Select Board Work Session Pt. 1 - September 16, 2026

0:02 You should

0:05 not say

0:07 well said.

0:08 So I have the meeting here.

0:12 Let me join the Zoom and I can at least

0:14 tell you if your window is turning

0:16 green.

0:17 Okay. Um,

0:28 I turned to not be on the internet.

0:30 Does my speaker need to be off or on?

0:33 I have this set as the microphone.

0:35 Yep. Um, your speaker should be on and

0:38 you want it to be set to probably set it

0:40 to Apple as well.

0:46 text me that the phone number so we have

0:48 it on record somewhere

0:56 out.

1:00 So yeah, so actually it was coming out

1:02 of the TV which is fine. So um am I

1:06 seeing it looks like it's picking up

1:08 close caption.

1:09 It's Yes.

1:11 It was here for sure.

1:15 And we are recording. So,

1:17 all right. Good morning everyone.

1:19 Welcome to our select board workshop. It

1:22 is Tuesday, September 15th. And now,

1:25 first item of business will be the

1:27 question of entering into executive

1:29 session for the purpose stated in item

1:32 two, which is an executive session

1:35 pursuant to general law chapter 30A 21

1:38 A6. Purpose six, for the purpose of

1:41 considering the purchase, exchange,

1:42 lease, or value of real property,

1:45 specifically the Coolage Corner Theater.

1:48 So, I will go ahead and move that we

1:50 enter into executive session for that.

1:54 Bernard,

1:54 yes.

1:55 Michael,

1:56 yes.

1:56 Amanda,

1:57 yes.

1:58 Anthony,

1:58 yes.

1:59 And I also vote yes. We will of course

2:01 be reconvening in open session once we

2:04 conclude our executive session.

2:07 How good morning?

2:09 So you want everything that we do to be

2:11 secret and executive special.

2:13 I just like hanging out with you guys.

2:14 That's just it's start. It's no

2:16 accident.

2:19 I do the same thing at town meeting. I

2:20 always vote no to journ.

2:27 All right. Welcome. We are now back and

2:30 we will proceed with agenda item number

2:32 three miscellaneous items. approval of

2:35 miscellaneous items or licenses and

2:38 contracts. Do any board members have

2:41 questions regarding items any items in

2:44 3A through 3L?

2:47 Could you separate the minutes because I

2:49 was not here?

2:50 Sure.

2:51 I have questions on

2:55 3C.

2:56 All right. So question of approving a

2:58 lease agreement with KS State Bank for

3:02 five dump trucks and one excavator in

3:05 the amount of 1.26 million approximately

3:08 be paid over two years. Who can talk

3:10 about that?

3:14 Oh sorry the dump trucks dump item.

3:17 So we've asked TPW for some information

3:20 around um purchasing believes that uh oh

3:22 here we go here just coming in now.

3:25 breaking

3:28 side guards are installed on the

3:29 infiltrate jiggles. Um they're still

3:31 trying to get more answers from you. Um

3:34 they're in a meeting right now, but

3:35 we'll we'll follow up with you after.

3:37 Perfect. Uh just to give some context, I

3:40 asked a question because in our vision

3:42 zero action plan, there are three items

3:44 related to safety of vehicles, including

3:47 retrofitting municipal vehicles with

3:49 intelligent speed assistant technology.

3:51 basically using GPS to make sure they

3:54 travel the speed limit. The second one

3:56 is making sure that um they either have

3:59 direct vision or install counter

4:01 measures to improve vision. Um and the

4:04 third one is um countermeasures to

4:07 counteract blind spots as well as side

4:10 guards which are actually really

4:11 important for uh problematic

4:13 interactions with pedestrians and

4:15 cyclists so that uh particularly

4:17 cyclists don't get pulled under the

4:19 trucks. Um, so I wanted to make sure

4:21 that if we are getting new trucks that

4:23 they are complying with our efficient

4:25 zero action steps.

4:28 Yeah.

