Well, good afternoon folks. Um, we're here for affordable housing trust meeting. It is 300 PM on November 12th. U, we're both in the select board chambers as well as on Zoom for those that are joining us virtually. Um, I'm going to have us, we've called this
meeting to order. I'm going to have us do a roll call um, attendance for those that are here. Um, just please say your name and uh, that you're in fact present. >> Dave Orland present. Bever Beverly Napier present. >> Cindy Bounty present.
>> Excellent. So that means we have a quorum. Um you one member is absent today. So that is okay. Um I don't have any chairman's additions or deletions unless I'm missing anything from our friends in the audience. I don't see anyone yelling at me
aggressively. So that is good. Um 1.4 is public comment. Any public comment from our friends in the audience in person or online? Seeing none, we'll uh shift right into meeting business. A quick summary of meeting business. Our main purpose today
was to uh open any sealed RFP responses to the towns and affordable housing trust RFP. Um 2.2 was to discuss criteria related to responsiveness to RFP and any next steps. And 2.3 was just to share the contract that has now been
signed with our friends at Timber Harvesting who will begin harvesting and selective cutting at some of the parcels in town that are over overseen by the trust. Um 2.4 will be discussed future meetings. I know we have some holidays coming up so we may not look for
anything December depending on timing but we'll um we'll discuss that when we get there and then we'll look to adjourn. Um so 2.1 we have one response to our RFP that was issued um some time ago. Um I do have the public document
recordings here from the Groten Herald as well as a copy of the RFP um to go through um at this point. The way I understand this process is we can um open up the binders that this uh party shared with us and take a look at it and
you know see what questions we have. It is important to note that I did email this out to trust members um a short bit short bit of time before the meeting today for those that were virtual in the event that we had a virtual member joining us um but they're not here at the meeting as I think their schedule is
jammed up. So um just have the folks take a moment to look at the response. Um I think it's from the King family here in town and um they shared a little you know background on their context for you know sharing the response to the RFP
and sort of next steps. We also have Nelson our town administrator joining us as he is our chief procurement officer in the event of any questions or any feedback he may have from his office's perspective. >> And it's that time of year for Colts so
here we are. I just sneeze a lot. >> I see how it is. Um, you know, in general, this lot is, um, it's about a 3 acre parcel up on Hannes Road. Um, had an assessed value of $104,000
plus or minus. I think it was 104860 or so. um you know as we look at the responsiveness from or the response from the family that shared um their valuation and things like that um it did occur to me that one of our threshold
for minimum criteria was the assessed value of the parcel um but I know you guys are reading it and we don't have a lot of wiggle room within going below that number because that was a minimum criteria we had >> um so I think that's important to note
again I'm very appreciative of having folks volunteer their time and effort for writing a response to the RFP. Um, but I think the trust in the town had some, you know, larger goals financially. Um, and that's something that we probably have to discuss as a
trust for what we're comfortable with and what the next steps may be. >> Um, so any other feedback from folks as they've taken a look through it? You know, it's a really nicely written letter. I'm appreciative of stewards of the land and things of that nature. It's
something I'm passionate about as I love turtles. I love planting trees and uh you running the dog through the woods. Um but you know I do know we have a responsibility to the residents and within the RFP to meet that you know minimum assessed value of the land.
And I can certainly, you know, unless there's any specific feedback from my trust members, um, I can share that with the family that that shared their response to the RFP. >> And is that sort of the right philosophy here, Nelson, in terms of process from your perspective as procurement side of
things? >> Yeah, I think for me it's um, yeah, just the minimum threshold that was um, clearly stated in the uh, RFP. Um, and so I think to even probably be considered, it had to at least meet that minimum threshold, which it does not
sound like it it has unfortunately. So I think um that would be I mean even though we received the a bid, I would say it's probably uh it just doesn't meet the minimum requirement. So I'm not sure if unresponsive is the correct term, but I just think it just doesn't
meet the minimum criteria that you guys set forth. >> Yeah. You know, it was worth noting that I did have a few phone calls from folks inquiring um to ask about, you know, the land and I thought it was some contractors and such. Um I don't know if
it was the timing or the mechanism of which we chose to have people respond that, you know, we we did have one party respond and we didn't get many others which was a little disappointing. Maybe time of the year. I'm not really sure. So, as a trust, you know, when we um
sort of close out 2.1, which is reviewing the sealed responses here, maybe we'll think about some other ideas for how to best engage with folks. Um, but you know, to give you the full context, I did hear from a few other folks. They just never wrote a response.
