Welcome to the community preservation committee meeting being held at one government center city hall hearing room uh at 6:00 uh April 27th, 2026. 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. Attendees 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 left. Michael Thearius, >> Alex Silva,
>> John Bryant, >> James Hornsby, >> Rick Mansami, Chris Benvites, BJ McDonald, >> and we're missing uh Christine Olive. We also have in attendance Craig from FRGTV and Sandy Dennis, administrative assistant >> and and we're missing Joanne
>> and Joanne Bentley is not here. Uh no citizen input. Uh we don't have the minutes from March 16th. So, can I have a motion to move table till next meeting? >> I'll make a motion that we table the minutes till the next meeting.
>> Second. >> Roll call. >> Okay. Roll call then. Um, >> still need a vote. >> Okay, let's vote. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I I All right. Um,
next on the agenda is uh um out of cycle funding discussion which used to be what we called our emergency uh funding. Um my idea with the changing the name was um emergency is I think for
us to do the work I think it takes too much and if it's an emergency I think that's by far past emergency needs but out of cycling opens up for housing projects land acquisitions and say something becomes before it's a shovel
ready that has uh matching uh funds coming from another agency that we wanted to entertain. It gives us the option of uh kicking that out of cycle. So, uh I thought we would discuss that. We also have uh in that we went back to
Alex's uh plan that he sent us um a while back on voting to see if it would uh come before us as a project. So, >> I know I've handed them out before. Does anyone not have it and would like it? So
I change I changed the language to out of cycle from emergency and I added like the the out of the the acquisition part to the language. Um but other than that it's the same as the old copy. >> Do you have an extra copy? >> Yeah. I have I don't have it here.
>> It's in your packet. It's >> in your package. >> This is okay here. Yeah, the one of >> it I think it just gives us the benefit of uh looking at some projects that might come later in the season. Um now
if it is close to like when everything else is in cycle, I think we would just group it with the rest of the applicants if it comes in after o September. Uh, but if something comes in midsummer that, you know, I'm just saying like the park gets a grant for 50% and needs
something from us, >> it'd be worthwhile taking a look at it, you know. Uh, and then housing, that's always a priority. That's something that can't be uh planned on. Land purchase, again, can't be planned on. So, coming in out of cycle, I can see that being uh
worth projects looking at. So, you guys have discussed this before. Yeah, >> I just want to uh thank Alex for pulling this together. I think this looks great. I think this gives us opportunities and you're absolutely right. Uh timing is uh
inevitable when it comes to especially housing and other projects and when grants come in. So I think there's a couple >> can't hear you. Could you talk to the microphone? >> Yes. I apologize. I just said thank you to uh Alex for this and I think that this is a uh a good mechanism in which
we can evaluate uh based on uh projects and not just on a deadline or a schedule. So I think this is great >> for that I >> Okay, any other good? >> Yeah,
I have a couple of comments. I like the improvement. Okay. I was prepared to vote against an emergency. Um, what isn't clear is this a one-step
I think it should be a two-step thing or we should consider two things at the same meeting. In other words, we haven't um for example for an historical item, we have to determine that it's historical. Well,
what would happen is we would get the application would be submitted to us. Then we would vote at that meeting to whether proceed with it or not proceed with it. So that would give us the time to do our research and homework on it and
then we would go from there. >> Okay, that's what I was asking. Y >> not not in all not in all cases but in many uh in fact I'm going to say most we find that the applicant generally uh
presents to the historical commission prior to and gets a letter of support and usually there's a letter of support supplied to this board so that assists Jim Right. >> But there might be other reasons for
wanting to do it in two steps. >> Yeah. >> Normally there's an ex the regular procedure has two steps. I'm just making sure we follow. >> Yeah. >> The same kind of steps >> out.
>> This uh Jim, this might I'm a little extra loud. I think um this might uh address or at least it's it's in line with what you're saying. So, one of the changes that I made um since last time uh if you go to like the category pages,
the second category was changed to time sensitive or time sensitivity and previously that was I I had it as CPA eligibility um which may have previously answered your or alleviated your concern. However, I swapped it and we
could add it back. It could be just another category as well, but I took it out because I think CPA eligibility should be like the precondition to applying. So, it shouldn't really be involved in like the scoring. It should be like is it eligible? Yes. No. And
then it moves on to this is what my understanding or what my thoughts I guess are of it shouldn't should being. Um, so that could be done one of two ways. Like, you know, the an el a traditional eligibility application could be submitted along with this. It could be like a two application
submission sort of thing or it could be, you know, one submitted before the other as as normal. >> Yeah, that's I prefer this pretty much the same format. >> Yeah, we would get the application submitted, >> the eligibility application, >> and then we would do this part to make
it go to the next meeting. So we'd have two meetings, >> right? We would get the the the eligibility, then we would do our voting and then the next meeting we would move on. >> Yeah.
>> Just a quick question. Uh similar to the historical preservation, you get you obtain a letter or the applicant uh typically obtains a letter for a historical preservation. Uh does that apply also for affordable housing? Do we go through I know Joanne's not here, but
um have we had that in in the sense of uh if it's going to meet a certain standard of affordable housing, would they get a letter of recommendation as well? >> We normally if we get something from housing, I'll call Mike Dion for his input on it. >> Okay. Thank you. >> From CDA. >> CDA.
>> Thank you. >> Being that our expertise, you know, I I I tend to lean on him on that matters. We haven't had too many applicants come before us. So, >> but we would seek uh his advice on that. >> That doesn't mean we can't make it a new
requirement. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Just because I know uh there are different avenues or what they call affordable housing, whether it's workforce housing, affordable housing, there's a whole u matrix associated with that at the state and federal level. So,
but if you could obtain like a just a simple letter from uh the local housing authority, that would be great. >> Yes. >> Thanks. >> Okay. Good. >> Any other comments? >> Does somebody want to make a motion?
