All right. Today is Tuesday, November 25th. It is just 4:30 p.m. This is the regular meeting of the CG steering committee meeting. Um, starting off announcement of open meeting recordings. Is anyone here
making a recording? Uh, besides staff, I see no mention of anyone. Uh, moving on to our public hearings. Um, first off we have FY2223 CDBG mini entitlement grant activity
budget changes transfer of 158,2652 in unused funds from the 205213 Main Street Demolition Project and the downtown phase 4 project to the Gardener Community Action Committee and the Massachusetts Veterans Outreach Center for Public Social Services. I'll pass it
on to Amy to introduce. >> So, as you know, we've been working to reallocate the little over 158,000 we have available from the 205213 Main Street demolition project and the downtown improvements phase 4 um
project. Both of those projects were completed under budget. So, we've been working to try to develop a plan to reallocate those funds. And given the current situation with um SNAP benefits and
heating assistance and other emergency assistance um coming from the federal government and an increased demand in the city for those services, after consulting with the folks at the Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing and Liverpool Communities and
Jason consulting with the mayor, we um decided that we would open up an application um process and send applications to both of the agencies listed here to see if they had a unmet need for public social services that
CDBG could fill. And in response, we have um their applications that are in your packet and also a summary of what they've applied for on the spreadsheet. and it gets us if we were to if you were
to approve um their funding requests, we'd be we'd have a little over $9,000 still left unallocated. The good news [snorts] is since our last meeting, we received an extension for our 2223 funds and we have until June 30th to expend
those funds. So, that takes a lot of pressure off. Um but we would want to execute agreements with these agencies right away and get the money out the door. and they both um when they when we sent the application to them, we confirmed with them that they'd be able
to expend the money very quickly. And we also talked about any procurement requirements that they would have to follow so they understand what those are. Um I can walk you through the requests if you'd like. Um
so the Gardener Community Action Committee submitted a request for a part-time staff position. That's a position that's currently funded with CDBG money that they use CDBG funds for through September 30th. They're waiting on they were part of our fiscal year 25
application. So, they're waiting for that money. So, they have a gap there and this would help them um fill that gap. They still have a need for that position. That position's critical to their operations and quickly responding to people's emergency needs, whether
it's food, clothing, um housing. They also requested the purchase and installation of a freezer and a new freezer and a new refrigerator. Um what they have now is over 10 years old. It's not efficient and it would be very
helpful for them to be able to store food, more food um for their recipients that use their program. They've requested funds to purchase a new cargo van van to um support their food transportation efforts. they pick up
food from the Worcester um food bank and this would allow them to do that much more efficiently. Currently they're renting a U-Haul or other truck to do that monthly. Um so that would be a real help to their agency. Um they also
requested money for additional shelving and a workt prep table for their pantry um to allow them to store more food and better serve their clients. and I think and more food. They also requested more non-p perishable and some
perishable food to restock because they've seen such a demand recently for their program. The final um request that they have is for heating assistance. They currently operate a heating assistance program through funds from the federal government that come through the state.
Um those funds may be reduced. If you've heard that in the news recently, there's that possibility. They've also experienced a greater greater much greater demand for those um that assistance this year than ever before. So, this would help fill any gap that they have there.
MVOC requested um support for their food pantry and clothing um pantry. They want to purchase more frozen food uh household cleaning supplies, winter clothing. They've had a big demand for winter clothing this year, particularly
clothing that people can wear uh to work. Um and their shelf stable food um that has been depleted and they'd like to replenish that with these funds. Program supplies for facilities. They've requested couch canes to help people
with mobility impairments um be able to move around more easily at their facilities. Um, six bed assist railings for their 268 Central Street and 55 52 Main Street permanent supportive housing project. 12 twin mattresses for their
268 Central Street transitional shelter program. The mattresses they have now are over 5 years old and they came to them used already. So, there's a big need for that. um two key keypad door locks for their 52 South Main Street
program that will help people who live there who have mobility issues not have to carry their keys around when they have other things they may be carrying or a walker assisted assistance devices um to easily access their their home.
