few extra people, we get a few extra people. I think the annual meeting is actually a a perfect time to do it. >> August anyway. >> You should record it and say if you missed it then this one
>> and you can see exactly what you're supposed to do. So >> yeah, they're recorded too cuz >> Yeah. And then just to >> maybe we plan for that then >> I get calls every week on the applicants. The applicants do call me.
I've gotten calls from few projects that have submitted with questions making sure that they're doing the right thing. >> Um, so some people do know enough to call me for guidance. Um, and I will give it to them. Well, >> and to your point, I mean,
>> everything's I've got everything on that web page that they could possibly want. I mean, they have until December 2nd from the time they became eligible, which was September, to really start and and some of these people have already
started looking. I already have people calling me now for September. So, they're already going on the web page looking at the eligibility and funding applications for next year. So, people know what they need to do. They need they know what they need to get to.
we've done like we've been through this enough times where we keep saying okay how do we make this process easier how do we make it clearer and I think we've gotten to a point like that checklist >> that cheat sheet >> you can't exactly that it can't be any
more clear than that and then even right on it you you get and on the website if you have any questions call or email Sandy Dennis right so if somebody's not >> getting after all of that information we
put out, I don't I don't think they're going to and like like um Mike was saying, then at that point, you kind of realize that maybe that project is going to go nowhere because if you can't even get the application part right, then how's the the rest of it going to go?
And so then again, that's also part of our due diligence. >> Yeah. Two of our best applications in my mind was uh Maplewood uh baseball park. >> Oh yes. >> And lights.
>> St. John the Baptist always puts in a nice clean app that's >> everything you need, you know. >> Well, the other one too is the um the fire museum. >> Yeah, they >> he had it was very like we had a book and it was very precise and everything
was in there. And then don't forget you have until December till from the time I give you your packets. >> You can all call these projects. You can do a site visit. You can ask and if you ask them a question I mean Alex has done that and then his question I've sent the
response to all of you so that you know what he asked >> so you all know what the answer is going to be. So you have until early December until January almost a month to actually and I know it's the holiday. I know we're real busy, but um you have almost
a month to ask the questions from what's on their application to make the meetings go that much quicker. Uh because you do only have two funding hearings and they can run you 9 10:00 at night. So, you've got plenty of time and I'll be more than happy if anyone has a
question, you get the response. I can email it to all of you so you all know what someone else is asking that you may not have thought about. Yeah, we'll probably hear 10 to 12 a night because I don't >> The parks department, you guys withdraw
two applications, right? >> Yeah. I kind of advised him that, you know. >> Yeah. >> Prioritize it based on the amount of applicants that we had and prioritize the ones that they were going to be able to get done and put that one forth rather than
>> throwing everything against the wall and seeing what sticks. I know. He said he took uh Kennedy Park off because of the cost, but I told him I said the 400,000 doesn't scare us. I said though, if you do Candy Park, there will be more
scrutinizing >> because we won't be able to >> deviate from, >> you know, plan. So I said, if you want to go do another park, >> you can. >> Yeah. So I had a conversation with Darren about it because there was and some of those were carried over like the
Kennedy Park one. I think they withdrew it last year as well. So they put it forth again. But then in conversation with with him, I said, "Well, what do you have the bandwidth to get done if it gets approved and what are and how do you prioritize which one would be the
most pressing to get done?" So I left that up to him and the and the board we kind of advised him. So I think there's just one and I think it's just a resurfacing of some of the courts that need to be done. Yeah, that's what I always try to tell the you know because you put in five applications. We're not
going to do five for you, five for the water. It's like pick your two best >> and give us that, you know. >> So that was why those were with you five then we might have five different if you come in with two solid ones. >> Yeah.
>> You know, they looks better to us. we can kind of hash it over and >> you know freeze up more money because >> you're not going to get it all >> and eventually those things will need to be done but you can submit it next year. Let's get one done and move on. >> But plus what else if it's the city like
in that way or if it's the water department or place that come to us a lot. How many other outstanding projects do they have >> and what has been done on them already and what hasn't? Because if you still have four projects outstanding that haven't even been touched,
>> right? Why are we going to give you more money? Unless there's some dire reason why this has to happen. It's because then you have projects that are just ready to hit the ground and go and then if we if we're not
>> a little off topic. >> All right. >> Sorry. >> So, any other business? So, can I have a motion to adjurnn? >> Just before you adjourn, John, I I we got dinged at the park board meeting. Mike was late and I wrote down the time 608. It was an open meeting law
violation that we got. So, just let the record reflect that 6:08. Um, >> good catch. >> Our favorite watchdog got us in the park department for an open meeting low and I had a committee member come in late. So, I just want to make sure the record
reflects that Mike came in at 6:08. >> Thank you. I appreciate and I apologize. I had a a dual planning board meeting in the lobby out here and >> and um a date was missed because of the holidays. So, we had to get 13 projects
through. >> Just saving you the head. >> Thank you. I appreciate it. I apologize. >> I also forgot to say tomorrow night historical commission right here has a uh presentation on the bio reserve 6:00 >> public's invited. So, anybody here >> anything you want to be aware? Do you
want to say anything about it or No, >> no, just just that this this is a bio reserve uh uh presentation. Uh it's been ongoing for quite a quite a spell and uh it's uh taking in uh most of the
property over on the east side of the north pond. Most of that is bio reserve and uh it's going it should be a really good presentation. uh and it's only phase one. Hopefully a number of the CPC
members are there next evening, tomorrow evening to to see what's been put together because we're looking to go into phase two also. Uh water department buyer reserve people. >> Okay. >> So anyone anyone who walks around the bio reserve
>> the public the public by the way is invited. So, anyone who's watching this video and this program, please feel free to come down and see what's going on. It's really amazing. >> Yep. >> 6 p.m. >> 6 p.m. >> this room.
>> Okay. So, motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Michael Ferris. Yes. >> Alexander Sylvia. Yes. >> Kristen Canara Oliver. Yes. >> John Bras. James Winsky. Yes. >> Rick Manceni. Yes. >> BJ McDonald. Yes.
>> Joey Bentley. Yes. >> And everybody have a wonderful Thanksgiving. >> You too, honey.