2023-11-30-CPC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

The Committee voted by a roll call vote in a straw poll to support LexHAB’s Affordable Housing Support, Restoration, Preservation and Decarbonization project in the amount of $478,865 (9- 0). Note: this amount was incorrectly stated and voted: the correct amount requested is $482,365. The Committee voted by a roll call vote in a straw poll to support the LHA’s 561/563 Massachusetts Avenue Exterior Improvements project in the amount of $100,000 (8-0-1). Mr. Creech voted to wait. The Committee voted by a roll call vote in a straw poll to support the AHT’s Pre-Funding in the amount of $3,200,000 (9-0). Mr. Creech, Ms. Krieger, Ms. O’Brien, and Ms. Fenollosa expressed concern for the sustainability of funding recurring big-dollar requests from the AHT. Ms. Fenollosa shared with the Committee that she had been advised by Ms. Tung that aside from land transfers from the Town, the CPA is the only funding source of funding for the AHT. Mr. Creech suggested that the AHT may still be able to make a substantial impact with a slightly lower amount of funding from the CPA. Ms. Fenollosa conveyed that Ms. Tung had stated that the AHT was not open to lowering their FY25 request. Ms. Tung explained that the AHT’s request is based on projected requests for funding from the AHT, and added that AHT funds are used to leverage the cost to acquire or create affordable housing, rather than paying the cost in full, which has been the practice in Lexington. Ms. Walker expressed support for Ms. Tung’s comments and challenged the attendees of the meeting to consider the hardships mothers are facing when they are living in shelters with their children after having put most of their belongings in a self-storage unit. Ms. Walker commented that she supports the AHT requesting as much money as they can possibly get and added that affordable housing should be paid for by CPA funding. Mr. Pressman commented that the Town’s anticipated request for FY26 is about $12.3 million and noted that the AHT should not be the only applicant scrutinized for sustainability. Mr. Pressman also commented that the Select Board five years ago opted to address all categories except for housing, and added that the same is true this year. Ms. Fenollosa replied that the CPC cannot control what the Select Board chooses to pursue or endorse for CPA funding. The Committee voted by a roll call vote in a straw poll to support the Administrative Budget and Debt Service for FY25 in the amounts of $150,000 and $681,200, respectively (9-0). Ms. Beebee, Ms. Kosnoff, Ms. Heitz, and Ms. Prosnitz left the meeting at 6:58 PM. Mr. Sandeen asked if the debt service for FY25 included approved debt financing for the Munroe Center. Ms. Fenollosa explained that the FY25 debt service was for the Cary Memorial Building project and shared that the Munroe Center debt had not yet been issued. Ms. Fenollosa added that until the Munroe Center debt is issued, there will be no other CPA debt service after FY25. 8