HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-12-18-CEC-min-execMinutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
December 18, 2012, Executive Session
Date, Place, and Location: December 18, 2012, 8:00 A.M., Town Office Building, Reed
Room (111)
Members Present: Charles Lamb, Chair; Beth Masterman, Vice - Chair; Jill Hai;
David Kanter
Member Absent: Bill Hurley
Other Attendee: Hank Manz, Selectman; Sara Arnold, Recording Secretary
Documents Presented: None
With Mr. Lamb having called to order at 8:01 A.M. the Open Session —which had been
posted also to involve an Executive Session —at 10:01 A.M. he then declared, as the Chair,
that an Executive Session was warranted under the Open Meeting Law Exemption 6 (to
consider the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property) as the discussion in an
open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the Town —and
with the intention to reconvene in Open Session only to adjourn. A Motion to do so was
made and seconded. Each member was polled and each voted "yes" The Committee went
into Executive Session at 10:01 A.M.
Potential Acquisition of Property at 33 Marrett Road
The Committee reviewed and discussed the updates provided at the Selectmen's Executive
Session last night regarding the Scottish Rite property.
The Scottish Rite property owners:
• Have put out a call for buyers, with a deadline of February 12, 2013, and plan to
make a decision by March 1, 2013;
• Have said they want to retain the pine grove because they want to extend their
parking area, but they would consider sharing the parking;
• Are interested in retaining the Commander's House, but there is still space between
that house and the property line for a road to provide a second access to the training
center —and, if purchased, the Carriage House; and
• Have also heard a rumor that the Town is interested in building low- income housing
on what is currently open space, and this is of concern to them. They were told by
the Town that this is not true, and they have not indicated that they would include
language relating to this as part of a contingency to selling to the Town.
In Open Session last night, the Ad hoc Town -wide Facilities Master Planning Committee
(AhTFMPC) reported to the Selectmen that in its opinion the highest and best use for the
Scottish Rite training- center facility, compared to other Town needs, is as a
Community /Senior Center, but didn't take a position on the relative funding priority. The
AhTFMPC noted the following for such a Center:
Page 1 of 4
Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
December 18, 2012, Executive Session
• Beyond the acquisition cost (currently unknown), renovations to the training facility
are estimated to cost from $9 -11 million as, among other things, a number of the
facility's systems — including heating, ventilation, & air - conditioning (HVAC) —need to
be upgraded.
• A new building would cost $15 -19 million.
• The Center would require an estimated $0.5 million annually in operating costs,
without the cost of any additional staff.
• The assessed value of the Scottish Rite property that is for sale is $5.594 million.
• Although the current RS (Residential, single family) zoning allows for municipal
building, additional parking might have to be provided — especially if there were to be
a gymnasium added —and there would have to be a Site Plan Special Permit if the
renovations exceeded 10,000 square feet (likely) and a Special Permit because of
the shared use of the primary driveway access.
One of the appraisals commissioned by the Town has been characterized by a Selectman
as being too low and a rumor was cited that $10 million has been offered by a potential
buyer.
Mr. Manz noted that the Community Center Task Force has not weighed in with a position,
and it isn't known whether the CPC would support funding the portion of the property that
would be eligible under the Community Preservation Act (e.g., the open space, the original
mansion part of the training center, and potentially other portions used for recreation).
The Committee discussed issues relating to the Town buying the property. Major concerns
included:
• Adding This Project To The Queue Would Heighten Competition Among Other
Essential, Major, Capital Projects In Both The Short And Long Terms. Many of
the yearly capital requests strike at the core of our Town Government's obligation to
maintain high standards of public education and public safety, as well as adequate
infrastructure stability. This Committee is mindful that all of the requests would
benefit the Town and its residents for years to come and that everything must be
paid for with limited public funds.
We appreciate that there is a concurrent effort underway to propose a prioritization
of those requests and a prioritized funding plan for addressing them, but it's not in
hand. (This Committee acknowledges that while it would comment on such a
prioritization —both during its development and when it was finished —that, in the
end, it would be a political decision and not one for this Committee to make.)
This Committee appreciates Lexington has a rare opportunity to address two
important objectives: (1) Construction of a new, modern community /senior center,
and (2) Protection of valuable and vulnerable open space. Still, the pressure for an
immediate decision on this property raises serious questions: (1) Would allowing
funding for acquisition and renovation of the site to leapfrog other equally essential
municipal and school projects in the queue be detrimental in either the short or long
Page 2 of 4
Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
December 18, 2012, Executive Session
term? (2) Are the decision makers distracted from our core obligations because they
believe that our Town may never have a chance like this again, and because the
process is controlled by the private seller's schedule?