They also requested um funds for a veteran reintegration activity program. This is these are activities that they carry out with the 12 people who live at the transitional shelter um to reintegrate them back into the community
after leaving the military. Um they've requested money for local activities, fly fishing classes, an overnight fly fishing trip, and a Red Sox game with tickets [clears throat] and transportation. So they they if you haven't read their application, they give a really good
example of how those uh activities have helped people reintegrate back into the community. Um it's very touching. So um any questions about what I've gone over, comments?
I think these are good. Um I think this is a good way to meet the need that we're currently seeing in the community. I know Julie and Stephanie have both uh spoken with me directly about the need that they're facing. Um so I think this is a good way to reallocate the funds and really meet the moment that we have with the funds that we have available. And I think this is actually what the
funds would be intended for. Um just for the purpose of the record, I will note that the CAC's um governing documents do say that the mayor does appoint someone to their board of directors. So I do appoint Miss Hillman who's here um to serve on their board um as my representative to their
board. Um but I don't foresee any issues with any of that either. >> Yeah, I I support um all the applications. I think both um applicants gave incredible detail for you know what each piece was which makes it our job that makes us not to have a lot to say
right now because um there's really not a lot of questions. It's very clear there. Obviously both organizations do this on a regular basis and um appreciate what what we are able to give them. Um, and kind of on the heels of the federal funding being up in the air for some of these things, I would want
them to I'm glad that this process was done um with um thoroughly and quickly like we can recognize the funding that was available, get the applications in, review them, you know, as meeting monthly helps us be able to do that in this committee.
Um I right now whatever kind of funding is out there I think should be in the hands of who needs it and can spend it as quickly as possible because you just don't know where it's going to go. Um we obviously have purview over this but um I you know I think you have no idea what's going to happen with federal
funding in the future as of right now. So um I support all of this. I think it's wonderful. I really appreciated this overview here um because it just makes it that line item by line and it makes again our job much clearer. Uh, and I
know that for the CAC piece of it, I was pleased to see the purchase of food in particular, um, because I know when the CAC gets when they get, um, funding for it, they they know best what they need,
so they can purchase it and they also um, have benefits because of the type of organization they are to be able to make that money go as far as possible. Whereas if the food is donated, um, you don't really know what their needs are. and you know it's so I think it's great that we're able to contribute to to to
fill what their actual needs are in that way. Um but again I'm support applications and I'm really grateful for Embuk and um CAC doing such a thorough job in submitting them. So thank you. >> Any other further comments? The only thing I'll just say I'm Julie
from the different part C and representing Mbach as a board member and we just want to first thank you for thinking of us during this and the investment is going to make an immediate impact into human lives right here in Gartner. Both our agencies are seeing unprecedented number of families coming
in looking for help with food, heating, clothing, reintegration activities. So thank you for your consideration um of both of our agencies for this. The only other thing I would like to to point out at the bottom um of your tables uh for the applications, it does
note that the CAC is going to be providing a 10% match for agencies. Uh that's due to the fact that 10 well actually 9% of the total uh recipients who receive uh benefits through the CAC
exist outside of gardener. So 91% are here directly in gardener and it was determined uh by EOHLC the governing body for this grant that up to 91% of the funding for these uh for any request from the CAC can be provided through the
grant funding. So they're actually going 1% above uh and beyond what is fully required um of providing the [clears throat] funds themselves to make sure that they are um seeing these projects through. you know, I the vast
majority of I mean, I think I've I've done the math correct here. $110,000 about is going directly to the CAC while about 38,000 is going to to MVOC. And I mean, the CAC is really the main food pantry uh and food bank that the city
has. Embach being the other one. Um and the the cargo van, I think, being one of the largest applications that you guys put forward. That's one of the main hindrances that you have is the fact that you can't transport all the food that you have. And this is allowing I think up to I think I read like 2,000
pounds of food >> uh per week >> that you would be able to to provide. And along with that, the the funds that you would be able to save that you're currently spending week to week renting out U-Hauls, Penske trucks, whatever whatever other rentals that that you you
gather, that those funds could then be re put back into your system uh rather than um you know, spent on unnecessarily unnecessary rentals. So, more than glad to to see that as a very just um just uh