>> I have one comment to add land acquisition to the open space. Well, that's under open space. >> Yeah, but it wasn't. >> Okay. Make a motion. Make a motion to accept the out of cycle
funding determination rubric and evaluation toolkit. Do I have a second? >> I'll second that motion. >> Okay. Roll call. Start to left. >> Michael Ferris. Yes. >> Alex Silva. Yes. >> Yes. I just don't need >> Yes.
>> Rick Mansini. Yes. Chris Benze. Yes. >> BJ McDonald. Yes. >> All right. Um, next is uh um that form in there, Sandy. The uh >> I put all three in there. >> Okay.
uh the project reimbursement uh disc oh discussion we had uh um with the uh rowing club um they needed money to
get the project started but we sign off work has to be completed uh so we thought we would discuss that um on how we feel with moving on that um
do we add a line uh in the completion where um we hold back 10 15% and pay and then when the project's done we finish the rest of the payment we add that in the line good practice
generally dictates that there is a a percentage held back till the completion of a project so that should be part of are this >> I I would make this a pretty much industry standard would be as follows. Um depending on the level of input you
have from a professional like so for instance if you don't if you've gone through the process of hiring somebody and they've done construction documents or write through bid documents the minimum that they usually put aside is 10%. So for instance, that's 100% of documents that are supposed to be no
errors in omissions. And so uh typical professionals if there is an error in emission, they have insurance for that. They miss something on their part, it's on them that you could go after them. So what I would suggest is perhaps 20%
uh hold back based on what level it is because you know once it's given away, it's kind of like a construction loan. you giving the money away and and the work is not done or it's not completed. It's a better safety net for us at the end of the day. So, um but that's that's
what I would at least minimum of 20% on a a hold back on that until the the the project has been authorized and and you've gone through and done a walk through and did a punch list and everything is done. So, >> but we also just pick up on that, we
also do not pay, we only pay on invoices, which is again a protection for us. It's not that we pay in advance. You know, the the payments are made, the project is is looked at, the percentage is done, you agree, they submit an
invoice, then that gets paid. So, you you're not pushing a lot of money up front, which is a good thing. you know, so 20% 10% that would be that would be more than adequate. >> Okay. So, we should put another line in
that uh um payment for upfront 20% held back till completion of the job. Is that what we're agreeing on? >> Well, I don't believe so. Thank you. >> Okay. Just because Go ahead, Jim.
Go ahead. Um I just ask if um this would necessitate a second vote of the city council. I don't think it would, but I want to just double check that as far as we know because they would approve
the funding. >> Well, no, that the funding's already been approved. Uh >> right. But that okay they would improve they would approve the entire amount >> and then we would disperse it at our discretion. Is that >> right? Well the thing is you have the
problem with uh the rowing club where they need to get paid. >> Well I was going to get to that. That's really a separate issue. >> Well that's the issue. Well that's why we were discussing it because uh >> it might come up again. So, we thought we'd bring it up for discussion because
>> so the rowing club was quite clear. They needed the money. The the person building the dock. The company building the dock wanted the money and we said we we'd send it. When the thing was done, the dock people said we need to have it
in advance. I actually offered to loan them half the money. This is to Mr. uh forget his name. called something at of all places my bank where he's an executive but I'm
offering him a loan but the the the problem is real for them. >> Yeah. >> They didn't have $50,000 you to upfront. Is there a way through that? >> Well, that's what we're discussing now. >> There's got to be a way. Possibly an
exemption by unanimous vote or something like that. Could couldn't or shouldn't the uh company have just sent a invoice bill for the materials that could have been paid and then they could have been sent over
>> in advance? Yeah. >> As an advance >> like just sent the invoice for the material. >> So that what was the problem then? >> Problem is the invoice is for the supplies, >> not construction and the labor, >> right? And we've always reimbursed on
each portion of the project being completed. Then it's it's looked at to make sure it meets Secretary of Interior standards. And then >> if it Yeah. Not for this one. >> This is Yeah. This is a This is a different situation. They sent the I've got the invoice. The
invoice is more than they have left. So, it's not going to get paid in full anyway. But they can't order these and do the job. >> Could you sit here? I can't really hear what you're saying. >> Rick, next time Jim talks, do you need a mic for him?
>> And there's a mic right there. Thank you. >> I was just explaining the rowing club how we did get the invoice, but the invoice basically is so that they can get the supplies to actually put the docks in. Um, and we've always
reimbursed an invoice when the job is completed because the CBC member has gone to the project site and reviewed the project and signs off that it met Secretary of Interior standards. Like Jim said, this is a little different.
There's nothing to review to see it meets Secretary of Interior standards because they can't stop the job until they get the materials, which is what I have the invoice for. I haven't paid the invoice. And Joanne brought it up that
she she's CPC member on the job, so she I don't think feels comfortable signing off because there's nothing to review. So this is a this is >> traditionally contractors do the work and then they get paid for most jobs. So I don't understand what the problem is in this instance.
