Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-03-18-CPC-min Minutes of the Community Preservation Committee Tuesday, March 18, 2014 4:00 pm, Parker Room Town Office Building, 1625 Massachusetts Avenue Present: Committee Members: Marilyn Fenollosa, Chair; Richard Wolk, Vice-Chair; Richard Canale, Norman Cohen, David Horton, Jeanne Krieger, Leo McSweeney, Robert Pressman and Sandra Shaw. Administrative Assistant : Nathalie Rice Also in attendance were Joe Pato, member of the Board of Selectmen (BOS); David Kanter, Vice- Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC), Glenn Parker, Chair of the Appropriation Committee (AP) and Rob Addelson, Assistant Town Manager for Finance. The meeting was called to order at 4:04 pm. by Ms. Fenollosa. 1.Updates on FY15 Projects and Funding a.) Cary Memorial Upgrades Project, Article 2, Special Town Meeting - Rob Addelson, Assistant Town Manager for Finance was in attendance to discuss the funding options for the Cary Memorial Upgrades project, currently estimated at $8,241,350 (and proposed to be bonded over a 10-year period). Mr. Addelson explained that at the Board of Selectmen’s meeting on the previous evening, Selectman Joe Pato presented an updated estimate of student growth which indicated a possible increased demand for school facilities in the upcoming 5+ years. Mr. Pato then reiterated his points, explaining that current trends in Lexington’s demographics showed a significant increase in recent years (from 20% to 45%) in the number of families with school age children who reside in apartments. This growing demographic, among other factors, forced Mr. Pato to rethink the Cary Memorial Upgrades project and the wisdom of burdening the Town with long term debt. Mr. Pato stated that if a new school was needed in Lexington, the cost could be up to $50M, particularly if land costs were included. He noted that although the renovations to the Cary Memorial Building were necessary, they were to some extent discretionary. He said he voted against the Cary project for this reason. (The Board of Selectmen’s vote was 3-2, with the Chair siding with Mr. Pato.) Ms. Fenollosa responded to Mr. Pato’s comments by noting that the CPA was passed in Lexington because historic preservation, open space acquisition, affordable housing and recreation, have historically been poorly funded because they arediscretionary. She said it was the intent of the State statute to specifically “represent” these important community needs. She stressed the importance of leveraging State funding which provides Lexington with nearly a quarter of its CPA funding via the “State match”. Ms. Fenollosa stated that the Cary Memorial Upgrades project was a CPC priority, having been under consideration for over three years. Delaying the project, she cautioned, would ultimately make it more expensive. She asked if Mr. Pato also objected to the funding of the Community Center Renovation project, to which he replied that he did not, since that project involved minimal debt ($451,000) and was necessary to 1 make the building functional for its intended use. The Cary Memorial Building, he reasoned, could be used in its present state. Mr. Cohen added his opinion regarding Mr. Pato’s concerns about long-term CPA bonding, noting that the availability of the State Matching funds completely “changes the game”. He explained that it made sense to take advantage of State funding, and noted that had Lexington approved the CPA when neighboring Bedford did, Lexington would have had an additional $6M for CPA projects. Mr. Addelson resumed his presentation regarding re-modeling the debt picture for funding the Cary Memorial Upgrades project. He said there would be $1.6M in premium funds that would be returned to CPF, which could be appropriated at a 2014 Fall Special Town Meeting. He said his current model showed $200,000 in the Historic Resources balance that could also be made available for appropriation at that meeting, as well as an estimated residual of $880,000 in the th Undesignated Fund Balance (“the 4 bucket”). He said he would need to do further modeling to get a sense of the impact of either (1) paying more cash up front for the Cary Memorial project, or (2) shortening the length of the bond. He said it was likely he could lower the amount of the debt payment, but was less certain about shortening the term of the bond. Mr. Addelson said it was possible that there might be additional monies in the Stabilization Fund and in “Excluded Debt” that could mitigate an increase in taxes. Ms. Fenollosa asked if it was likely that the Town would receive a premium on the upcoming February 2015 bond issuance, to which Mr. Addelson replied that he was unable to predict such a return. He explained that the authorization at the upcoming March Special Town Meeting to fund the Cary project with the issuance of debt would have to be for the full $8,241,350. He added, however, that it might be possible to stage the issuance of debt to meet the cash flow needs of the project. He said he had had preliminary discussions with the architects and believed he might be able to reduce total bonding by initially issuing a bond of only $3M and following it several months later with a