HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-04-30-CEC-minMinutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
April 30, 2013
Date, Place, and Location: April 30, 2013, 8:00 A.M., Town Office Building, Reed Room
(111)
Members Present: Charles Lamb, Chair; Beth Masterman, Vice - Chair; Jill Hai; Bill Hurley;
David Kanter
Others Present: Aaron Henry, Lexington Assistant Planning Director; Bob Pressman,
Lexington Community Preservation Committee; Deborah Mauger, Chair, Lexington Board
of Selectmen
Documents Presented:
• Presentation: Westmetro HOME Consortium Update for Lexington,
December 3, 2012
• HOME Materials for Next Week's Meeting (Mr. Aaron's e-mail, April 23, 2013, with
four attachments (HOME Investment Partnerships Program Summary, Outline of
HOME Project Requirements, Lexington's HOME Program Summary, &
Massachusetts Income Limits)
• Background Information on the Federal HOME Program (Mr. Kanter's e-mail,
April 29, 2013, to the Committee members.
• Charge for the Ad hoc Community Center Advisory Committee (AhCCAC) (Adopted
by the Board of Selectmen [BoS] on April 23, 2013)
• Outline Minutes of the CEC Meeting, April 30, 2013
Call to Order: Mr. Lamb called the meeting to order at 8:00 A.M.
Lexington's Continued Participation in the HOME Consortium
As the BoS had requested this Committee's input on the pros and cons of the proposed
changes to the administration of the MetroWest HOME Consortium —of which the City of
Newton is the lead entity and Lexington is currently a member —and whether Lexington
should continue its participation, Mr. Henry had been invited to brief the Committee on the
Federal HOME program that was created by the Federal HOME Investment Partnerships
Act and is managed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
That program provides local governments that would not otherwise qualify for funding to
meet their affordable housing needs may join with other contiguous units of local
government to form a consortium that can directly participate in the HOME program for
Federal funding. The Lexington BoS plans to address whether Lexington should continue
its participation at its meeting on May 6, 2013.
Because of the need for each member to be geographically contiguous to another member,
and as Lincoln has already discontinued its participation, if Lexington were not to continue
its participation, then Bedford, Concord, Sudbury, Wayland, Natick, and Framingham would
lose a contiguous relationship with a remaining member of the consortium which, in turn,
has a contiguous relationship to Newton and, thus, those named municipalities would not
be eligible to continue as members.
Page 1 of 3
Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
April 30, 2013
Mr. Henry discussed funding that Lexington has gained by having been in the consortium,
Lexington's current project, and the Town's remaining grant balance after that project. For
all practical purposes, it is the Lexington Housing Authority that has the potential for
identifying HOME - eligible projects. He explained that funds are, and would continue to be,
allocated to members by HUD; the past administrative practices used by Newton with
regard to to grant balances; and the new practices contemplated to be used during the
upcoming 3 -year qualification period.
Mr. Henry then presented the pros & cons for Lexington's continued participation as seen
by the Lexington Planning Department and why, in the end, it believes the Town should
continue its participation —at least for the next 3 -year term. The key accommodation for
Lexington's continued participation is that administrative changes would give Lexington
priority access to the pooled funds if the Town only requests them once every three years.
The Committee then discussed the matter. That included questioning whether the
HOME - related effort by the Planning Department during the upcoming 3 -year term would
impair its ability to address other priority, on- going, efforts such as the development of an
affordable- housing production plan for presentation to the BoS for approval. Mr. Henry
replied that, in his opinion, it wouldn't. The consensus of the Committee was to support
continued participation for the next 3 -year term, but still had strong reservations about the
"distractions" that continued participation creates for the Planning Department with
potential —if not probable —low return on the Department's time. If the geographical
considerations affecting the other member towns were not present, then the Committee's
recommendation might have been different.
It was moved and seconded that the Committee's input to the BoS be that the Committee
supports Lexington renewing its participation in the MetroWest Consortium for the next
3 -year qualifying period (FY2014 -2017) with serious concerns with respect to the Town's
ability during that period to find one or more eligible projects and whether Lexington could
prevail in the new lottery process even with a preference to gaining funding in light of the
competition within the consortium. Further, the CEC recognizes the other housing - related
activities that the Planning Department has and remains concerned about that
Department's ability to focus on those as well as about the Lexington Housing Authority's
ability to identify eligible projects. Vote: 5-0
Mr. Lamb will advise the BoS of the Committee's conclusion.
Ad hoc Community Center Advisory Committee (AhCCAC)
The Committee discussed the recently adopted Charge for the AhCCAC and how its
recommendations to the BoS will have a bearing, over time, on the Town's Capital
program.
As the Charge provides for this Committee to designate a non - voting liaison, this
Committee discussed which member would be willing to serve that role. Ms. Masterman
Page 2 of 3
Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
April 30, 2013
volunteered and her designation was unanimously endorsed by the other members.
Mr. Lamb will advise the BoS of that designation.
Member Concerns and Liaison Reports
Mr. Kanter alerted the Committee that the BoS has drafted a Charge for a Community
Farming Committee and is asking for comments from the public.
Ms. Masterman expressed a concern about Committee members on occasion as Town -
Meeting members having voted contrary to the positions they have taken on the
Committee. Mr. Lamb and Mr. Kanter responded that they hold their responsibilities as
different in the two roles and, thus, sometimes find their votes are different. While they see
the Committee as responsible for advising and making recommendations to Town Meeting
on what Capital program is viewed by the Committee as being in the Town's best interests
under the policies that have been established —with that establishment not within the
purview of the Committee —both feel their Town - Meeting- member responsibility is to look
beyond just the Committee's role. That broader view can lead them to vote differently than
they do as Committee members.
Approval of Minutes
As no other business was before the Committee, the Committee then reviewed the
presented Outline Minutes for this meeting and updated it to reflect the actions taken. Then
it was moved and seconded to approve the updated version with the inclusion of what will
be the actual time of adjournment —and with Mr. Kanter authorized to make the needed
changes. Vote: 5 -0
Adjourn: A Motion was made and seconded at 9:45 A.M. to adjourn. Vote: 5 -0
These Minutes were approved by the CEC at its meeting on April 30, 2013.
Page 3 of 3