4:29 I had one for 3G. I had a question. Um,

4:32 those six police officers out of those

4:34 six police officers that were approving

4:36 for higher requests. Um, what is the

4:38 impact on traffic um, management? Well,

4:42 as you know, as as with anything, right,

4:44 when we have more officers means the

4:46 more opportunity for people to be on the

4:48 street, more, you know, prioritization,

4:50 right? The police have to prioritize,

4:52 you know, um, you know, emergency

4:54 response and so forth to lose that

4:55 hierarchy. I will say that I went to the

4:58 swearing in of a couple of laterals last

5:00 week and the chief made special

5:02 reference at that at that uh at that uh

5:06 process to the fact that there's a real

5:08 push for traffic enforcement and that

5:10 that's where they're going to be

5:11 assigned for a lot of the work. So it's

5:14 um you know every every person

5:16 contributes to that and you know the

5:18 message that the police department is

5:19 receiving from the community is very

5:21 clear. Can we make can we make a note of

5:24 trying to track the number of traffic

5:25 violations and kind of I I'm sure we do

5:27 somewhere obviously, but I just want to

5:28 make sure that we talk about that later

5:30 down the line.

5:30 Sure. I mean, yeah, Sergeant um Sergeant

5:32 Johan has that information and we can

5:34 make sure that that that gets to you.

5:35 Yeah, I want the public to know about

5:36 that.

5:37 Yeah, they'll know when we talk about

5:39 the Warren article that too.

5:41 I have a question regarding 3 L into the

5:45 fire chief employment contract.

5:47 Sure. Uh and again it's not because I'm

5:49 substantively opposed but I'm just

5:50 curious in terms of process. Do we

5:54 regularly revise contracts midstream?

5:56 This is uh this is a little different uh

5:59 than usual but it's because um the

6:01 police and fire contract the so you have

6:04 three contract you have three contract

6:05 employees which me the police chief and

6:07 the fire chief. Um the police chief's

6:10 contract was updated most recently and

6:13 provided a substantial raise and as and

6:15 previously the police and fire chiefs

6:17 had been in parody. They were making

6:18 roughly the same amount of money and so

6:19 this is this is a an adjustment to

6:21 ensure that the fire chief remains

6:23 imperative with the police chief. Okay,

6:26 um back to 3G, you mentioned that

6:30 there's a swearing in recently. Were we

6:32 notified of that?

6:33 Uh the chief should have emailed you. I

6:36 will double check to make sure she did

6:37 not. I may have missed it, but you know

6:39 you used to be that we would Yes. attend

6:41 those sessions or swearing swearings in.

6:44 Yes. And to be clear, I'm not throwing

6:47 the chief under the bus. There must have

6:49 been miscommunication from our office.

6:51 So, we will we will figure that out. My

6:52 fault.

6:53 Um I just want to make a note in item 3B

6:55 it says questions accepting a gift or a

6:57 grant. Um I believe we typically have

6:59 the amount existed grant in the agenda

7:02 item. So, we just want to make sure that

7:04 that's recorded. Um, as far as the

7:07 minutes,

7:08 it is Oh, well, in the explanation of

7:12 the bookmarks, $3,000

7:15 gift,

7:17 right? Is it It's just not in the item

7:20 itself.

7:22 Yeah. Sorry. So, yes, 3B is $3,000.

7:25 Yeah.

7:29 Why don't we revise

7:31 agenda item 3B to reflect that? So

7:34 question 17 gift for grants in the

7:35 amount of $3,000 pursuant to GL chapter

7:38 44 except we'll amend that.

7:43 All right. Any other questions?

7:45 3A through 3 L and we will take 3A

7:48 separately.

7:50 All right.

7:50 I had ahead.

7:51 I had some amendments that I sent you

7:54 email sent

7:57 regarding minutes.

7:58 Regarding minutes.

7:59 Okay.

7:59 All right. So I move approval of 3A be

8:04 the minutes from September 2026

8:07 subject to the amendments opposed by

8:10 Michael

8:11 Bernard.

8:13 Michael

8:14 yes.

8:14 Amanda

8:15 yes.

8:15 Anthony

8:16 yes.

8:16 And I also vote yes.

8:19 Now items 3B. I move that we approve

8:22 items 3B through 3L in omnibus fashion.

8:26 Bernard.

8:26 Yes.

8:27 Michael.

