Link back to Community Preservation Committee page
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Hingham Town Hall
7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Phil Edmundson, Judy Sneath, Bill Reardon, Sarah Dewey, Jim Watson, John Kelleher, Sally Weston, Gene Babin, AdCom Liaison David Ellison
Members Absent: John Riley
Chairman Phil Edmundson called the meeting to order at 7:05P.M.
The minutes from the February 12, 2009 meeting were approved as amended.
Whitney Wharf, Mill Pond Outfall Crossing – Unspent Appropriations
Chairman Edmundson discussed the need to return unspent funds to the CPC general reserve or to the respective categories from which they came in order to ensure that the projects recommended to 2009 Town Meeting can be funded. Nick Amdur, Harbor Development Committee Chair stated that of the $50,000 appropriated for the Mill Pond Outfall Crossing, $7,400 was spent on an engineering study, which concluded that the bridge design would not work. Mr. Amdur, speaking for the Harbor Development Committee went on to say, “We said we would return the rest of the Mill Pond money. We don’t agree with the Whitney Wharf money going back to the CPC general reserve because of the problems we are having with the fence. We asked the Town to seek corrective action. It took several years to get a response. Town Counsel said he did not recommend pursuing the contractor, Vine Associates. The Selectmen said they will take the fence down. Harbor Development thinks that is dangerous. We want to spend $50,000-$120,000, based on estimates received last October, for a new fence. We are requesting to retain the Whitney Wharf funds.”
Bill Reardon suggested that the Selectmen’s decision to tear down the fence may have been due to a misunderstanding. They considered if it is so bad, we’d be better off with no fence than with one that isn’t sturdy. The Town Wharf doesn’t have a fence. If you fell you’d fall 10-12 ft. Absent a fence it is more of a danger.
Gene Babin asked if there was performance bond and, if so, was it released? Harbor Development representatives were not sure.
Chairman Edmundson asked about the current condition of the fence. Nick Amdur replied that there is flaky paint and rust, and that several posts are loose. Harbor Development asked the Selectmen to repair the grout to solidify the fence. The grout would serve its purpose for the foreseeable future. Grant Hansel said that was approximately one year.
In response to Chairman Edmundson’s question regarding CPC finances, Bill Reardon responded that the CPC authorized $1,010,000 in new appropriations, and that there is an additional $53,187 in unspent funds.
After further discussion about the length of time money should remain allocated to any project, the CPC articulated a process to return unspent funds to the general fund:
1. Check with the grantee to confirm that the project is complete and meets the original specifications before returning funds.
2. Projects will be subject to an automatic review if they are not complete within 18 months after the grant voted by Town Meeting. Project proponents must apply to the CPC for an extension, or the CPC may consider returning unspent funds to the CPC general fund or to the appropriate restricted fund. The Committee voted unanimously to adopt the process.
Chairman Edmundson then asked Harbor Development to return to the next meeting with a specific use in mind for the remaining funds.
Bill Reardon identified unspent funds from projects that have been completed, which can be returned to the appropriate CPC fund. The Committee voted unanimously to return the specified unspent funds.
Fort Hill Veteran’s Home
Mrs. Plante, owner of the property asked to provide additional information to the Committee. She estimated that the 6 rooms proposed for rental could each be rented for $600 per month. Utilities are approximately $800/month, and insurance is $1,000/year. She estimated $50,000 to $60,000 in capital improvements. Chairman Edmundson asked if the house manager would pay rent. Mrs. Plante said that was still a question. He said that the Committee needed to see a comprehensive operating plan before it could give the project further consideration. He asked if the project is the Housing Trust’s responsibility, or the CPC, or both? He said that further conversation with the Housing Trust would be necessary to determine how best tot go forward. Judy Sneath said that this is such a great project; it’s a surprise that a plan hasn’t already been developed. Bill Reardon said that the project may just not be ripe this year and that given the other projects under consideration, he didn’t think the CPC will be able to do anything this year with this project.
Beal Street Wetlands Delineation
Gene Babin said that he suggested increasing the amount originally requested for this project because the amount originally requested would not cover all the work necessary. Further discussion identified confusion surrounding what work has been completed and what hasn’t. Mr. Babin recommended withdrawing the application. Chairman Edmundson asked attendee Bob Keyes from the Housing Authority to find out what’s going on, and to coordinate with Gene Babin if the Housing Authority would like to go forward with the project.
Surtax Reduction
Chairman Edmundson asked the Committee how we should approach the reduction. He asked if we should take an active role in defending the current surtax? Bill Reardon said that he would be uncomfortable not taking an active role because it could be interpreted that even the CPC isn’t interested in keeping the surtax at 1.5%. Others agreed and determined that the CPC should actively oppose the reduction. Chairman Edmundson said that the Town Boards representing each area should be the strongest advocates for leaving the surtax at 1.5%.
After planning for the upcoming Advisory Committee hearing at which votes will be taken on all CPC articles, Chairman Edmundson adjourned the meeting at 10:10 P.M.
The date for the next meeting is to be determined.
Respectfully submitted,
Andrea Young
Administrator