application here. So, um, something I'd like to add to, and I think it, what Julie just mentioned, I think highlights how this is a really [clears throat] symbiotic application to with it too, and that there is a high level of collaboration between MVOC and the CAC with you being the executive director of
one and a board member of the other and set me on, you know, the both ways really making sure that it's a complimentary system and not something that tries to cannibalize off each other, but really have the best interest of the city at heart. So that's why I think this is more of a a real, like you said, an impact hit on daily lives right
now rather than something that may go one way versus the other. We know we're getting the full picture with this. >> We want to make it clear that the city watches out for itself regardless of what happens, whatever winds may blow and and whatever level that those winds
come from, whether it be state, federal, what have you, acts of God, like the city is going to watch out for itself. and if we have the ability to provide funds when times of need come such as this where SNAP funding was at risk that
we have the ability to you know pivot and allow there to be alternative funding that the city can help provide for those who need it most. So um was very happy to kind of help my assistant director in terms of getting this together. she really led led the charge
on on a lot of this. But, you know, appreciate all of the um as many have said, the um detail that you put into all these applications, each individual one. It makes our lives a lot easier. Um it makes this meeting a lot easier. So, really appreciate all the time and
effort both yourself and um director Marquetti has put into this. Um Dr. MarQuetti, sorry. Um, so with that, um, is anyone like to speak? Are there any other comments in favor
for the proposed transfer? Any other comments in favor of the proposed transfer? Any comments opposing the proposed transfer? I hear none. >> Do you need a motion on this? >> This is just the public hearing. We will
actually >> Do we actually have it further down? We need a motion on this. Okay. Um, then do I hear a motion on the proposed transfer? >> I'll take a motion to accept. Second. >> I hear a motion. I hear a second. All in favor to accept the proposed transfer of
$158,2652 to both the Gardner CAC and MVOC. Uh, say I. I. >> I. All oppose say nay. I hear none. The motion passes and uh meeting [clears throat] the the hearing is closed.
>> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Very nice meeting you. Good to see you
in person. All right, >> before we move on, just one quick um >> I wasn't sure where to put this, so I put um the income current income limits for CBD program here um because it kind of related to the work that's going to be carried out by these agencies. So,
just so you all have it, I know we talked about it the last meeting actually. Moving on to the next public hearing, we have FY2024 CG mini entitlement grant activity budget changes transfer up to $791,342.51
allocated to the school street school demolition project to a new Greenwood pool pavilion project and cancellation of the school street school demolition project. Pass on to assistant director. >> So in your packet you have a revised
estimate from Tyen Bond. Um this shows an estimated total cost of $782,970 which is um about a h 100,000 and change more than their um original estimate. And you also have a revised um rendering
of the proposed pavilion walkways landscaping. Um, I think that the increase in in cost is due to in part to the VA requirements, the by build America by America
requirements and also just the increase in construction costs that we're seeing. I did um based on our discussion at the last meeting, I did send um actually today so they didn't have much time to respond I um the folks at Tai Bond a
message asking about the lowing and seating and whether they thought um it was appropriate to carry that out as part of the demolition project and um you know how they wanted to proceed, get their input on that. So we'll hear back from them soon, I'm sure. Um, so we may
have some additional money left from phase one demolition if that if we do a change or take that out of their contract. Um, and we also have not um tapped into any of the contingency budget for that phase of the project. So there'll be some additional money there
unless something unforeseen happens. >> What was the total contingency budget? Was that time usually runs a little bit higher than this number right here? >> So it was 10%. Um, both I think the original the demo contract was 682,000 I
think. >> So I just want I think maybe I want to make sure I follow this correctly. So would that mean if if there would that mean this number the 782 970 could be lower? >> So phase one could be lower the 682,000
for the demolition that that we might not need as much money for that as we anticipated because of that contingency not being spent. Um but this could be lower too. again or this could be higher when we bid it, you know, it's an estimate. So, >> so I guess then my question is um or
probably should have been. Um so if we because I know this is about procuring for the 791 342. So would we be able to take would phase one balance out phase two? I guess I don't know if that's the right
question, but like cuz this is you you see what I'm saying? like this is like this is for the pavilion. >> Mhm. >> And this this school street demolition, this is for, you know, this is just taking this amount of money from this project and putting it over here.
