2009-03-19-CPC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Community Preservation Committee Thursday, March 19, 2009 G-15 4:00 pm Present: Betsey Weiss, Chair; Marilyn Fenollosa, Vice Chair; Joel Adler, Norman Cohen, Jeanne Krieger, Wendy Manz, Leo McSweeney, Nathalie Rice, Admin. Asst., and Dick Wolk. Also in attendance were Charles Lamb, David Kanter, and Shirley Stoltz of the Capital Expenditures Committee, Glen Parkerson of the Appropriations Committee, Carl Valente, Town Manager, Rob Addelson, Finance Director, and Maryann McCall-Taylor, Town Planner. Absent: Sandy Shaw The meeting was called to order at 4:05 pm. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the options for paying for the upcoming acquisition of the Leary land, and to discuss the appropriations into the various CPA “buckets”. 1.Bonding vs. Paying cash for the Leary Land – Ms. Weiss opened the meeting and turned it over the to members assembled for a discussion of whether to bond or pay cash for the upcoming acquisition of the Leary land. Mr. Lamb of the CEC stated his strong opinion that with 7-9 million in the CPA accounts, bonding the purchase could not be justified. Mr. Cohen refuted this opinion and pointed out that with other large purchases such as the Busa property, it made sense to bond while the rates were low, (at approximately 2%). He felt the Town could be in a position to actually make money in the years to come. He also said he had heard the argument that if the Leary land were bonded, the CPA could not be revoked if voters wished to do so. Mr. Cohen stressed the point that irrespective of a CPA revocation, the payments for bonding would still be taken out of the General Fund. He also pointed out that the CPC would not be able to bond appropriations for any future private projects, such as the Hancock-Clark House or Douglas House. Mr. Kanter, who agreed with Mr. Lamb, made the point that the CPA was not approved by the Town on the basis of using CPA funds to “make money”. He said with a proven cash flow, and money in the CPC accounts, the prudent thing to do would be to pay cash. Ms. Fenollosa asked about the transaction costs of a bonding, to which Mr. Lamb replied that it would depend upon the amount bonded. The general figure of $35,000 came up as a possible figure. Ms. Weiss said that she had talked to Stuart Saginor of the Community Preservation Coalition, and he had noted that if a community has a large reserve in its accounts, there is often pressure to reduce the percentage of the surcharge. In Lexington’s case, this could be a reduction to 2% or even 1%. Ms. Krieger noted that there has been no discussion in Town about reducing the CPA surcharge percentage. 1