8:28 Yes.

8:28 Amanda.

8:29 Yes. Anthony,

8:30 yes.

8:30 And I also vote yes. Well, that brings

8:33 us to item number four, discussion and

8:35 potential votes related to the

8:37 rehabilitation and affordability of

8:39 homes at 99 Kent Street as favorably

8:42 recommended by the Housing Advisory

8:45 Board as well as other related items.

8:50 So, um I'm Amy. Uh nice to see you all

8:55 again. Roger Blood um is should be here

9:00 any minute. He was going to kick this

9:01 agenda item off um if you'd like to wait

9:04 for him for a few minutes or I can um

9:08 fill in. We have a couple of guests with

9:10 us. We have Gilbert Win. Um and I'm

9:14 going to butcher your last name, I'm

9:15 afraid. Lauren,

9:16 I don't mind. Kafari

9:18 Kafari.

9:20 Well, what we can what we can do, we

9:21 have items 4 A through 4E. So, were one

9:24 of you going to be presenting

9:27 one of those additional items for B

9:29 through 4? And we can jump in with one

9:30 of those.

9:31 I think

9:32 he's here.

9:33 Oh, there he is.

9:37 Oh my go

9:45 get to that point.

9:52 We also have um Michael Alfren on Zoom

9:56 with us from a train on his way to New

9:59 York City

10:01 to help out with this presentation.

10:07 Gina said let's dive in.

10:09 Oh, I thought I was

10:14 good morning everybody.

10:16 Good morning. Um I'm Gerald the advisory

10:20 board and um I'm going to lead off

10:25 several presentations

10:27 regarding the u the expiry use situation

10:30 we have. Um the uh the general problem

10:34 challenge that that we face is um a

10:38 number of projects including the one

10:39 we're talking about here were financed

10:42 decades ago um under perhaps an illvised

10:46 uh structure whereby uh the

10:49 affordability of the units was tied to

10:51 the terms of the financing and um these

10:55 terms have now reached a point where

10:57 they're expiring and tenants are at risk

11:00 of um losing their affordability. Many

11:03 of them in this project if um uh terms

11:07 can't be uh achieved that um will

11:10 successfully

11:11 substantially extend the affordability

11:14 terms um in the in the project.

11:17 What we have here is probably the

11:19 largest such situation in the pine. Um,

11:23 originally a single property now divided

11:26 into two uh 99 Kent Street um in the in

11:31 the village and north of the TRAS with

11:33 um 117

11:36 all affordable senior uh dwelling units.

11:39 And then um on the south of the TA

11:42 tracks um of village way there was a

11:45 Brook line with uh 193 family affordable

11:49 units and uh straddling the two

11:52 properties um a large uh uh parking

11:55 garage um serving the property um under

11:58 a long-term air rights lease uh with the

12:01 uh with the T. Um

12:04 our um the objective here uh is to uh

12:08 both extend the affordability and um

12:11 also renovate and upgrade the property

12:13 so that they will um physically uh be in

12:18 uh top shape to uh to serve the tenants

12:21 over the uh extended affordability term.

12:24 Um our our goal um from the town's

12:28 perspective in addition to these two um

12:31 general objectives is to optimize uh the

12:34 town's investment um in this project.