>> So, it looks like we're going to have more money than we need >> if transferred. I just want that to be clarified. Yes, I recommend I mean I would recommend and it's up to you all, but I recommend that we allocate the full amount that we had um for school street school demolition to this project
just in case we bids come in higher than the estimate. And we've also um talked with Ty and Bond about um bid bidding some things as alternates um like the land some of the landscaping or the lighting so that we can get the pavilion
built no matter what just you know in case bid bids come in high. >> Okay. Thank you. That's >> yeah I um have a couple comments and uh questions as well. But just to start it off I guess for the benefit of the public watching and for the committee here too. Um, so we did conclude the RP
process for School Street School. Um, there were two bids that were received. Those have been reviewed by the review committee. That's all been turned in. The recommendations were made by my office. Uh, I took the re unanimous recommendation of the review committee and that was an offer that's been accepted and is currently pending. It's
uh closing details right there. So, the uh details of that sale will go public once the closing is recorded um as to who the no owner is and what the plans are for that uh time frame. But until that recording happens, all of the uh submission for the RP documents are still considered privileged executive
session or normal executive session, but where this wasn't a full uh committee that considered privilege documents until recording, in which case at that point in time that become public record. Uh but the sale is moving forward. So that does fully formally and now officially free up this funding that's
there. um as that moves forward. Uh looking at um the budget, I also am in favor of moving the full amount into this. I'm personally someone uh who goes with the plan for as high as you can and hope for as low as you can uh with it
where particularly with the uh requirements and the procurement laws of the Commonwealth that you have to have the appropriation before you can even go out to bid and then figure out if you have enough in your original appropriation to go back out. um because we can always do this process again to transfer it to another project after the fact. Uh I think if this was tying it up
permanently and we weren't able to make that transfer in the end, I'd feel different. But because we always have that ability to transfer between projects, that that's where I'm okay with that. Uh but my question in looking with the um conceptual design is that I see there's a fair portion of it that's
in the um zone C buffer zone. Um, is that just mainly more conservation review because of the distance to the reservoir that that >> Yes. >> Yeah. They would need to go before the conservation commission for >> conditions or something. >> Yeah. >> Either an RDA or NOID
>> um >> depending on what they would probably consult Mass D to consider what um notice that they would have to move forward with um >> and I know we had to do this process for the bike trail and that was in the zone A area here too. And I see that there's
a walkway that connects to that bike trail as well there too. I just wanted to more clarify what the process was moving forward that that's the same process that we had to do with this and this looks like it is and based on what was just said too. The only thing I will mention and I I have mentioned this to the assistant director but I don't think
Tyon has has re um submitted um a a draft for the design is that there will likely not be uh the surrounding fence around the the area. As you can actually see there's gates on the areas including
the gate and fence that will be between the pavilion and the pool. I don't think it really makes sense to have a pavilion fenced in, seeing as how people are meant to just walk to and from, have it be open, and then have there be a gate
between a fenced area for the pool and a fenced area for the pavilion. >> I think it's it would send incredibly confusing message. >> Yeah, it would it would at the end save us money in terms of building that fencing. So, I've already like mentioned that over to the assistant director. Um,
and while these plans don't showcase that, that is our intention to not move forward with any any fencing around the civilian. >> With that being said, are there any other comments? >> I mean, I would say that I would be in support of the full transfer of the 791
34251. I just But it totally makes sense that this could come over one way or the other. And like you said, we have um we have flexibility one way or the other. It's not something that's set in stone. So, I think we should do it. >> And with the funds both from not moving
forward with the loming and seating for the ground, seeing as we're moving forward with this and it's the middle of winter, um or about to be in the middle of winter um and it wouldn't make sense to loan and seed right now. Um we're saving money there. We haven't dealt with the contingency budget. So there
are funds that are going to be available for phase one as well that if needed um could be moved here or to another project um as we decide as that moves forward and and gets finished up. Um with that being said, are there any more
comments in favor of the proposed transfer >> those being 2024 budget? Um when does that have to be >> That's a great question. We also um received approval of an extension for those funds and they do not have to be expended until December of 2026.