Um, and you know, these these folks did it the exactly the right way. um you know it's the three binders, it's you know the email PDF which was really really appreciative of that as someone who's seen RFPs in other places. Um sometimes folks don't follow the process
um so I think there's a lot of of kudos for that. Um but again we we do have to work um at the trust and the residents for hitting that minimum criteria which would be the value of the land. Mhm.
>> Do you do we want to read the uh at least who bid and the amount into the record so to speak? >> Yeah, I can do that. Or perhaps if Dave, you know, I'm happy to do that if you want or Dave, you want to do that as the chair? >> Well, there's a lot in here. I mean, if you want to read the entire binding,
>> I can do that. Yeah. Or I can you reference a few key points? >> I can just reference. I don't think we that's an awful lot of information there. >> Yeah. >> Yep. So, this was the um the party one's response. uh the family of George and Cindy King. They did it uh September
19th. They shared their contact information. Um they shared their expressed interest in acquisition and continued stewardship of the land. Um they shared their background and um the purpose of the proposal was to formally
offer a purchase of $4,000 for the land for the identified parcel. Um, you know, their goals were to seek and incorporate this parcel into continued property management, um, over in that vicinity of town. Um, you know,
they shared some great goals and stewardship of commitment to, you know, maintaining the land and such. Um, and then their contact information. Um, they shared their certificate of state tax compliance, which is great. Um, you know, and all the other criteria that we
had laid out. um you know with the various appendencies um you know I do think we'd have to make a motion to to say we opened it but that those are the steps I'm not sure of in terms of >> um no I don't think we need to make a motion to open it because we kind of you
probably would need to maybe uh formally uh respond to the uh to the to the offer itself. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> That we are you saying in writing? >> Um I think you guys can discuss it and then make a motion and then afterwards
we can you know >> it would go into the minutes and that would be the response in writing. >> Yeah, correct. >> Could be. Yeah. So, um you as we've touched on um the the purchase price they've offered of $4,000 for the parcel
to not meet the minimum threshold that we have of the assessed value. Um so, in that sense, it doesn't make it a qualifying offer for the land. We would probably want to entertain a motion to say that um the town afford a town's in affordable housing trust does not accept
this offer to purchase um you know the town's in affordable housing trust lot 34-80 lot 34-80-0 on Hayes Road um and that didn't have a vote to satisfy that.
>> So essentially the motion is we don't accept the proposal to purchase lot 34-80- from the King family on Hro. >> You could also say so move. >> Well, I could or or I mean you can tell me if
this is just an empty suggestion, but we could counter it >> with what the assessed value is, which is the threshold that we've agreed we need to be at. Um, you could do that. >> I don't know. Does that that just prolongs I mean I I don't see any reason
why we should just outright reject it. We just say this, but I mean that's my suggestion is counter it for the threshold that >> that we agreed to. >> Um, >> that is a while, >> but that I mean that's that's up to the
rest of the board. I mean that's that's only a suggestion. You're the real estate. >> Oh no, no, no, no. That was a long time ago. That was a long time ago. Um, but I mean, you know, you could counter it, but but it was, you know, and and I
think this is this is a well done proposal. It's the problem is we had the threshold of the appraised value of the land. So, you know, that's that's kind of where it stands. >> Yeah. And I think it should well in that case, maybe we don't counter. We just say we're sorry, we we can't accept
this. But that's the reason. It doesn't mean they can't come back a second time if we >> because I also think too, you know, it's the time this time of year. It's a funny time of year. >> Everything's a little uncertain anyways with interest rates and everything else, >> you know. So maybe that's why people
other people that may have been interested are probably like, hm, you know, should I sit back and wait and see what happens? Yeah. >> You know, um should I see, you know, so I because I think I think we will do this again at a later date, right? >> I think so. Yeah. Yeah,
>> that's up for discussion, you know, for your next step. So, depending on how >> you respond to this uh offer, your next steps could be >> um lowering threshold or waiting, you know, some in amount of time that you
guys >> spring market is always the best market. >> Exactly. You never know. >> So, so those are the steps that you know the trust can you know um discuss and you know um agree on something. Um but I think uh yeah the first step would be
would be to to um officially uh respond to the offices. >> I'll I'll make the motion if you wanted. >> I mean a part of me doesn't disagree with you know the folks made an offer to counter. That's what it's like buying a