>> In my line of work it's actually the former >> how how Sy's describing it is typically how I am accustomed to seeing work done. Usually there's an advance of payment to secure the resources in order for the services to then be rendered. Right? So
it's not out of the ordinary that you are describing it the way you are. In the instances that some industries or companies do it that way. I'm I'm not so concerned with that method if that makes sense. So if it becomes a vote for us to say hey this vendor looks clean like I
think you know if we go ahead and advance the payment I think we're going to be safe with our money and services. I mean that's probably an okay >> method on occasion where that's the stipulation of the company or the vendor providing the service >> because they're not going to stop. >> Not that that's our stand right. They
won't start the job. Exactly. >> And I think in this case too there's probably not many dock building >> vendors. They probably don't have a million different choices >> or labor to just secure. They probably are backed up on jobs. And yeah, >> I would I would um boil it down to this
because I've done these types of projects. I would say on materials to order them because a lot of materials of this nature have to be ordered in advance that you could do 100% of cost of material. >> They were ordered though and paid for.
That that wasn't the problem, right? >> We haven't. >> Yeah. So once you get once you get their receipts, so they can order them, but you have to have receipts of purchase um from them and then you can pay that component of it. And to help with the stipulation cuz you are trying to
schedule this stuff is that maybe you have a percentage will will allow up to 10 to 20% to schedule the project, the the labor component of it to put it on the books for them. And then once the project or phase portion is done, then
you pay that component to it. So for instance, you're really paying the labor component, the 20% say um in advance. You're giving them the money, you're putting it down, you're saying, "Schedule this. This is the time frame associated with it." You already have
receipts of the materials already being bought and they're either on site or at their warehouse. And then their their their second uh would be the next phase of work that they do. So they typically do you know again uh 25% 50% 75% and
then the final billing of a project. So that would protect us because when you know that the materials were bought and and you'd be surprised like cuz a lot of this stuff has a long lead time and then two you've given them 20% to schedule it and they have the people power to do the
work and so that's already paid the first invoice that they would have for labor and then you know again they continue to you know send it out after that. So that doesn't necessarily help the situation where you're saying they don't have enough to finish the project. So
there isn't going to be a subsequent invoice or anything. This is essentially the total sum of the allocation >> because I what I did is in your packet I included the invoice that has been received from the company. So I' I've included that in your packet. I've also
included the piece that Jim forwarded me on the docs. It's right here. Um, and as you can see, um, I also broke down how much we've already
paid them for the project and how much money they have left. And you'll notice that the invoice exceeds how much they have left from CPC. >> Are they aware of that? >> They are. I've Yes, I've made that very clear in all my emails to them. um that
this is how much money you have left in your project. >> So is this is this the um 202181 in the amount of $69,365? That was the invoice paid. >> And so you have 128947
with $1,950 invoice paid. And then you have a balance of 60,000 $60,685 >> remaining. So that that spreadsheet tells me that. But what was the total allocated for the project?
>> Oh. Um 185. >> Yeah. Uh I'm going to look it up right now. >> Do you have the invoice the the newest invoice? >> That's the newest. You have the latest invoice. I I gave you all a copy of the most recent um invoices.
>> Do you have I will >> I have two of the same ones. So, I think I'm missing one. >> No, there's two. Yeah, you I just >> Oh, it's the same one. So, I think >> I copied everything. >> The one. >> Do you know what fiscal year that was by any chance?
>> I got it. Let me see. This this invoice is dated October 19th, 2023. >> Yes, >> that's the invoice. >> Okay. So, they were FY24. They were awarded $135,000. >> I don't I just don't see the newest invoice that exceeds the balance. I only
have the ones that were paid. Um, so do we know what the newest invoice is? Cuz if it's materials, I think that's fine. Um, >> so this is all they sent me. This is what this is what was sent for Joanne and Jim to sign off on.
>> So the 2023 invoice has not been signed off on. It >> says it was paid the same invoice. >> It is. Yeah, it is. >> Yeah, it is. >> It is. >> So there just we don't have that invoice yet. So we can't even really look at this. Okay. Cuz I think past presidents and my opinion I would say is
ordering materials is fine. um that's what we've done I think in the past and if the applicant is aware that you know they don't have the remaining balance that's on them there's no um pre-existing condition that you know they can get additional funding or
anything they should be planning for that accordingly I don't see any problem to signing off on a material you know invoice um we can make a condition or something of it being one final inspection after the work is actually done since there's not going to be a
final invoice, >> right? >> You know, like I don't know if that's in the actual close out that that close out application we have before us. Um, but it could be it could just have an added part that says final walkthrough, you know, sign off sort of thing. Just one final signature from the committee
member. >> Yeah, I have no issues with with that statement. But could we go back to the original problem set? I thought I thought we were I thought we were discussing the payment of services for services not yet started. >> Right. They're going to have to pay for those services because we just have
enough money now for them to finish ordering their supplies. And I don't know if you want to hold 10% back from that until the job's inspected. >> I >> that's up to the committee. >> But they're not going to be able to order if you hold back 10% of an invoice for materials. They're not going to be able to order.
