Loading...
Agenda and Minutes 2009-09-16 City of Northampton Community Preservation Committee 210 Main Street, City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Community Preservation Committee DATE: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 TIME: 7:00pm PLACE: City Council Chambers, 212 Main Street (BEHIND City Hall) Contact: Fran Volkmann, Chair, Community Preservation Committee Franv@comcast.net Tom Parent, Vice Chair, Community Preservation Committee ParentBridge@hotmail.com Bruce Young, Community Preservation Planner byoung@northamptonma.gov (413) 587-1263 Agenda ?? Public Comment ?? Acceptance of August 19, 2009 & September 2, 2009 Minutes ?? Chair’s Report ?? Community Preservation Coalition presentation regarding SB90 ?? Procedure for 2010 CPC Plan Revision ?? Other Business For additional information please refer to the Community Preservation Committee website: http://www.northamptonma.gov/gsuniverse/httpRoot/comm/ MINUTES Community Preservation Committee Date: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 Time: 7:00 pm Place: City Council Chambers, 212 Main St. Members Present: Fran Volkmann, George Kohout, David Drake, Downey Meyer, Don Bianchi, and Jack Hornor. Staff Present: Bruce Young, Community Preservation Planner John Frey, Community Preservation Planner Fran Volkmann opened the public meeting at 7:03pm. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT ?? David Hirships, Warburton Way stated his belief that the Leeds Hotel Bridge proposal is vague regarding its budget and the DPW is spread too thin to maintain the project going forward. The Look Park recreation project again is not worth funding the study when likelihood of funding the full project is not great. Regarding the Dorsey-Jones project, it is a private home, and it is not stated if public benefit would be forthcoming. Finally, Valley CDC mortgage counseling is not a worthy project. CPA housing dollars should only be spent on bricks and mortar. ?? Fran Volkmann re-iterated the CPC’s stated need for detail from the applicants regarding a project’s ability to meet the CPA criteria for funding. Hopefully applicants have realized this need. 2. ACCEPTENCE OF AUGUST 19, 2009 & SEPTEMBER 2, 2009 MINUTES ?? Fran Volkmann tabled the review of August 19, 2009 minutes to the next meeting. ?? Fran Volkmann presented the September 2, 2009 minutes for discussion. After noting a couple minor technical changes the minutes were approved as read. 3. CHAIR’S REPORT ?? Fran Volkmann announced that Joseph DeFazio has been nominated as the new CPC representative of the Housing Authority. Hopefully he will be approved on one reading at City Council. ?? Fran Volkmann announced that applicant questions must be submitted to Bruce Young by Friday morning, September 18, 2009. Also, the CPC must decide on a site visit schedule. 4. COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COALITION PRESENTATION SENATE BILL 90 ?? Stuart Saginore of the Community Preservation coalition spoke to the committee regarding current CPA funding concerns and the proposed legislation to remedy the problems. A copy of the power point presentation can be found here… http://www.northamptonma.gov/gsuniverse/httpRoot/comm/minutes/2009/ ?? Highlights of Stuart Saginore’s presentation included… ?? The Coalition is comprised of representatives of 7 major non-profits plus member CPA communities (70% of Coalition budget). ?? There are only 15 cities out of the 142 CPA communities and very few are large cities. A concern is that if a large city approved the CPA it would eat up the available matching funds. The slice of pie is already shrinking and this would make the situation worse. Proposed legislation would remedy this issue. ?? So far over 10,000 acres have been protected and 2300 affordable housing units created. Historic preservation leads the list with over 1300 appropriations. Recreation has received only 500 appropriations. Over $700 million in funding and matching appropriations. ?? The Coalition is constantly defending raids on the CPA Trust Fund. They are also defending against legislation harming the CPA. Over 25 proposed bills this session alone mention CPA. ?? The primary challenges to the CPA currently are 1.) Trust fund matching dollars, 2.) Lack of cities, 3.) Limited use of the recreation category. ?? Matching dollars have run upside down since 2006. Revenue has fallen every year since 2003. On the distribution side demand has grown every year. There was a 100% match for the first 6 years. Last year it fell to 80%. This year the match is expected to be to just 35%. 100% is not guaranteed and unlikely to happen again. 50% match is a more realistic goal. That level would keep existing communities onboard and slowly bring on more communities. Another goal is to use legislation to guarantee funding levels as more communities pass the CPA. ?? The state legislature wants solutions that will bring on more cities. Proposed legislation would allow communities to adopt at a minimum of 1%, and then transfer other municipal revenue to their CPA fund in order to reach the maximum 3%. ?? Currently, recreation projects cannot be funded unless the land is acquired with CPA dollars. Any current parkland is hands-off to recreational rehabilitation. Preservation is the most restrictive definition requiring protection from injury, harm, or destruction, and not including maintenance. However, the SJC stated if land has ceased to be recreational land then it is possible to create new recreation. The timeline is vague though and open to interpretation by the individual City Council in each town. ?? SB90, An Act to Sustain Community Preservation, has three major components… 1.) Increase the Trust Fund revenues to guarantee a 75% match in the first round. Registry of Deeds CPA surcharge is currently $20 per deed. Under the legislation the fee would automatically adjust to guarantee a 75% match. As real estate transactions increase fees could fall. 2.) To make the CPA more attractive to cities the proposed legislation would allow communities to adopt at a minimum of 1%, and then transfer other municipal revenue to their CPA fund in order to reach the maximum 3%. 