car, right? Like you always make a counter to what they say at the Honda dealership. So that's true. That's true. you know, or Toyota or wherever you go, you know, Jeep. Um, they say $1, you say, you know, 10. I don't know. Um, but I do, you know, understand that it's a
peculiar time. The holidays and, you know, sort of housing markets and things like that are tricky right now, um, and such. So, um, it's open for discussion. I do have a hand up in the audience if we want to entertain a question. >> Sure. >> Yeah. just tell us your name and address
just so we know it on uh the TV too. So, >> okay. Cindy King, 72 West Street Down. So, I just had a question as far as next step if it goes out to bid again. Um excuse me. So, what happens if no bids come in and
what would the town's next step be with the property? >> Well, as you just said, >> yeah, we would probably just keep putting it out and we would reevaluate. >> Sorry, I didn't catch that. >> Yep. No, that's all right. would we would we as a trust and the trust members would decide if they wanted to re-evaluate the criteria the minimum criteria um
>> you can catch that part of it. >> Yeah. >> But what happens if there's nobody that ever meets the criteria >> then you you could just stop the put stop putting it out. >> Um this has happened in other towns where it took them almost a decade to get a response to an RFP.
>> Wow. It's a long time >> and sometimes it just takes time. Would that ever be offered to like fish and wildlife or is that >> um >> I don't know if fishing game has any value in that land because it's only three acres. I think usually they have a minimum threshold of acreage and they
want some type of water >> aspect. You think of like fish I guess, >> right? But there's no doesn't what I mean it doesn't like join any other land that they have out here, >> right? Yeah. It's not a contiguous like agricultural. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's truly a standalone lot which
is kind of unique. So, >> right. >> Yeah. I mean, we we totally understand >> what where you're coming from. We we get that and you know, and we appreciate the fact that, you know, you want to be stewards. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um
I don't have the exact address that you would I don't see it in here. Um number >> Yeah. I mean, for the >> I mean, I can make the motion, but if you want me to have the lot number. Ah, there it is.
Okay. All right. I move that the Towns and Affordable Housing Trust does not accept the RFP response from Cindy and George King as it does not meet the minimum threshold uh set by the RFP. And I authorize the housing and grant administrator to inform prospective
bidder of the trust position which we've done regarding lot 34-80- Hannes Road Town. >> Is there a second? I second. >> Beverly second. And a roll call vote, please.
>> I Beverly Napier. >> I Cindy Boundy. >> I Dave Horton. >> Okay, the motion passes. I will let the um folks know um I'll copy Dave on the email just for your record as the chair. Um and let them know that we appreciate
their response on this, but unfortunately did not meet the min minimum criteria um as we discussed. And so that closes 2.1. Uh 2.2 is discussing the criteria and something I
briefly touched on in regards to the responsiveness to the RFP and whether we want to re re-evaluate, you know, um any of the criteria related to the RFP. And I say I say that with the caveat of
it's always the trust's decision to decide how you want to evaluate the land. You know, do you want to take that assessed value and say, well, we want to be within 20% of it, 25% of it, you know, as a way to generate some more
offers, if you will, um, and encourage more bids, you know, down the road. you. Do we want to, you know, I hate to say we're going to spend some money to make some money, but do you want to go out there and do perk testing? You know, it's probably going to cost you five
grand to do a perk test and well, >> you know, kind of concept. We don't have a lot of discretionary income. >> Um, but that may generate more interest. Like one contractor did ask me, you know, I can't remember the name of him, but it was a 978 number, and he's like,
"Well, have you done a perk test?" I was like, "Well, no, it's, you know, it's town owned. for just selling it as is and it's kind of the way we represent it. He's like, "Well, that would really help." I was like, "Well, thank you, sir." You know, of course it would. Um, but just an idea and you guys can sort
of pontificate in terms of what you think would help get the land moving. Um, >> well, that's a big um ask for for the perk test. However, I think if it were me buying a piece of
land, I'd say, "Well, um, I'm not going to take that chance because I'm going to spend now $5,000 and figure that it doesn't perk." I'm like, "Oh, now what?" >> Figure out the money. Yeah. >> So, I think we have to really at least by spring when I think the market is
going to be better, we have to kind of think about that. >> Yeah. Or drop the numbers so low so that they if they don't perk test. >> There you go. then, you know, the 75K may mean they go to zoning board of appeals and find another way through because they have to pay an attorney to make that,
>> you know, argument or something to that effect. >> Um because you've seen that in other towns where they say, "Well, you're within a certain zone, like can you do a buffer or a wetlands replication zone or, you know, you work with conservation?" >> Yeah. >> Um >> just food for thought.