>> Okay, great. >> Great. Thank you. >> I'm sorry I should have led with that, >> but congratulations on getting through that process, too. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Any other comments in favor for the proposed transfer?
Any comments opposing proposed transfer? I hear none. Then I will entertain a motion for the proposed transfer of $791,342.51 to the Greenwood Pool Pavilion project from the cancelled school street school demolition.
>> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. I hear a motion. I hear a second. All in favor for the proposed transfer say I. I. All oppose say nay. I hear none. Motion passes. That clears up both the public hearings
and we will move on to the regular meeting. Starting with the vote to approve the regular minutes of the regular meeting from October 28th, 2025. >> Motion to approve the minutes as presented. >> Second. I hear a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Hear a second. All
in favor say I. I. All post say nay. Motion carries. Moving on to the review of under new business item 2.1 review of FY2026 CBG application schedule assistant director. >> So the last item in your packet is a
proposed tenative schedule um for our fiscal year 2026 mini entitlement CDG application. Um I wanted to present this to you all for feedback discussion. Um,
I looked through records from prior years to try to get a sense of what happened. Um, and it seemed like there used to be a process where there was an initial um, preliminary application that applicants submitted and then I'm not sure what
happened in the interim. I didn't see any records saying okay, you know, we reviewed these and these applications will go forward to four full application. So, I'm not sure what that process really looked like, but um I'm proposing we not have that initial preliminary application this year. I
think we can make the application simpler than it has been in the past um to allow agencies to complete it fairly quickly. I think that the two um a applicants that were before us tonight are a good example of I mean, I think
they got started getting applications back to us the day after we sent it to them. So I think um I think if we allow a month uh for submitts I think there there will be there will be plenty of time for a full application and they don't need to do that interim step.
So, what I am proposing is that we um we're reviewing the proposed application schedule tonight and I'd like to actually on that second date, the Tuesday, December 2nd publication of the RFP, I'd like to move that to December
9th. I was being overly ambitious when I put this together. Um and then have training for potential applicants on the 16th. It looks like last year and at least the year before they made that mandatory. Um,
I don't think it needs to be mandatory. I think we can record it and I can send it to anyone who's interested in seeing that. I think it might be hard for people to get away. Um, if we do that during a workday or even in the evening. So, that's what I would propose to do this year. We can record it and send it
to people who can't make it. um then >> I'm sorry my comment that is >> it's to their advantage to watch the training so if they don't choose not to do it then they might not have the most complete chance that's our application
you know so >> I have no issue with that if there was something that it was like we wanted to make sure if they really want to do it they'll watch it and >> I agree >> yeah so I'll do it in person and then send out a recording to everybody that said they had an interest in applying >> given its proximity to the holidays as
well. There very well might be people already on vacations or just might be wrapping up work themselves trying to get ready for the holidays. So having there be multiple options and avenues for them to to get trained through this I think is is going to be the best option. So I appreciate you hosting both
the in person and sending out the virtual. >> Sure. I mean I think also too along that line it um it it shows it's good faith for the city. It shows that we did the best we could to get, you know, to accommodate and also this is available if you couldn't come. So I think it's
it's more transparent and complete. >> So then um we would have a meeting of this committee on December 16th, which I know is outside of your normal schedule. So I want your feedback on whether that would work or not. Um to review our fiscal year 225 community development
strategy. So that's a document that we submit to the state that is a summary of unmet needs or what we'd potentially like to use CDG funds for in the city. Um it relies on information from other planning documents like the the GR uh
the renewal plans um the open space plan um master plan. It relies on those documents, pulls information in from them, and then has a prioritized list of potential projects. So, we would review that at the December
6 December 16th meeting. And um there's no public hearing required for that. It's just supposed to be presented at a public forum. So, we don't have to advertise that 15 days in advance like we do for our other CDBG public hearings. So, that makes it