>> That's what I was saying. I don't >> I'm fine with paying for materials. Okay. >> It's, you know, it's >> it's on like if they if it's an escalation that wasn't planned for, there's usually a 10 to 20% contingency already built in with the numbers they send us. So, it should be covered in
that. And if not, I mean, we're under no obligation. >> Okay. >> They can submit an application the next year if they need if they need another phase. But, you know, >> so Joanne and Jim can basically sign off on this. >> Just make sure Well, make sure we have the in like the invoice cuz I don't think this is it unless I'm
misunderstanding. sign off on 63,685 not even >> well yeah just less >> like when when the reimbursement paperwork is filled out just the total won't be the full invoice total will be the she'll have to know the grant amount total so just if you could make sure that's clear
>> yeah so when they fill out this paperwork it'll be the um certificate of completion they're going to have to put just the amount that they have left which is what I'll give them because >> 638 they're not going to get reimbured for their invoice voice. >> So, they're going to sign the
certificate of completion even though the project isn't complete because we're zero and out. >> No, no, no. I wouldn't I wouldn't have them sign. So, that's the you want them just to do the certificate of payment request. >> Yes. I think they should do a certificate of payment request for the
invoice for materials and then once you know the committee receives notification of project completion, then they get the final sign off. Um the the kind of rub I guess is that there's no funding that you know is potentially being withheld but if the
project isn't completed um there might be something in the grant agreement you know for the when that that switch where the committee can re >> reclaim the funds you know through legal action which >> I I've just got a quick question here. So when I'm looking at this simple uh
matrix here, it's just the four lines, it is the um uh invoice uh 20 uh 202181. So that was the amount of $69,365. Then you had another invoice for $1,950. Then you say there's a balance of
$63,685. You add that all up, that's 135, $135,000. So my question would be is if they're ordering materials now, typically the first thing you do is you order your materials. Where did this where did the $69,000 $365
go to? >> They did some work last year. >> Yeah, >> they laid the wiring and that stuff. They're finishing the dock this year. >> The buoys, remember the underwater buoys. That was explained I think when they asked I don't remember what >> they asked for an extension. >> They had those diagrams with the
>> Okay. the buoys on the floor of the pond that >> release. >> So is this total project $135,000? >> So the $135,000 now they're asking for the $63,685 just for the materials for the dock and
all the other work has been done. Okay. >> Because these are the two invoices we paid >> and then that's what their balance >> and it's it came before us just so I understand because we're basically going to zero out the grant. There's going to be no money left. No, >> but the project isn't necessarily done.
>> Well, they're going to buy See, my my concern with that is that you got the you got the material now, but you don't have any money to install it. >> So, you can kind of >> they've been fundraising, so they're going to that's possibility. >> Okay. >> But that was I was trying to understand how we got here,
>> but I think I understand now there's $63,000 left in their grant bucket. >> Yeah. >> And they need the money up front so that they can pay it. Y >> but we have never this board has never had a mechanism where we've zeroed out the grant before the work has been done
essentially is where we're at. >> We have never >> which I don't have an issue with fronting them in this case because they've already done >> part of it. It's not like they're not going to finish it. They're going to figure out a way to get it. >> Y >> you hope. >> You hope. Yeah. >> But I I think but I think with this
particular job I mean with >> you're you're on the water. You have a contractor who's already done >> Yeah. half of the work or you know a percentage of the work. Um I don't have an issue with it. >> Yeah. >> Rick. >> Yeah. Uh just a couple of thoughts that
that that are coming up here and one is uh one would think that probably from this group that a call would be made to to find out or to check on the integrity of the company. Are they a new company? because we're we're going to be
submitting a large sum of money to this organization. Um is it 6 months or have they been around? Are they well well established? So it gives us a little more confidence in relinquishing the funds. That's number one. The other is
I'm still in favor of holding back a percentage. Uh the 20% is good. 10% I would feel adequate with but 20% is even better. And the reason for that is when they someone enters these situations
with us, what they do is they know upfront they they allocated x amount of dollars but the project is much larger. They have to have cash on hand to proceed. So they should be able to supplement some of this with their own
cash on hand. And I'm very cautious in my thoughts with if we supply them with 100% of our contribution and the project is only I'm using numbers here I know but only 50% accomplished how are we
assured that the project is going to be completed if we hold back a percentage and let them use their own money >> that they were going to use to fill in that void >> and then we just at the end of the total project then give them the remaining
20%. It's an insurance policy for us that the project does get completed in total and and I understand all the other concerns about paying for materials ahead and maybe in that particular practice or particular organization
that's that's their practice but we too check the integrity of the company and secondly our own good I don't know confidence I guess holding back some funding and allow them to use
some of their money up front >> because that would that would have solved the problem. >> It it's almost that they should have had a phase two to this. And so of the $135,000 they've already gone through $71,315. And so now they're looking to buy the
materials for phase what I would call two because I don't see any money to do the work. Like if you spent $135,000 honest. Where where is the >> other invoice though? >> I'm sorry. >> We don't have the other invoice to say
what that 63,000. >> Well, I'm just saying. So, okay. That's a very that's a very good point. That's an excellent point. So, is that six the the remaining balance of $63,685? >> That's what's in there. We're just saying that's the balance. >> That's what they have left from us, but
they're in 80,000. >> True. True. True. Or it could be it could be $25,000 for materials and the other 40 is is for the labor. I don't know. Yeah, that's a good I I think these are just questions we need to get answered a little bit. You know what I'm saying?
>> Maybe just a different perspective. So maybe we should just perhaps change our thinking of project completion because there are projects where we're only funding parts of it, you know, or or partially funding a total of it. So, you know, there's plenty of scenarios that
come out where maybe we're funding the earlier half of it and we don't actually see the completion when we sign off of the total project. So we can look at it you know one of two ways where it's the holistic project's completion which you know depending on any number of
circumstances can be delayed like perhaps they should have invoiced for all the materials at once at the beginning um they might still be in this problem you know uh because of the multi-season work schedule um but there are you know partial project funding grants that we do um where it doesn't
happen so we could look at you know our project completion just being the expenditure of the full funding towards the the project that we awarded it to. Um if it comes down to situations where not everything was done that was originally pitched in the application
because of you know cost escalations and you know hard choices were have to make perhaps there's a section in the form the certificate of completion where you know it's just like scope that had to be excluded for whatever reason you know you know and then just committee members can identify whatever scope wasn't
included that the committee was expecting. So, say they apply in a next year or in two years for additional funding. At least that's documented and recorded about why they didn't finish the scope. You know, if it affects whoever's decision one way or the other, at least, you know, there's a there's a
path for it. Um, so I don't know if that helps anybody with this one or not. >> Well, the the first one was they they put in the lanes. So that was the work that we paid for already >> and that's done and they have no issues done but it was the same project that
they applied for you know one it was one grand to finish the project is the docks that's what they're doing now so they're asking for the funds to finish the docks and then they're going to pay for the >> the funds that they've already been awarded to do the scope that they were already approved
>> the work done which happens in a lot of cases >> and it's not a different contractor so it's the same one that's already started the same we vetted during that application process. You know, I think they said it was a leader in that four lined up so far this year. So, they uh
it's kind of timesensitive that it's done. So, >> so can we make a motion that uh you know pending the the invoice? Do we allocate the rest of this like the with the 10% hold that?