>> Um you know, I still think it's a beautiful area. It's a beautiful lot. Um, you know, to Cindy's point, timing is everything. You know, sometimes it's just a weird time. You're seeing house prices fall right now. Maybe it's just not a good time for builders.
>> Yeah, I know. I I don't know because I'm not in real estate, but there's so much uncertainty right now. Yeah. >> With everything that I think and people are just kind of like, let's just wait, you know. Um, in a different time, this would have been snapped up, you know,
regardless of testing or anything else, you know. So, and and I think we we we h we do have a responsibility that we can't just give things away, >> right? >> You know, that we this the town gave us the land. And I think we have to um So,
I'm kind of in favor of just sitting on it for a little while, get through the holidays, see what happens. See what happens in that crazy world. And where where everything shakes out in a few months and >> maybe January is different. Yeah. >> You know, Yeah. the, you know, Christmas, Thanksgiving, all the other
celebrations that go on that people might be a little more dust settled, you know. >> Yeah. >> And I heard that, you know, out with our highway department earlier where we were met with an engineer and he's like, you know, we're not putting any bids out >> until after the holidays. He's like, it's just people are sort of in slow motion right now. They're getting
through it. They're going to get to Thanksgiving, >> you know, football, New Year's, Christmas, holidays, you know, all that stuff. So he's like, "We're really just going to kind of slow walk till we get to post, you know, New Year's." So >> yeah. And kind of go from there. Maybe that's that's just an idea.
>> Yeah. We do have the opportunity to review the criteria and you could also say you could bring your minimum number down too. You could say it's 75K. I mean, the trust can set a value at, you know, >> I'm not prepared to to support that right now.
>> Sure. Okay. you know, down the road, >> but there's still, as you were suggesting, >> it's only been out there a short time. Yeah. You know, so >> there might be other criteria on the other hand that might make raise a little bit more interest than the way it's currently written and that maybe we can think about until then.
>> Yeah. What I can do is I can um push around and maybe work with Nelson and his team to sort of see, you know, what what other ideas they've seen. You've done many more of these than I have, I think. So, you know this world a lot better. Yeah, this one's a little Oh, sorry. This one's a little bit unique because it's just like a piece of land.
Yeah. So, I think, you know, there's, you know, some flexibility in terms of the criteria, but probably not as much as, you know, some other projects that I've worked with. >> Um, so I think, um, we're certainly not in a hurry to, you know, get rid of it.
So, I think we should, you know, be a little bit patient and try to get as much value as we can out of it. Um, sometimes, you know, things, you know, the market will pick up and if you guys decide to, you know, pay for a perk test, I think that would probably
>> um generate more interest than than now. And and yeah, this time of year, it's, you know, you know, you're just not going to get a ton of interest. The springtime, that's when the activities really going to pick up. So, I think, you know, I think waiting um for a
little bit and then, you know, um finding what the what the next steps are, you know, makes a lot of sense. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And I'll float a couple ideas out over, you know, through our email threads and if we meet in December, we can chat about some other ideas. So, um
that's that's a good step forward. >> Um so, that's 2.2. Do you need to run? I know you had another meter. You can hang. I'm not kicking you out. >> Yeah. for this one. I I will leave you guys to it. So, uh but thank you for inviting me to for me to discuss things
with you. So, appreciate it. >> 2.3 for us was um the executed timber harvesting contract with Anderson Timber. Um I don't have an exact start date for them yet. Um, but I will ask uh Kyle and I think it's his wife Kathleen
to sort of run the organization there about what their start date is going to be. You know, it is selective cutting. Um, it sounds like they're going to do a little landing zone as we discussed >> and halfacre >> half acre approximately right on the roadway there just to sort of load up
equipment and logs. I hope um >> yeah, we do have um both an expense and a revenue account set up with our um treasur collector and accounting office. So, as we generate some money out of that, we're going to see that account come up. It is dedicated to the towns
