|
Lexington Home Page
|
Help
|
About
|
Browse
Search
2009-03-19-CPC-min
Breadcrumb Navigation:
TownOfLexington-Public
>
WEB PUBLISHED-PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
>
MINUTES-REPORTS-COMMITTEES ARCHIVE
>
Community Preservation Committee-CPC
>
Minutes
>
2006-2009
>
2009
>
2009-03-19-CPC-min
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/10/2019 11:18:00 AM
Creation date
10/19/2009 6:00:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Archives
Keywords or Subject
Minutes - CPC - Community Preservation Committee
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Community Preservation Committee <br />Thursday, March 19, 2009 <br />G-15 <br />4:00 pm <br /> <br />Present: <br />Betsey Weiss, Chair; Marilyn Fenollosa, Vice Chair; Joel Adler, Norman <br />Cohen, Jeanne Krieger, Wendy Manz, Leo McSweeney, Nathalie Rice, Admin. Asst., <br />and Dick Wolk. Also in attendance were Charles Lamb, David Kanter, and Shirley Stoltz <br />of the Capital Expenditures Committee, Glen Parkerson of the Appropriations <br />Committee, Carl Valente, Town Manager, Rob Addelson, Finance Director, and Maryann <br />McCall-Taylor, Town Planner. <br /> <br />Absent: <br /> Sandy Shaw <br /> <br />The meeting was called to order at 4:05 pm. <br /> <br />The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the options for paying for the upcoming <br />acquisition of the Leary land, and to discuss the appropriations into the various CPA <br />“buckets”. <br /> <br /> <br />1.Bonding vs. Paying cash for the Leary Land – <br />Ms. Weiss opened the meeting <br />and turned it over the to members assembled for a discussion of whether to bond <br />or pay cash for the upcoming acquisition of the Leary land. Mr. Lamb of the CEC <br />stated his strong opinion that with 7-9 million in the CPA accounts, bonding the <br />purchase could not be justified. Mr. Cohen refuted this opinion and pointed out <br />that with other large purchases such as the Busa property, it made sense to bond <br />while the rates were low, (at approximately 2%). He felt the Town could be in a <br />position to actually make money in the years to come. He also said he had heard <br />the argument that if the Leary land were bonded, the CPA could not be revoked if <br />voters wished to do so. Mr. Cohen stressed the point that irrespective of a CPA <br />revocation, the payments for bonding would still be taken out of the General <br />Fund. He also pointed out that the CPC would not be able to bond appropriations <br />for any future private projects, such as the Hancock-Clark House or Douglas <br />House. Mr. Kanter, who agreed with Mr. Lamb, made the point that the CPA was <br />not approved by the Town on the basis of using CPA funds to “make money”. He <br />said with a proven cash flow, and money in the CPC accounts, the prudent thing <br />to do would be to pay cash. <br /> <br />Ms. Fenollosa asked about the transaction costs of a bonding, to which Mr. Lamb <br />replied that it would depend upon the amount bonded. The general figure of <br />$35,000 came up as a possible figure. Ms. Weiss said that she had talked to Stuart <br />Saginor of the Community Preservation Coalition, and he had noted that if a <br />community has a large reserve in its accounts, there is often pressure to reduce the <br />percentage of the surcharge. In Lexington’s case, this could be a reduction to 2% <br />or even 1%. Ms. Krieger noted that there has been no discussion in Town about <br />reducing the CPA surcharge percentage. <br /> 1 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.