>> Well, do we have the invoice? Do we actually have that second invoice? >> We know what it costs. All I have here is what your remaining balance is. If we have a a breakdown like I would want to see an invoice. >> We have an invoice for the for the dock cost. Yes. Where is it?
>> It just needs to be submitted. >> I'll email them. >> Yeah. I I would we need to have at least a breakdown of what the materials are and what the installation is, which I mean that'd be fine. >> And that's normal. That's that's the normal process. I think we're going past. We already voted on what they're
going to get to 135. >> We're just trying to have decide. >> Well, we don't >> Jim's responsible for do we want to get them the responsibility on our hand to sign off >> on uh giving 20% holding 20% back?
That's our question. >> That's fine. >> I don't think it's I don't think it's uh um too much to ask for what the invoice is. If I saw if I saw a breakdown of materials in the thing, I would say, "Okay, this is great.
>> I agree with >> you get the invoice, I'm sure." >> Okay. >> Quickly, to Sandy, >> that the one of the problems with this is it's not usual, and John said something. We're buying a dock. >> Yeah. >> Um and essentially, we're buying a
second dock, which is needed because the current dock is too small for >> the regatas that the Those are laid out what they are. So there's not really they're not when there's no labor and they just get hit
with the $50,000 giving me the 50 grand ahead and as you point out there are not a lot of dock makers and they wanted the same dock from the same builder. Mhm.
>> So I I think a 20% hold back would be fine. I also think it ought to be rare and I think it should be an unanimous vote of this committee. >> Do do we know that the 20% hold back will be like I agree with with you
Michael that the invoice is needed >> because in some instances some vendors don't like the 20% holdback is not in their policy. They they either need it all up front or nothing at all. So this this this discussion around 20% might be a moot point if we don't know how much
we're we're funding for. So in other words, if we know exactly how much we're funding for, >> we and and we know whether or not the policy 20% is workable for the vendor, then we can vote on it. But if we don't know what the number is, nor do we know if the vendor will accept a 20% hold
back, we're going to vote on something that's just going to get squashed the minute we leave. So >> Jim, you said $50,000 would solve the problem. I think so because so >> I now see 69 there and I'm not sure anymore. >> So if there's 63 in there and we held
back 20 that's $12,000. So we could we could technically tonight say we'll advance 50,000 hold back the 13 cuz that's the remaining balance >> provided providing that they submit a >> provided they submit the invoice that solves the problem I think. Yeah, I have
no issues with um funding materials at all like on a project especially with lead time to it 100%. But we haven't seen an invoice of what this money is and that's and and again I think if if you're saying it's $50,000 that they need >> seen the invoice.
>> So they have the invoice in there and have the receipts that the material has been purchased and and and submit that like that's not a problem whatsoever. If there was an issue with like I need to schedule this and I need to I need a 20%
or 25% down then that's okay as well. But but what I'm saying is I we haven't seen I haven't seen an invoice. I haven't seen what the materials are. We haven't purchased it yet. You need the money. So that's all I would say is the first thing. Get the invoice.
>> We'll review it and then we'll we'll submit the $50,000 if that's what they want. 20% at this time is really an insurance policy for us. That's what it pertains. That's that's what it is. >> The issue though with submitting the invoice is that we have to wait a month. >> I think we're agreed on the 20%.
>> Are we are we fine with Jim getting an invoice and paying holding back 20%. >> Yes. >> And 20% of the remaining balance, not the grant award amount, right? I don't think it's so I don't I don't think it's so we need to see the invoice obviously but usually that's at the discretion of
the committee member I think if the invoice is just for materials and it exceeds the grant amount then perhaps we need to have this discussion but if the invoice is broken up you know Jim in a way that it's just the materials and it's under it's under the amount then
they can just order the materials they'll still have some money they'll know how much money they need they can work on funding it they don't have to wait for the materials to be ordered and then they could fund raise and expend the rest of the funds as they see fit for project completion. No 20% needed because we always fund materials
in full ahead of time so they can get ordered. That's always that's always traditional. So I don't I don't really see the need to withhold 20%. I don't see the need to vote on anything unless unless there's material costs are exceeding the amount and they can't make the order because they don't have enough money. And if they can't pay for it,
then that's not really that's not really our our issue. >> That's correct. for this. >> So, Jim, just get the updated invated paper out. >> Just break it up, you know, >> or or or if they can't break it up, you can just submit the full invoice and
only pay the amount of materials. >> See, they did not write the invoice. The dock company wrote the invoice. Okay. But, >> uh, it's possible the dock company said, uh, we will we will build and install a dock. >> Okay.