easier administratively. Um, and we don't have to redo that community development strategy until next year's application. So, federal fiscal year 2027. We can keep what we have in place or we can revise it. So,
we can discuss it at that meeting and see if there changes that that we want to make to amend what we have currently. Then, on January 8th, responses would be due from our for our application. January 20th, we would hold an initial
review of proposals. So what I have here, we would have an initial a meeting to re to initially review proposals that are received and then another public hearing on January 27th to continue that process. We don't need to have both of those. So
like your feedback on I mean we can schedule them that way and if we don't need the second one um we can cancel it. it gets a little tricky because of needing to run an ad for a public hearing 15 days in advance. So, um, and
then I also have a final public hearing on February 24th to review our, you know, application before we actually submit it by the end of March. So, that gives us hopefully plenty of time to get through the steps we need to get
through. We were only required to have one public hearing. Um, so we could only have one, you know. Um, I just wanted to make sure we have time for this committee to, you know, dedicate to the review of all the proposals and not
knowing how many we'll receive. [clears throat] Thought we might need to >> more time. >> Yeah, >> I would defer to the rest of the committee as you've all been through this process in its totality before. Um >> I yeah I I've got some comments that I
long and short yes I think the more hearings is better. I think it's similar to when um when we work with the council on when uh the committee set the budget hearing or the the committee the whole sets it so that if there's multiple ones and if we need them great if not then our we've already planned for them. So we we it's better to plan ahead. I feel
like >> basically you can post them and you can cancel them. Yeah. >> And that's what we do in that as that example. It's incredibly helpful to be able to do it. If we don't meet it, it's not there. But we we we already um schedule it ahead of time so we meet that and and people that people know
about it. They have plenty of um >> there's no harm in having it. Yeah. >> No, I think it's a good idea. And I like that it says if like if needed just for this document like yeah, we just keep that in mind. But >> um the other couple things that I'd like to throw out that I was kind of waiting till we got through a little bit more in
the end uh of this was so I do think that multiple hearings are better because it's also a hearing. That's the thing, too. So, while we may have our ducks in a row here, that doesn't mean that it's there's still an opportunity for someone from the public to come and make a presentation here in the hearing
model. Um, I do like the taped training. Uh we ran into issues this fiscal year where we had um a couple of applicants [clears throat] who said because of the work that they were doing in their social service nonprofit were not able to make it to the training but then wanted to participate after and we were
trying to figure out how to fit them [clears throat] in when they weren't able to make a training that was deemed as required for. Um, so I think that that's helpful, too. Honestly, to me, this is the most complete, thorough process that's clean that we've had since I've been mayor here uh for the
CDBG process, and I think this is going to be really great moving forward. I thank you very much, >> thank you. >> Yeah, I was going to say, I mean, I think having this document like you had to go research what the process was before, and I think it's [clears throat] like this is the process on the
document. I think that's incredibly helpful for historical reasons, too. Um, but I I just wanted some clarification. So, so it it' be it'd be December 9th would be the publish the ad, submit the current 22 to 25. Like that first box
was you were changing that to December 9th. >> So December 9th would be um >> from December 2nd. >> Yes. Would be the it would be pub the that the application being available would be published on December 9th. >> Okay. And then the next box down,
Friday, December 12th, is that is that changing to the 16th? >> So I'm not um I'm not sure why I put that there, but um that um will happen when so once um so we know that EOHLC's
application will be available somewhere around um January 16th. And once so we are supposed to two weeks prior to their application being available we are supposed to um submit our community development
strategy to them. >> Um so no that that box can actually move down to um below this the December 16th meeting. >> Okay. So, conduct application training
for potential applicants now goes below the Tuesday, December 16th. >> Um, the submit the current community development [clears throat] strategy goes below um Okay. Yeah, the December 16th meeting. Sorry about that. Okay, it's okay. And and this goes here and
then um but the box that says Friday, December 12th, 2025, conduct application training for potential applicants, that that's December 12th that stays >> it. It can I I think I'd move that to the following week. So, I'm thinking December 16th. >> Okay. That's I I thought I'd change that, but I wasn't sure if I heard it.