12:37 Our our piece uh uh as as with so many

12:40 other affordable housing trust

12:42 investments um isn't the biggest piece,

12:45 but it's the you might think of it as

12:47 the last one in and what makes

12:48 everything else possible and draws other

12:51 resources that are that are critically

12:52 needed. Um very quickly um the uh the

12:57 participants in in this and the process

12:59 itself uh has involved um um a a

13:05 negotiating committee on the on the part

13:07 of the town at the executive level uh

13:10 that uh began um it its meetings last

13:13 April. So, it's been going on for some

13:15 time and periodic uh uh executive

13:18 sessions uh that have included our town

13:21 administrator uh Bernard Green from the

13:23 select board uh town council um uh the

13:28 planning uh director, planning

13:30 department director and um uh assistant

13:33 uh director for housing and community

13:35 development uh and and uh and myself

13:38 from from the HAB. Um

13:42 the um the HAB is uh has been another um

13:45 participant in this uh not just myself

13:48 on the negotiating committee by all

13:50 means but um of the uh the entire AB um

13:54 itself I'll come in a little bit further

13:56 about that in a moment but other other

13:58 critical players we were fortunate to

14:00 have been able to secure uh a very

14:03 capable consultant Michael Alpring I

14:05 think you all know is now an independent

14:08 consultant and he has proven to be

14:12 critically helpful not only from from

14:14 his knowledge and experience but in his

14:17 positioning in this process uh as an

14:20 intermediary between the town and and

14:22 win as those negotiations have have

14:25 continued. Um then the other uh major

14:28 player of course is is players are is is

14:31 when uh the development owner operator

14:33 of the project since its uh original

14:35 construction many many decades ago. uh

14:38 and um this the Commonwealth of the OLC

14:42 um being another major player. While

14:44 this is a a negotiation that involves

14:47 three critical parties, uh in a sense

14:50 it's not a three-way negotiation. Um u

14:53 the way this is structured is that um

14:57 the town is negotiating with with wind

15:00 at at our our local level and uh at the

15:03 same time win it has the relationship

15:05 and negotiating um responsibility with

15:08 uh with the with the commonwealth.