That's okay. Invoice from the >> That would be some labor. So that's why I >> And just to be clear, you don't Jim, you don't even have to have them send two invoices. If you have the invoice and it's clearly broken out for the materials and they tell you how much the materials is. You can just attach the
invoice and then, you know, fill out the amount only as much for the materials. You don't have to like wait for a new, >> you know. I bought docks and on you buy a dock. It's almost the same way you buy a car. >> You don't there's no
very little install. The insulation is proper in the in the water on on top of the uh things that hold it up. But I will we'll get it to Sandy. And um thank you. Do we need a vote on that? >> No. >> Okay. >> So when I get the paperwork signed off
by Jim and Joanne, then I'll pay the invoice. >> Okay. And just, you know, pay extra attention to >> Yeah. because I never pay invoices that exceed >> and I don't know. Yeah, I would like to get it in by the next
anyway next regata. All right. So, stuff about I did include uh just because we had a uh just for a little more paperwork uh
uh tracking form when we uh recall a grant. Uh just to have everything a little more uh paperwork wise. just it's just a a sheet that has the project name uh year
funded uh primary person uh contact log who is uh on the project uh we we'll list the dates that we email send a letter phone meeting all that would be documented then a checklist from uh um
community chair and the community members that are checking on the project. So this way we have it. >> Do we have that in our packets? >> Yeah, that's in your packet. That way we have it on file. Just a little extra paperwork for our our benefit of
you know most of our agreements follow the uh but you know just to have a little extra protection of paperwork and we can show people that we did our due diligence. Okay.
>> Okay. >> Yeah, that's fine. >> I think everything is that looks >> I I I wouldn't even mind having that uh being public knowledge. I mean, if they know
>> it' be on the web page. Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah. All our paper all of our paperwork's on the web page. >> Okay. >> So, if you don't if you ever need to download a copy of something, >> it's on the web page. >> Perfect. >> We have nothing we hire on CPC. It's all
on our It's not It's more for It's more for the populace than it is for us, I think. That way they know where the money's going, who's kind of overseeing it, and >> people have >> create a nice paper trail of like if things go on for years and years,
>> how many times they were contacted. >> And so the expectation is that once they receive whatever uh communication, they'll sign this and get it back to us every time.
Uh no that's just for us to um >> like the bottom part for the signatures of the grantee is so when do they sign that >> whenever there is um an action? >> So whenever they receive something like
an email they assign like we'll send this every email and they sign this >> we'll track their emails. We'll track the letters go out to them. Did they respond to you? No they did. So when you have a particular issue, so you could have one issue with just one sheet, you
know what I mean? So it doesn't have to be you sent an email, they sign, they send an email, they sign, you send another phone call, they sign. It it's per issue. It should be this is up to you all how you want it. Um I just did a draft. You can pick and choose how you
want to use it and what you want on here. How I see it personally is it's per issue because occasionally you're going to run into issues with projects that you're going to have to justify what you've done as a committee
and a committee member. This again is another insurance policy for you all to make sure that you're >> acting on an issue or a problem. someone can't come back and say you didn't do this when in fact you did do it because
you signed off on it. >> This way people say like ah did we email did we call them? We have it >> where we can go back and say yes we did email this time and we called >> committee members assigned to it went and called. So we did our our best to
>> try and you know solve the problem whatever. >> This is a this is a rough draft. This is like the first draft that I I did for all of you. You can change it, add to it, make it however it's going to be easier for you all to use. And you can
pick and choose how you want to use this. >> So I was going to ask I notic there are two different copies. >> No, this just one copy. >> Oh, okay. Sorry, I was looking at the uh certification. So this >> this is a lot of like extra
administrative work or you thinking it's going to be something you can take off handle. Well, we've only ever recalled too long. So >> So is it just Well, it's not just for that, you know. It's for a lot of other potential inspections. It's almost for like every communication we send about
>> not even just problems, but like So I'm a little concerned it's a little too much. Um but if we have time to look at it, I like to sit with it. It might be like you saying that it you're thinking of it as an issue related form. I think there's changes that can be made in that regard. Like perhaps there's a log where
you just list the communications and they sign off like once a month or once every something f like once every while not every communication because I can foresee you not getting these signed almost all the time and then like what is that going to do? was just how many more emails are you going to send to
have them sign this, you know? So, uh, one other thought is if it's not issue related, it could be just like the the applicant related and in which case it's more like a log as well of like the issues and you could even break it down by contacts. So, there just two possible
ways. you all if you all look at it and you can all decide how you want to use it and then you can let me know and then I'll implement it however it is you all want to use this form. >> Yeah, >> it could be like tying to uh the project
updates that the committee member give like every time it's something warrants an update this is submitted on the agenda day you know and it kind of details the contact history too. >> Yeah. because the the nature of sending emails or text messages is in in and of
itself a log. So you already have that documented in theory or actually in practice. Um so yeah, I kind of agree it's a little bit redundant in that sense. >> Yeah, it should it should be just like the milestones like >> should be milestones, right? >> Because I I I've reached out for the the
um children's museum roof and they're still in the process of doing what they said they were going to do. So it's really that you don't need a updated report on that. But if there's a milestone like they just found something that was needs to be addressed then that would be a milestone. >> My thought pattern on this was for when
we resend uh a grant that we do have >> you know. >> So not necessarily every project we would need to use it on but projects that are >> you know. >> Yeah. No, no, no. I think I think this is a good uh working >> because this way when we sit down with
whoever we're discussing it with, we have it in writing that this is how we contacted them. This is why we're resending it. And >> yeah, so another way to think of it, um, if I were to apply this to more of like a business term, it's like if you have someone going on a performance
improvement plan, >> that's typically when you start documenting all of the activity based on achievement or progression. So in this sense, if we are starting to see that we're going to resend money, then all of a sudden we start enacting what would you consider like a performance
improvement plan. We're documenting specifics as opposed to maybe normal >> form of business. So I can understand I can understand why that would happen in this instance for the application where it becomes a little bit more redundant but necessary >> and that would likely start with a project update meeting. So it would
start with there and then each time it's updated you just add any past communications that >> are notable since the last uh update. >> Yeah. Yeah. Great. >> Okay. All righty. Let's see. Moving on to uh deed restrictions.
