Community Preservation Committee

Public Meeting of June 28,2005

9:00 a.m.

Members Present: Elaine Anderson, Chair; Tim Hazel, Co-Chair; William Dougal; Eric Dray; Nancy Jacobsen; Stephen Milkewicz; Winthrop Smith.

Consultant: Laura Shoefelt, Falmouth Housing Authority

The meeting was called to order at 9:10 a.m.

Meeting Agenda.

Public Statements.

Laura brought to the committee's attention a Housing With Love Walk from Provincetown to Falmouth on July 11 2005 starting at 8:30 a.m.

Chairman's Updates:

Treg Kaeselau submitted his resignation as the Recreation representative on the Committee. A new Recreation representative is awaited.

Mona Anderson was present at the meeting as the newly appointed 'at large' member of the Committee. Because she had not yet been sworn in, she participated in the discussion but did not vote.

Emails have passed back and forth between Cheryl Andrews, B.O.S., and Elaine clarifying what the Selectmen would need from the Committee when they come before it if the B.O.S was to be asked to take a position. Eric pointed out that the Committee can act without Selectmen approval. It was, however, agreed that the Committee would seek such approval.

Annie Howard, Co-Chairman of the Planning Board would welcome a presentation from the Committee when it is ready to make one.

A contract for Laura, which had taken some time to pass back and forth among the parties, has been approved by the B.O.S. for the fiscal year. The requested amount has been increased from 15K to 25k so that there would be additional fiunds for legal or other support.

Continued Discussion with Laura Shoefelt.

Eric, the representative from the Historical Commission, added a section covering the proposed use of its 10% of C.P.A. funds.

The discussion started with the section titled Goals. Bill reminded the Committee that two points had to be emphasised: that 2/3 of the C.P.A. funds be used to create affordable rental (as opposed to purchase) units; that lower income and middle income units had to be created. Laura disagreed, stating that funds could be used for lower income or median, not middle, income. Tim disagreed that the C.P.C. was locked into rental as opposed to purchase units by any documents.

Eric suggested that the C.P.C. make clear that it can only address/solve a piece of the problem, not the whole problem.

Elaine suggested that the Plan was a dynamic document subject to revision over time.

Win questioned whether the purchase units would allow potential buyers to conform to Fannie Mae requirements regarding income/mortgage payments/real estate taxes and common charges. Laura stated that she had taken such numbers into consideration when she came up with her figures.

Eric wanted the word 'agencies; replaced with 'organisations' under the Potential Uses of Funds section.

Win commented that Building Commissioner Doug Taylor had stated at a Planning Board meeting that accessory apartments would not 'count' in the total of affordable units. Laura stated that they would as long as they were deeded as affordable for perpetuity.

Bill asked about the word 'market' under Goals. It is a description of housing, not of income levels. Laura agreed to change it. She also commented that there may be projects which would require a market component to make it workable.

Eric objected to the wording of the fifth Goal. Laura agreed to rephrase it in the next draft

Bill asked about the term of the deed restriction the Committee could use. Laura answered 'in perpetuity.'

Bill wants the Committee to make sure it has a completion time table in the event that the Plan or other documents need to go before Town Meeting at a Special Town Meeting. Laura will rework the schedule she is using. The agreement was that the Committee would indicate to the Selectmen/Town Clerk when they would be ready and let them/him work with that.

Under Potential Uses, Eric questioned whether the Committee should move Re-Develop Existing Buildings into the first section and move New Community Housing into the second section to emphasise the position of the Committee. Bill reminded the Committee that it had to be fiscally responsible about the use of the funds, trying to get the best bang for the buck. Tim asked why the C.P.C. was locked into the numbers of units needed to be created. Laura suggested that the Committee be flexible in any decisions.

Bill requested that Growth Management be stated under Goals. The committee had to work with existing documents.

Win suggested that under the projects included under Re-Develop Existing Buildings language be inserted which would encourage the donation of buildings to then be sued for the creation of affordable housing.

Laura suggested that project examples 1 and 3 in 'Projects May Include' be combined.

Win suggested that 'residential' be inserted into the third project type to clarify the difference between the use of commercial buildings above.

Mona suggested the use of 'owner unknown' properties as another source for buildings. Laura stated that the easiest method was to transfer such properties directly to the Housing Authority.

Win questioned how the Downpayment Assistance would work for an individual. Laura explained that the Committee would request an amount of money for each cycle to be set aside for such purposes.

Eric asked if properties had to conform to federal requirements in things such as room size or sanitation. Laura stated that projects using C.P.A. funds would have to meet federal standards.

Laura pointed out where deed restrictions could not be added when funds are used. Tim added that middle income properties using funds would be deed restricted.

Steve will address the Open Space section of the Plan.

Eric wants to sharpen the language of the Historic Preservation section, such as using the word 'threatened' with 'acquistion.'

Eric wanted the 10% total earmarked for Historic Preservation for such intangible things as a survey of historic properties done, etc. Bill would like to see a long term plan to the section. It was also stated that the Committee could bank funds for future use.

Mona suggested that college students could be used for some historic preservation projects.

It was decided that the next meeting would be held on Tuesday July 12 at 9:00 a.m.

It was also agreed that meetings would last 90 minutes.

The next meeting will focus on the application form of which there are currently two examples.

The meeting was adjourned at 10:37 a.m.

These minutes were approved by a vote of the members of the Community Preservation Committee on Tuesday 12 July 2005.

These minutes were then submitted by Winthrop Smith, member of the C.P.C.