Okay. >> Just to give people time to know that it's available and put it on their calendar. >> And that would that would be Tuesday the following week. Tuesday the 16th. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> Okay. So, that's those were my questions. Thank you. I think this is
really helpful. I agree with the public hearing piece that we talked about. Um, and you know, I think this is like you said, you said you have to start somewhere. It seems like as long as you you know the process, that's your that's your job. Like, so to me, it all looks
great. Um, because it's it's laid out. It seems like there's enough time between things like you said, there's there's days you have to post certain things. There's all all of that. And it looks like it's all been accounted for. So, um, you know, I don't have any other suggestions or anything. And I also think it gives plenty of time before the
deadline too because >> the deadline isn't the due date right at the deadline. So like we could turn before then [clears throat] or we could have but that's so I think that's what it allows for some time. I mean, even just the um example that the mayor gave regarding like the way that we do our budget public hearings when we do that
in the spring for the council, just thinking of that as like I would we've always given a big window at the end of it in case we have to meet multiple more times or whatever happens. And um this process just seems like it is it's accounting for that. So, I'm I'm comfortable with it for for that reason.
Um and then, you know, we can meet later on after it's over and see how it works for you, too, because your office is the one managing it. It also like gives us a lot of lead time like it gives us three meetings leading up to February 27th which is the end
date to have either submitted a timely expenditure uh waiver request or to have expended up to 90 or 90% at least of your 2223 funds and and uh 40% of your
2024 uh FY um of your FY24 uh funds. So, it allows us to check in over those three meetings, see where our spending is at for our grant uh budgets for those grant years. Um, and ensure that, you
know, hopefully we won't be submitting a um request maybe for FY24 given the um pavilion construction project that that we'll be we'll be doing. Um, so at least maybe not a FY223
expenditure request and just to check in on >> Yeah, I think I mean I think it's going to just depend on how many responses you get. You know, that's really that kind of January 8th is like what do we have
to work with too? That's going to be indicative of a lot of this. All right. If there's no other comments, we can move on to old business [snorts] with 3.1 status of FY2025
CBPG mini entitlement grant assistant director. >> So, um the only So, do do you want to talk about main the 205 213 Main Street? Do you have any updates for that or? >> Um, yeah. >> Oh, sorry. No, I'm I've jumped ahead.
I'm I'm so sorry. Um, so um we haven't heard anything more on our application after that initial award letter that the mayor received. So, we're just waiting for additional information on that. We do know that they'll um
that they did not score our school street school design project that was $90,000. Um, so we'll need to um provide a new project to allocate that money to. Um, something I'd like to
do with the RFP [snorts] that should have mentioned previously, but um I'd like to when we um publish a notice that the our application for fiscal year 26 funds is available. I'd like to include the additional amounts that need to be
reallocated in that process. So you can look at all the applications together. For instance, you know, we've been working on the um St. Paul's community garden expansion project. They could submit a formal application as part of that process for this money that's
available from the school street school design or the money that's available from 2022 23 that 9,000 that that's unaccounted for right now. or um we also have 51,000 in program income
from CDBG that we had said we were going to use for school street school. Um so I'd like to wrap those pots of money into this process um to make it clean and um you know all together and everyone considered at the same time.