new bond issuance. Such rolling debt appropriations could reduce the total debt burden by taking advantage of CPA cash as it become available. Mr. Cohen stated that the Cary Memorial Upgrades project required a 2/3rds vote, which if not received, might sideline the project indefinitely. Mr. Kanter of the CEC felt his committee would encourage the payment of the Cary Memorial Upgrades project with any available CPA cash appropriated at the 2014 Fall Special Town Meeting. He said the CEC would likely wait until the fall before recommending a term length on any bonding, however. Mr. Parker of the Appropriations Committee stated that his committee had voted (8-1) to support the project, and that the sole negative vote had revolved around the issue of financing. He encouraged the CPC to “figure out what it wanted to do” and let Mr. Addelson “find a way to do it”. He also encouraged the CPC not to leave $2M in the CPF as a cushion from year to year. He said that the CPC “should put the funds to work”. Dick Wolk and David Horton asked Mr. Pato if he could suggest an acceptable term for bonding of the Cary Memorial Building project, specifically one that would ease his concern about burdening the Town with long term debt obligations. Mr. Wolk suggested modeling a “couple of scenarios” and Mr. Kanter added, that at the very least, modeling the “no cash in the reserve” option might be instructive. Mr. Parker stated that he did not think the alternative of additional cash payments for Cary could bring down the term length to five years, but perhaps might 2 shorten it to seven. Mr. Addelson responded to a question about “callable” bonds, which he said gives more flexibility, but is more expensive. Mr. Pato responded to Mr. Wolk’s and Mr. Horton’s original inquiry stating that he would rely upon Mr. Addelson’s expertise regarding funding alternatives to the proposed 10-year bonding. Based upon the discussion with Mr. Addelson and Mr. Pato, the CPC reaffirmed its commitment to the Cary Memorial Building Upgrades project. It voted unanimously (9-0) to recommend the project to the March Special Town Meeting and to fund the project through the issuance of long term debt. It agreed to reexamine the financing plan prior to a proposed 2014 Fall Special Town Meeting upon the recommendations of Mr. Addelson regarding the use of available CPF cash (and perhaps other sources of funding) to reduce the term of the bond. b.) Visitor Center – Design Phase – There was a brief discussion of the Visitor Center Project in which Ms. Fenollosa questioned Mr. Pato about the Board of Selectmen’s position on the project. Mr. Pato responded that the Board had not made any recommendation on the project other than to recommend its funding. Mr. Kanter referred to the description in the Brown Book (page XI -16, Budget and Financing Plan) for FY15, which states, “At this time, the Board of Selectmen is still in discussion on whether this scope is warranted. If funding is approved, it will not authorize design to begin before it receives and reviews program recommendations for the facility”.Mr. Kanter said the CEC would be recommending approval of the project (5-0) and would leave the finalization of the design to the Selectmen. The CPC re-voted this project, with a (7-0-2) vote. c.) Remaining Projects Voted – The CPC reaffirmed its votes on a number of projects, since several reflected only seven member attendance. The Committee took new votes on the following projects, all of which received unanimous (9-0) CPA recommendation to the upcoming Special and Annual Town Meetings: Renovations to the Community Center, Sidewalk Construction for the Community Center (which may be Indefinitely Postponed), Hastings Park Gazebo Renovations, and the Battle Green Streetscape Improvements. The final votes of the CPC under Articles 2 and 3 of Special Town Meeting and Article 8 of Annual Town Meeting are as follows: Article 2: Cary Memorial Building Upgrades, $8,241,350 (9-0) Article 3: Amendment of Art. 5 of 2013 Nov. Special Town Meeting, Renovations to the Community Center, $5,797,184 (9-0) Article 8: a)Sidewalk Construction for the Community Center, $100,000 – (9-0) b)Visitor Center Design Phase, $59,332 – (7-0-2) c)Hasting Park Gazebo Renovations, $120,000 – (9-0) d)HC Inventory Forms for Listed Buildings, $35,000 – (9-0) e)Battle Green Streetscape Improvements, $63,000 – (9-0) f)Vynebrook Village Renovations, $300,551 (9-0) g)LexHAB Set-Aside Funds for Development of Affordable Housing at the Busa Property, $750,000 – (9-0) h)Lincoln Park Field Improvements, $200,000 – (9-0) 3 i)Park and Playground Improvements, $65,000 – (9-0) j)Park Improvements – Athletic Fields, $100,000 – (9-0) k)Park Improvements – Hard Court Resurfacing, $85,000 – (9-0) l)Parker Meadow Accessible Trail D&E, $34,500 – (9-0) m)Debt Service – Combined Costs, $1,600,807 – (9-0) n)Administrative Budget, $150,000 – (9-0) The meeting was adjourned at 5:43 pm. The following document was presented at the meeting: 1.CPA Funding Model, “CPA Fund – Projected Revenues and Expenditures” – presented by Mr. Addelson, Assistant Town Manager for Finance. Respectfully submitted, Nathalie Rice Administrative Assistant Community Preservation Committee 4