2019-12-05-CPC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

an argument that section 6 refers to operating funds and LexHAB's request is not operating funds but rather capital funds. Mr. Makarious stated that funding the project would be legally risky and is not in line with other Towns. A conservative position is to not reimburse for work previously done. Ms. Nelson stated that the statute only refers to operating funds. Mr. Makarious stated that the no supplanting section is an unclear area of CPA, and there is a legal risk at the Department of Revenue (DOR) and in the courts. Mr. Pato stated that he would like to defer LexHAB's Farmview request until after the Board of Selectmen (BOS) reviews it. He is concerned for many reasons and believes that the Board did not anticipate this request after the Town Manager signed the memo approving prior payments. Ms. Walker asked if Town Counsel might change their legal opinion based on the Ms. Nelson's memo. Mr. Makarious stated that their recommendation will not change and that it is a recommendation based on their interpretation of the law. Mr. Pressman stated that he thinks it is wrong to defer this to the BOS and the Committee can vote not to defer it to the BOS. Mr. Hornig stated that he would like to vote to place it on the warrant as TBD. After a motion duly made and seconded the Committee voted (7-0) to place LexHAB's Farmview request on the warrant as a placeholder with no figure given for FY20 & FY21 until the Selectmen discuss the req uest. Mr. Makarious discussed the legal opinion for the proposed project "Athletic Fields Feasibility Study". Mr. Makarious explained that it is not clear how this project would lead directly to CPA eligible capital improvements. An inventory or analysis it too broad to be eligible for CPA funding. Ms. Kosnoff explained that the CIP does not address specific Town-owned properties. The Committee discussed allowing Ms. Rhodes to go back to the Recreation Committee to revise the scope of the project to potentially be CPA funding-eligible or to withdraw the FY21 application. Ms. Rhodes stated that she will discuss the project with the Recreation Committee during their next meeting on 12-18-19. Debt Service- Ms. Kosnoff distributed an Excel spreadsheet to the Committee detailing CPA funds, projected revenues, and debt service (Community Preservation Fund Balance). Ms. Kosnoff stated that the spreadsheet is similar to the original one distributed on 11-7-19 with minor adjustments in the end of year balances and project buckets. The total amount of debt obligated to be paid in FY21 is $3,016,730. Preliminary estimates suggest that the Community Preservation Fund balance will be $5,239,178 after debt service and funding all FY21 project requests with the exception of the Athletic Fields Feasibility Study which was removed from the spreadsheet due to ineligibility. The bucketed amount for LexHAB 116 Vine Street Design Funds will be increased from $75,000 to $100,000 to enable study of the possibility of reusing the Hosmer House at the site. Ms. Kosnoff informed the Committee that the Center Track Note can be prepaid, but it is not very cost effective in regards to interest. After a motion duly made and seconded, the CPC voted (7-0) to approve debt service for FY21 funding. 2