Here we are. Do you want me to come up and explain it? >> Yeah, come up and explain. Uh, >> okay. Basically, what I did is I just did an update for all of you because, um, I wanted everybody to know where you stand with the D restrictions that have
been filed with the attorney. Um, so I gave you a one sheeter, which tells you nothing because it's just an address. So, I knew it said nothing, so I broke it out for you all. Okay? And basically
the top portion, Third Street, Rock Street, Rock Street, Pleasant Street, Troy Street, Middle Street, Central Street, North Main Street, Pleasant Street have all been um filed. The ones at the bottom, 162 to 170, has not been filed. It's an
affordable housing, and I I put an explanation. Um John's actually been following up on that. North Main Street, which is the Children's Museum. They've had a change in staff over there. So, the check was
cut. It was sent to them. They didn't send it to the attorney. It needs to be followed up with a little bit more. I've been working with them to find out in finance how we can get a new check cut and stop payment on the first one that they said they never got. So, anyway,
that's going out the Children's Museum. Um, San's shrine. They just need the second deed restriction signed. Rock Street, which is a school administration building. Um, the check was mailed. I've left voice messages waiting to get messages back. I'll probably do a
physical visit there to find out why they haven't sent the check to the attorney. Um, Freedom Street, that is because they were awarded 150, but in this next appropriation order is the remaining $500. So, if the city council
approves this year's appropriation order, then they can get their remaining $500 so that they can pay the attorney for their deed restriction. Uh, they've been on top of it. Um, but it's not their fault. Uh, Prospect Street, Little Theater, um, their payment's going to go
out soon. A lot of this that's contingent to, I believe, on the appropriation order. And then of course you have a whole host of deed restrictions that are in this year's appropriation order. So until the city council approves that appropriation order, those deed restrictions are on
hold. The attorney hasn't drafted them. I haven't contact the attorney to draft them. There's no reason that we need him to draft deed restrictions if the city council doesn't approve the appropriation order. So that's where we stand. And I just wanted to give you kind of a little bit of a breakdown um
on what's happening with them because most of them have been filed. Rick and Rick and I have met with John. John's been in contact with John Coughlin. Um but I thought it would be a good idea to just do a quickie update for the committee just so you know where they're all standing restrictions.
>> Okay. >> Uh next uh project update. Uh start down if anybody has any >> uh yeah I as I said they're still in the process of doing the evaluations on the roof for the children's museum and then
the other one is the windows and they're still just in the order process. So it's still on track. >> Uh I don't have any big updates. Uh, I think Rick's going to talk about the central fire station, which is the only one I have, so I'll defer to him. If I'm
wrong, Rick, I can >> I know, uh, actually on the central fire station and the fire museum, me and Rick are meeting with Ala tomorrow. Uh, we only had a concern about the central because
Troy Street is uh, city funded. So, we want to kind of make sure they follow Secretary of Standards >> and Rick probably can speak a lot more to this. There's a couple more issues like it's it's a whole other architect from the side. >> That's why we're meeting with them
tomorrow on that. So, um the windows were ordered for u the fire museum. Uh they're going to be installed uh this month. So, that is >> anything on the little theater uh the
roof on that component of it. the last uh >> Well, does I'm sorry. >> Does Jim have anything? >> You have any other update? >> I do, but let him go and then I'll do it. >> No, no, I have >> Go ahead. You're quick, guys. >> All right. The uh the only update is the
rowing club and we you saw the paperwork. You have the paperwork about three large regatas. Um and they're going on. One was last Saturday. I watched and I counted
at between 7 and 9:30 in the morning 22 different boats going up and down. >> Um, two things just for the be sure the television audience particularly. One is
that kids are free in this program. And the second one is that there what was the second one? I just wrote it down. That's okay. This big one was the
Oh, yeah. The um there were two more regatas. And one of the reasons we're getting the riatas is because we are an Olympic size >> pers
course. That's the word. That's the word. Course >> and that's the update. >> I think we have the uh the Navy >> and uh we have a Charles River Club coming down. Yeah, I I just had I it's
on your paper that you have and I can't find my paper from the guy from Jeff at the rowing club. >> Yeah. >> But one of the one the past one was colleges. >> It was I didn't realize they were colleges. They looked to me like middle
school children, but getting older. >> It'll make them like they used to. >> Okay. All right, Rick. >> Okay. Well, just briefly, our little theater has a a contractor come in who is a special has a specialty in slate
repair and uh he rented a lift and worked for a week just uh checking the roof, did many repairs. Uh and I did speak to him and his comment to me was uh once this roof is repaired, the slate
will give you another hundred years. So actually it was a good decision by the little theater people and the cost according to even the contractor should be less than cost of an asphalt roof repair or replacement. Uh Gail Powers
was going to who's pretty much acting as the project manager for Little Theater. We'll be getting back to uh John and I uh with a letter explaining everything and cost and things of that nature. So that should be forthcoming.
So the any questions good update >> central uh station uh they had or they invited Alex and I are both involved in that project and neither one of us had been to any meetings at all. Uh and
there was a zoom meeting last week uh and we had an invite. Uh it was a very short meeting. Um but there were two architects working on this project. There's the architect who's working on the Bedford Street. >> Just just to be clear, there's two
architects working on the building. There's one architect working on our project, our CPA project. >> There is the separate city project with a separate architect. So it's not our architect. >> Yep. And um so it but it's one big meeting now because they have an OPM
handling the project as a whole. So we will be involved on a pretty regular basis at this point. And Anowan uh the fire museum number six is going to be putting in windows. Uh
the architect was scheduling a meeting uh that was supposed to transpire probably in the last probably now six weeks now. Uh, and that's forthcoming. >> Okay,
>> Chris, anything updates? No, >> just one question. Uh, anything on the arts association? Do we um Who's overseeing that one? >> I don't know. Uh, who's overseeing it? But I was by there Saturday. They have the new spindles they put in the railing.