But going back to the 2025 application, that's where we stand. We're just waiting for more information from EH E OLC um on that. >> All right, moving on to 3.2 with 2022 23 project updates. Uh starting off with
the demolition of 205213 Main Street. As has been said in previous meetings, that demolition has been completed. We've been in the process um being the land owned by the Gardner Redevelopment Authority and myself being its executive director have been in the process of um
a land uh sale. Um with that, we've now entered the closing. We've actually I've finished uh drafting up the purchase and sale agreement, sending that off to um the buyer for their review, and I've
heard back some initial comments, but I'm still waiting on the uh actual redlinined uh version of the PNS for for myself to to go through and uh review those edits. They don't seem they seem to be pretty surface level. a couple deliverables here. Just making sure that
the buyer has all of the necessary environmental documents that came from the I would say limited remediation with the site given just the uh unused oils that were in the oil tank
and the lead paint that was found in parts of the building. So, it was pretty light compared to um [snorts] other projects um environmental remediation. So, uh, just providing all that information. So, I expect that to not take too long. And once we enter the
closing, similar to how the mayor said, um, we yeah, School Street has been in executive session. Um, this has also been uh in similar um been in executive session until we enter the closing. Following that, all that information
will enter public um public knowledge um and we can move forward from there. Um in terms of closing up the 205 213 demolition, but that has any comments. Just [clears throat] uh a question regarding
this one and then how it also how it relates to 3.3.2. um where so the CDBG funding that we received went towards the demolition of the project that project being completed now the sale being done with the GR so really this work is fully done completed especially now that we've transferred
that funding to something else so there's nothing else that needs to be done CDBG wise for >> no for 205 213 it has been completed on their side fully uh financially uh projectwise all of those have been fully submitted so in their EOHLC's
perspective 205213. The only reason it's still on here is so that we know that this project is wrapped up and we put the nice bow on it at the end and that it's been passed off and given as uh you know a new life um to say. >> Y
>> so uh and the same will happen with Greenwood Pool demolition uh when when that project is completed. So I will pass on for 3.2.2 to uh assistant director u. So, I don't know if you've been buying the site lately, but um I was out there this morning and it's
fully flat. Uh everything, all the bricks have been removed, everything's been removed. Um they backfilled the, you know, where the building was. I think they're just on the last few steps of completing their contract, which is removing the chain link, fence, and
gate. Um new electrical service and lighting controls, and then top soil installation and seating. um which you know we'll we'll um fill you in on how that discussion goes and what what if a portion of that will be done now or um
if we'll do a change order to remove that from associated building records contract with us. So wrapping that up um it [clears throat] was a really smooth process um they were great to work with. The contractor was great to work with. Time and bond were great to work with.
So I'm really happy about the way it's turned out. Any questions? >> All right, moving on to 3.3 FY24 project updates 3.3.1 social services. This is the director.
>> So, we are uh we good news. We got the gardener athletic program agreement uh fully signed. It's sitting on my desk. So, we'll return a copy to [clears throat] the school department and we'll keep a copy and then we will um work with them to submit an invoice for the uh you know the athletic
scholarships that they provided to participants and get the demographic and income data um that we need from them and then we can close out that project. The um GEMS project is completed. Um,
Voices of Truth still needs to submit a final invoice and report. Um, but you know, they've submitted everything on time up until this point and their next report is due at the end of December. Um, and the um,
you know, that that we should be able to move this off of our agenda um, soon. Um I think after you know after we get the final reports in December um this will come off off our agenda and we'll be looking towards those fiscical year 25 funds and the the um public social
services that were included in that application. >> All right and we've mainly covered 3.3.2 demolition of school street school but if there's any further comments you wanted to share. >> No. >> All right.
And there being nothing else on the agenda, were there any other final comments >> before we close the meeting? >> We have a new member who's agreed to serve as the mayoral appointee. Uh former police chief Neil Ericson is going to be joining us uh beginning our next meeting. Um so he'll be uh the
mayor's appointee and then the executive aid position was also just posted today for the new term. Um so once that's filled, we'll have a mayoral designate as well. >> Amazing. Thank you. With that, there being nothing else, I'll entertain a motion to close the meeting.
>> Um, I just wanted to wanted to say, did we want to talk about December 16th? You'd said that's a meeting that's off. Do you want to do that here or >> we can >> if if you'd like to if you have your calendars >> or or if you're going to [clears throat] reach out to us after, >> I can reach out to easier if I reach out
to you after. Then we can take look at your calendars and see. Okay, I'll do that. >> Okay, >> it's awesome. Look for that early next week. >> Thank you. And I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Second. I hear a motion to adjurnn. I hear a second. All in favor say I. >> I. Post say nay.
>> Motion carries and meeting is adjourned. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thanks everybody. him to wait.