and affordable housing trust. >> Um so, we get the first right to allocate those funds. So, to the question about a perk test, >> I was just going to say it. >> Um so, one could help with the other. Um, so there is a little bit of a
strategy there. Um, in Dunable, we've done that before from our conservation side where we use some of the timber money to help with the town owned parcel that they ended up putting a per test on. >> Yep. >> Town disposed of it and so on and so on. So that'll be an exciting sort of winter
project, I think, for the timber folks. Um, and hopefully it gets us some decent >> Yeah. you know >> I really hope that that they give enough notice to the abutters so that it's not they wake up one
morning and >> right today's the day you know it's like black Friday now they go you know that's really not fair I hope um but I think some folks know it sounds like I think you guys were on the meeting you know Kyle Anderson right you knew he was decent decent
>> I've heard he was decent heard of him but I think >> I thought it One of you guys said that. >> I I did. Yeah. Yeah. I heard he's a really decent guy. So, I heard good things. I'm sure he'll let everybody know any appropriate not appropriate time. >> Yeah. So, hopefully I mean hopefully
they cut some trees down that'll generate some money and then it'll offer some chance for renewal as well back there. Um I'm sure the woodpeckers won't like it, but they'll find somewhere else to go. So, or the owls. I keep seeing the owls in my yard right now. So, >> Oh, lucky you. Wow.
>> There's like a pack of them. It's a owls and then there's a pack of blue jays and they're all just sort of picking each other off I think. So but um I don't have anything else on my agenda other than plans for future meetings. Um and that may encourage us
to open up a calendar. Um, we do have, you know, a Thanksgiving week and then, um, I'm away for the 10th through the 18th in December. Um, but I could certainly meet
>> when we're out of town as well. >> Yeah. Before that, >> so I don't know. your week that any day of the week you're thinking of and then we'll look at weeks. >> I mean like Monday the 22nd if you
wanted to try to just touch base it would probably be a short and kind of sweet meeting. I will have sent some ideas out just on other RFP ideas more than anything else. Um, and if that that would be the sort of the goal or we
could hang till probably the first week of January, have a meeting in January and then look to get a revised RFP out, you know, right before like MLK day usually. Um, maybe that generates some more interest just because of timing wise if someone could pick up the land and then they could start a house in the
spring, something to that effect. you know, it gives you also the month of December off, >> which sometimes isn't a bad thing to >> Yeah. >> have your have your time and holidays and all the other >> Yeah. Unless there's something time sensitive about getting a meeting done in December, I don't think we
>> I don't think so. I think it's a good chance to Ronnie because she can't check in on this. >> Yeah. But I I know I we I don't we don't have anything like super pressing, right? I mean, this is um >> so the the week of the 5th or the week
of the 12th of January. >> Yeah. >> Let's look for the the week of the 12th. Um and probably that Wednesday the 14th. I know I seem to like Wednesdays and I think it works with most of the folks here. Um >> we're doing one o'clock before. Do you
want to do three o'clock, four o'clock? >> Yeah, we could do what works for you. >> So if I'm here, if it's before 4, they don't have to ding me for extra hours. So, if you can do three again, that would be great. >> Oh, okay. And that's on the 14th. >> Correct. >> And I'll let um Veronica know too.
>> Will that be Zoom? >> It'll be both. Yeah, I think we'll just do Zoom that day. Slap slap our way back into the town hall. You never know if it's snowy or not in January. So, good point. >> Snowed this morning. >> I know. >> Beautiful. I was like, "All right, let's
go. and I I'll send the meeting, you know, materials and stuff like that probably that Monday, the 12th, and I'll review with you, Dave, sort of on the sidelines for different topics. Okay, thanks guys. Have a great day. >> Thank you. >> Um so, you know, we'll look to meet on
the 14th and um >> that's about it. Otherwise, so go enjoy your holidays. Mhm. >> And otherwise uh a motion to adjurnn with a roll call vote if someone wanted to entertain that.
>> Yeah, I would I move that adjourn at >> 3:28. >> Okay, I second it that. >> Dave Worland I. >> Beverly Napier I. >> Cindy Bounty I. >> Thank you very much. Short and sweet. Thank you, TCAP.