>> Okay. >> So, they are working on the porch rough. The spindles are new. So, they're just starting. So, it's still rough. >> Okay. >> But, uh, they have a, uh, Bear who was, uh, heading up the construction, isn't
there's a new guy doing it. So, uh, I don't know who has I think Chris has that. >> Kristen and I. >> Yeah. So, >> she'll probably check back in on that. >> Hopefully, they are because there comes up in August.
>> So, they need to get on. They were going to be putting putting that ramp up there which is which is the better choice than that electric lift that was going to destroy the porch. Uh because there are again interior secretary of interior standards that have to be maintained
with that building. Uh the drawings have not been supplied. Um they were to be supplied last fall. So I'm sure they're forthcoming with the weather breaking. >> Thank you. The only update that we had had Michael was the u block windows the email we had
sent out. So nothing other than that yet. >> You do anything? >> No. >> Okay. Uh okay. Uh new business. We do have the uh meeting uh with the city council tomorrow. Uh we just need like
four of us. I know Rick, me, Alex, and then Chris is going to be going. the rest if you want to go and participate in the you know we can only have four of us down because we can't have a full committee. Um not sure what is on their agenda. Uh but uh
>> it well it says on the city agenda to talk about um like city priorities for future projects I think. >> Well they have to appropriate the money that we've already allocated. >> That's on the agenda after >> that's on after. I I hoping they're taking this advantage time to uh capital
improvements to include us with uh the capital improvements because like the park lead and the uh uh father Kelly Park is also under the capital improvement and CPA. So hopefully they're >> well hopefully they incorporate you a
little sooner. They had you sit there for five hours the other night and then objected to it. So >> yeah, it is early in the agenda tomorrow. >> So it is at six o'clock. We do have uh six or seven uh applicants coming to uh speak up on our behalf uh their projects
to move on. So uh uh they'll be there just to give us a little support and it's a good support for them because uh they can total CPA helped them out. uh you know little uh not little theater uh historical commission you know they raised $3 million and shipping society
and uh but uh you know so it's highlights them CD reps come in uh new windows the stuff they do for the kids you know >> uh DJ even wrote a nice letter to submit to uh yes I saw that >> you know um and then uh they wanted Stuart to come
down but it's just too short a notice and uh CP uh Stuart Norman doesn't get involved in the politics of uh >> they being the city council wanted Stuart come down. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Well, they asked him on Wednesday. >> Mhm. >> And they didn't send him the email till
Friday. So, and I called him and he goes, "I'm already booked all week." He did uh send a letter saying and uh he put uh that RCPC was planning on attending and CPC in Fall River is an experienced,
well-trained group. So, I know they will be answered any questions the CPA might arise. So, um but yeah, and Sandy put together a uh booklet that uh that looks good. You know, because the one thing the council doesn't think is we uh we
meet with uh heads of departments I do every July to get applications in. Um some years we never got any in like the parks. We got a new park director thanks to a new uh park direct uh chairman that's leaving. But uh you know he's
beginning to work with us. Dan's beginning to work with us with engineering. So it highlights uh if you start looking through this or we don't need to go through it. Uh it's more for your information, but out of our almost 20 million that we've uh funded, 11
million has been to the city. So this shows them breakdowns everything what uh happens uh uh kids uh you know to the children and stuff breaks down what the usage of the money goes to. So uh it's pretty ind
depth that should answer a lot of their questions that uh you know >> and it's good for us to know too somebody ask you you know where's the money being spent just look right there and parks everything historic. Um, so
we have that. And also I I do want to say that uh BJ's last meeting and >> thank you. >> It's been a pleasure serving with you. We're going to miss you. >> You know, the park department's really going to miss you, but uh >> I'm sure we'll be all right.
>> We thank you for your services and uh best of luck on your move. >> Thank you. You know, is it fair to ask what you >> I'm just moving out of town. So, my even if I wanted to stay on, I wouldn't be able to because I won't be a full river
resident as of the end of next month. >> Oh, okay. >> So, no hard feelings. All good. Appreciate everything everyone did, but just had to move on. >> That kind of >> Thank you. Thank you for your service. I just wanted to give a quick kudos. I
received an email yesterday and it was actually on um the review of the Fall River Historical Society and it was phenomenal. It was a 20-minute interview. Um it basically went through what we provide for our services so that
they can get that project done. But it was um it was pleasantly uh surprising and uh definitely a good watch and that's what I was looking for where the website is, but I haven't found Don't they have something on Wednesday at PCC? >> They they do. Yeah, they do. Uh but this
one was actually just to talk about how they got the funding, what they did with the funding and what the purpose of this and and I was actually blown away with the fact that um with being a gateway city, the level of expertise that we
have here in the city and the level of expertise that they're putting into that particular museum. um it basically outshines even some of the uh more uh affluent um parts of the state and in the country in the sense of you know
historical preservations and even the uh different types of things that you will see on display there. So it's very very um uplifting. >> Yeah, good job. Um anything else? >> All right, can I have a motion?
historical think Roger Williams. >> No motion to adjourn. >> I'll make a motion that we adjourn. >> Second roll call. >> Michael Parish. Yes. >> Alex, yes. Yes. And James, yes. Rick
Mini, yes. Chris Benites, yes. BJ McDonald, yes.