3.) Clarify the recreation language by allowing rehabilitation of current parkland without requirement to create new recreation. ?? There were 83 sponsors of SB 90 including Senator Rosenberg and Representative Kocot. The legislation is currently assigned to the Committee on Community Development and Small Business. A hearing is scheduled for September 29, 2009. ?? George Kohout asked if the deeds fee would be the only source of income to the CPA Trust Fund. ?? Stuart Saginore stated the legislature could choose to change the deeds plan and allow other sources of revenue, however this is unlikely. ?? David Hirships asked if any cities are interested in adopting the CPA. ?? Stuart Saginore stated many are interested pending the newly proposed legislation rules. Businesses often fight the tax surcharge. New legislation would allow a possible $100,000 base exemption for business property owners, similar to the current residential allowances. ?? Don Bianchi stated we have a current request from owners of a nursing home to do improvements. Is this considered rehabilitation, support or preservation? ?? Stuart Saginore stated the application must include a line item budget to determine the status. The major issue is if it is not preservation then the City Council must be willing to call it support. ?? Don Bianchi stated the nursing home houses 80% Medicaid/Medicare residents. Some of the residents could be above 100% AMI. Is that a problem? ?? Stuart Saginore stated the DOR believes this is generally ok. If only 80% are below AMI threshold then DOR would like CPA to fund no more than 80% of the project. Proportionate funding is the goal. A bigger concern is that as a private facility they must not violate state anti-aid laws. There must be a clear public benefit, what is it? Perhaps try to get deed restriction guaranteeing affordable housing units. ?? Bruce Young asked if all communities adopted the CPA could the deeds fee increase be endless. ?? Stuart Saginore stated the cap would be $70 per deeds fee transaction, though legislation could be changed. No other revenue sources are likely possible. CPA BONDING ?? Stuart Saginore spoke briefly regarding CPA bonding opportunities. Highlights included… ?? General obligation bonds can be issued against future CPA funds only, not the expected state matching dollars. ?? A two-thirds vote by city council is needed to issue a bond. ?? Bonding can count toward the 10% annual reserve requirements. ?? If the CPA is revoked a town could either pay from another source (unlikely) or the CPA surcharge would continue at the full or reduced rate until the bond is paid. ?? 52 towns have issued CPA bonds funding 103 projects to date. There is $152m in outstanding bonds with most for open space projects. Many towns are fully bonded for coming years. 5. PROCEDURE FOR 2010 CPA PLAN REVISION ?? Fran Volkmann stated the plan revision is an ongoing process. For instance, the CPC has already clarified expedited review. However, the CPC must still clarify the mayoral role in CPA project funding. ?? Jack Hornor stated this is not something the CPC could change. ?? Fran Volkmann stated the CPC should continue to look over the plan for needed revisions. She requests all category specialists review their own categories with their respective boards. ?? Bruce Young stated new housing and historic plans are forthcoming. Also open space will have a new plan for 2010-2015. ?? George Kohout asked what is the timeframe for plan revisions. ?? Fran Volkmann stated a goal to review and adopt revisions in March 2010. December 16, 2009 is the next time the CPC could discuss this. Please move forward with review within your individual boards. 6. OTHER BUSINESS SB90 ?? Jack Hornor stated he is generally supportive of the legislation, but language allowing percentage replacement is not good for Northampton. ?? Fran Volkmann doesn’t see percentage replacement as a viable strategy for the anti-CPA crowd. People simply need to decide if the CPA continues or not. ?? George Kohout stated he is comfortable in supporting SB90. He has not heard a clamor for CPA repeal. Let’s not fan the flames. ?? David Drake stated he is very impressed SB90 has 83 sponsors. It is definitely a strong bill. ?? Fran Volkmann queried if the CPC is comfortable in approving an endorsement. ?? Upon motion by Don Bianchi, seconded by David Drake, the Northampton CPC endorses SB 90, An Act to Sustain Community Preservation. All voted in favor. ?? Don Bianchi stated the CPC is well served by the Community Preservation Coalition. ?? Fran Volkmann stated she would write a letter supporting the legislation. ?? Bruce Young stated he would email a support request to our grantees. ?? David Drake suggested also bringing it to the Conservation Commission, Historic Commission and Housing Partnership for endorsement. Upon motion by Downey Meyer, seconded by George Kohout, all agreed to adjourn the meeting at 9:41pm.