• Major Public Safety & Education Needs Deserve Priority. The formal mandate
for the Capital Expenditures Committee requires consideration of "...the relative
need, timing and cost of these projects, the adequacy thereof and the effect
these expenditures might have on the financial position of the Town." The
Lexington Fire Department's and the Lexington Police Department's long overdue
capital needs for new, modern, secure, and adequate command Headquarters are
well established, accepted facts. The estimated cost of a new Fire Station is likely to
be on the same order of magnitude as the acquisition and renovation of the Marrett
property. The Police Headquarters project is likely to require over $10 million.
In addition, there remains the very - large, expensive schools projects to consider.
Taken together, Lexington will face financial, departmental capability, and human
energy challenges to execute the projects even staging them along the timeline
appropriate to their needs. Gaining community support required for the debt -
exclusion votes needed for just those projects will be time intensive.
The CEC is uneasy with the Town choosing to address the Community Center and
its commitment to open space before it resolves our duty to focus on major
public- safety and schools obligations.
Major Capital Projects Have Significant and Long -Term Effects Upon the
Community and Taxpayers, and Warrant A Formal Buy -In By the Voters
Continuing the concern that this purchase and renovation could potentially crowd -out
public safety & education needs, we question whether it is good public policy to
proceed with what's likely to be a nearly $20 million expense without voter approval.
Furthermore, the adoption of the Community Preservation Act (CPA) with its funding
stream had voter approval, but we have not been provided with advice as to what
extent funding the acquisition and renovation of the property would be eligible under
the CPA; this is something the CEC would like to know before it could offer its full
support of the Marrett Road property purchase.
Any Suggestion That The Purchase and Renovation Adds Potential For
Generation of Income by Leasing A Portion Is Problematic and Premature.
First and foremost, our Town Manager has advised that the Town is not well
positioned to be a good landlord. Further, we don't know if there would need to be a
further zoning change —which might be problematic with the neighborhood.
• The Town Could Forsake A Net Tax Increase If the property could support about
10 new houses, then it is possible that residential tax payments could outweigh the
cost of added services (primarily for the schools). While this Committee has not seen
any proof plan for a residential development, we wonder whether the pressure to
Page 3 of 4
Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
December 18, 2012, Executive Session
decide is causing the decision makers to gloss over this potential revenue in favor of
a vision? This Committee understands that while the marginal cost for an additional
student is low as long as there is both physical and teaching capacity in the school,
we are continually facing the prospect of inadequate capacity and the incremental
cost then becomes very significant. The CEC wants assurances that this equation is
adequately considered before the decision to move forward with the purchase is
finalized.
• Does The Town Need or Purely Want To Buy More Property To Protect
Remaining Panoramas? While this Committee fully appreciates the value of
conservation land to the environment and the community, the purpose of the CEC is
to evaluate "...the relative need, timing and cost of these projects.." Lexington
already has very- significant holdings. Given the competing demands for funding
other essential projects, this Committee is unconvinced, at this time, that the cost of
this incremental addition would be the proper allocation of Town funds.
• Buying The Property With Any CPA Funds Means The Town May Not Resell It
for its Highest and Best Use Value. If Lexington's current vision turns out to be
unfeasible or unsustainable, the use of CPA funds for its purchase would encumber
the terms of a future sale of the property. Without the ability to sell the property, this
Committee is concerned that the Town could be locked into long -term funding of an
unrealizable vision with dollars that are sorely needed for other capital projects —
many of which are critical to the general welfare of our Town.
In the light of the above concerns, a motion was made and seconded that the Chair
communicate the same to the Chair of the Board of Selectmen. Vote 4 -0
The Committee agreed that this could be further discussed in an Executive Session on
January 4, 2013.
Return to Open Session: At 11:04 A.M., it was moved and seconded that the Committee
return to Open Session. Each member was polled. Vote: 4 -0
These Minutes were approved by the CEC at its Open- Session meeting on
January 22, 2013, but without making the content public as it was still sensitive at that time.
In response to a query by Mr. Kanter on April 11, 2013, Carl Valente, Town Manager,
advised on April 12, 2013, that the content of these Minutes could then be made public and
the CEC did so by submitting these Minutes to the Town's public archives on that same
date.
Page 4 of 4