HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-04-28-SBFRC-min RECEIVED
2022 01 Juin, 1232 Ipin't
Ad Hoc Stone Building Feasibility/Reuse Committee TOWN CLERK
Town of Lexington, MA LEXINGTON
MA
April 28, 2022 8:00 AM
MINUTES
Attending: Jaclyn Anderson (Left 8:30), Cristina Burwell,Jeff Howry, Mark Manasas (Left 9:02), Meg
Muckenhoupt (Appropriations Comm. Liaison), Melinda Nasardinov, Paul Smyke (Left 9:00) , Anne
Grady (arrived into the meeting), Carolyn Goldstein, Lester Savage (Left 8:45)
Absent: Suzie Barry (Cary Library Trustees Liaison), Doug Lucente (Select Board Liaison), Anne Grady
Guests: Elaine Ashton, Bob Pressman
Recording Secretary: Cristina Burwell
The meeting began at 8:08 with an online Roll Call & Reading of the Statement on Use of
Virtual Meetings.
Minutes for April 21, 2022 were approved unanimously, as motioned by Mark and seconded
by Jeff. Jeff will edit minutes for 4/7 and we can vote.
Public Comments & General Announcements
Public comment was made noting displeasure that the link that was provided was not the link
of the webinar for the 4/27 public forum. The committee did provide a work-around by a
member greeting attendees in that space and redirecting them with the correct link.
Bob Pressman noted that CPC gives careful consideration to each application, should this
group or the Town make an application to CPC in the next cycle. TMM don't have an
established date for the fall town meeting b/c they don't know in advance when that will be.
The practice now seems to be that there is a special fall town meeting. The established
deadline for receiving applications for annual town meeting is November 1st, and it is not
customary for groups to meet with the CPC in advance of an application, but they sometimes
do.
Jeff noted that he wanted to discuss some things that he and Les have worked on, and that he
would provide to the committee and discuss next week.
Public Forum #3 Debrief
Overall everyone was very pleased at both the feedback and the material we presented -
encouraged that people with many different perspectives seemed to agree with the vision
and how it resonated with them.
1
There are 2 SBFRC meetings before our meeting with the Select Board. Jeff to confirm the
Select Board and Trustees meetings are zoom meetings, and not in person, as well as what
materials are required to be sent in advance (e.g. Trustees by May 9th. Jeff would like to make
part of the presentation to Trustees and Select Board with content that he wants in the
presentation (discussed later in the meeting). Discussion to follow on making presentation
hybrid or online, etc.
Final Report
• Hope is that we look at keeping the report concise for easy reading, and scanning of
highlights, with the main body a better place to synthesize and point to highlights.
• Mark volunteered to take on summarizing the last two proposals
• Appendix to be reviewed for what items have been referenced in the main body of the
document.
• Vision to be clear and well-written is important and we will want to focus on it as a
committee. Committee members to send vision comments to Paul and Jackie.
Comment was made to make sure to put vision in the forefront.
• Jeff picked 6 related properties that showed a range of arrangements from other
towns that might be parallel to the Stone Building. Size affects programming and
relationships with the Town government. The amount of programming space will
determine the amount of income an entity can generate and carry the building in terms
of expenses. Initially in the first 5 years there will need to be more support to get the
building up and running. Jeff referenced a graph showing a diminishing line of
municipal financial support as nonprofit gets involved, but Town has to commit early
on that it will support the building.
• This relates to a phased approach noted by Carolyn. Our thinking has led to a Phase 1,
it would be helpful to SB to chart out further phases.
• Committee members expressed not being comfortable stating numbers that we have
not seen evidence for ($100k reference). Request to Jeff to summarize the range of
expenses for historic structures by the type of governance they have (we have those
numbers). *Amendment not possible task as noted by Jeff 5/12
• (Carolyn) that is what I see as the question of the Select Board -not us finding a way to
do it, but exploring possibilities and seeing what is possible. Explore and communicate
what we have found - understand and agree on.
• Question raised if we have access to tourism numbers . . .
Ways responsibilities are shared
2
Window on the range for sb to consider unique cases, situationally different ... incubation.
Anticipate phase 2 one way could be dominant NPO emerges in phase 1. Lps remains
involved to a great degree so that town wants to bring resources to support (in parallel w npo
component). No answer, possibilities.
RFQ
Adjournment was made at 9:16, as motioned by Cristina, seconded by Melinda and
unanimously approved.
3