15:11 Um

15:13 the um the HAV's role in this um our our

15:18 formal role is a bit narrower than the

15:21 than the broader informal role. We are

15:23 here to recommend um as trustees of the

15:26 town's housing trust a um uh what what

15:30 has ended up being a $4 million uh

15:32 investment specifically for one of the

15:36 two project components which is the

15:38 senior housing at 99 Kent Street. Um uh

15:42 one way of looking at that investment of

15:44 $4 million as it applies to um uh

15:47 basically 115 of the 117 senior housing

15:50 units there uh and and have

15:54 instinctively looks at almost everything

15:56 we invest from the trust on a per unit

15:59 basis. Uh that comes out to um about

16:02 $35,000

16:04 per unit of the 115 units for uh what

16:07 we're proposing. uh it's called

16:09 perpetual but it's a basically a 99-year

16:12 extension of the affordability

16:14 provisions um of the units on that

16:16 component of the project. Um they have

16:21 um as a as a public body um and our

16:25 meetings have been uh basically a part

16:27 of the public process but I want to

16:29 emphasize um that the HAB's role has

16:32 been um more extensive than that. Um we

16:36 we have been fortunate to bring to the

16:38 table uh this is a very complex project

16:42 perhaps even more so than some of the

16:44 new developments. Um the H have a a a

16:47 range of skill sets and experience and

16:49 in this uh current situation we're

16:51 fortunate to have had uh three members

16:54 and now four which who have direct uh

16:57 experience with this unique kind of um

17:01 financing and refinancing uh under under

17:04 expiring use terms. Um so the process

17:08 that we set up to uh to to try to

17:11 optimize uh the the HAB's um role of

17:15 this was to open up a line of commun a

17:18 continuing iterative line of

17:20 communication between those uh the three

17:23 active HAB members Jonathan Klein Pam

17:26 Goodman and Carol Gladstone where they

17:29 could communicate back and forth uh

17:31 directly with our consultant who could

17:33 then take their combined expertise piece

17:36 on a Q&A basis, you know, continuing and

17:39 add that to the negotiating process that

17:42 um that that Michael Alurn was was doing

17:45 uh directly with wind. This this proved

17:47 to be very helpful. Um uh I I myself

17:51 added a little bit to that, but not

17:53 having the direct professional

17:55 experience that I have was very well

17:57 structured to uh to set things up this

18:00 way. And then we were um we were

18:02 fortunate to have um Amy Upast join the

18:06 process from the staff um because with

18:09 her

18:11 10 dozen odd years at HUD, she also had

18:13 direct experience um with this

18:16 particular kind of project financing and

18:17 you're going to hear from her

18:19 immediately following myself. Um the um

18:23 the um the end result of what we're

18:27 recommending to the select board uh and

18:29 and I know you've seen the details in in

18:31 your packet is both the HABs vote and

18:34 then the that folded into the the

18:36 memorandum of agreement which uh which

18:38 is a longer detailed legal document that

18:40 you're you're

18:43 looking at executing. Um the the uh the

18:48 financing gap uh that began last spring

18:51 u as brought to us with wind and their

18:54 detailed numbers showed uh around 6 and

18:57 a half million that potentially could be

19:00 called upon the town if we were to close

19:02 the entire gap. Um

19:05 early on in the process that that number

19:08 was able to be reduced uh without an

19:10 awful lot of difficulty to five million

19:13 of when took on some more of its own

19:17 some of the line items that the

19:19 developer fee deferral uh a a seller

19:22 note which is functionally equivalent um

19:25 but a separate line item that they were

19:27 able to uh to to to make a little bit

19:30 more attractive. So we we were at 5

19:32 million and then um question being how

19:35 did we get to four? Uh that that aspect

19:39 was was a little bit different. Um and

19:41 the way that was done um when there was

19:44 a $5 million uh um investment that we

19:47 were contemplating. Um it it um it was

19:51 in the form of uh the town uh loaning at

19:54 at a a positive rate of interest for

19:58 repayment at the end of of a loan term

20:01 and the the the town's money being put

20:04 in uh to a considerable extent at the

20:08 closing, some upfront and some at the

20:10 closing. The way the additional million

20:11 dollar reduction was achieved was um

20:15 advancing the timing of the of the

20:17 funds. So that you you'll see in in the

20:20 proposed terms now 95% of the funds can

20:23 be put in at the closing with only a 5%

20:27 uh hold back. Um and um instead of uh us

20:32 relying on uh like with with a a loan or

20:36 a mortgage repayment terms with an

20:38 interest uh applied and acrewing the the

20:41 terms that are being proposed now and

20:43 these are quite similar to other new

20:45 projects that we do. there's a 0%

20:48 interest and the um the 4 million will

20:51 be due at least on paper uh after 45

20:54 years but um that that will possibly be

20:57 re renegotiated um on village at

21:00 Brooklyn our role is more informal since

21:03 there's no trust fund money um we uh we

21:06 have appined and and been very

21:08 interested in the way that the terms of

21:09 that that extend extended affordability

21:12 has been negotiated

21:14 um it it didn't it didn't make everybody

21:17 totally thrilled at the end of the day,

21:18 but you know what they say about about

21:21 bad deals that if not everybody's

21:23 entirely happy, it's a sign that

21:25 probably it's as good as anybody is

21:26 going to get. Um and then on the timing

21:30 um which I think you you'll hear more

21:32 about from from others including Michael

21:35 um that it it we there's a preliminary

21:38 um commitment from the select board and

21:40 and again with new projects we do

21:42 something very similar a two-step

21:43 process with you all where we're asking

21:46 for it and you would be executing now a

21:48 preliminary commitment. The function of

21:50 that is that the state, this is

21:52 critical, needs to see some assurance

21:55 that the locality, us are really

21:58 stepping up with some significant funds

22:01 to induce the state through wind. They

22:04 can present this as the town being a

22:06 serious player here so that we can get

22:09 priority for the funding. We know

22:11 there's annual rounds and possibly

22:13 semianual

22:14 uh and and get this done early. And the

22:17 timing has been moved up so that your

22:19 schedule now is rather tight. You're

22:21 going to meet today, I think, and maybe

22:22 one more time soon so that you can vote

22:25 in time for when to get in the um under

22:29 the late September deadline for the

22:31 so-called preliminary preliminary round.

22:34 And so with that, I hope it's not too

22:36 detailed and because you're going to

22:38 hear some more from I think Amy next and

22:40 then Michael remotely and Dwayne will be

22:42 be giving you their formal presentation

22:44 after that and I'll come back and then

22:47 ask for you to vote which we'll have a

22:48 look at for you before you see it and we

22:51 may or may not vote today but you'll see

22:53 what we're the details of what we're

22:55 offering. So,

22:56 would you like to go to Michael first if

22:59 possible while we have him just because

23:01 I'm concerned that we we may lose him on

23:03 his way on his travels. Um, Michael, can

23:06 you hear us?

23:12 He's muted.

23:24 should be able to

23:33 see if not

23:35 Amtrak Wi-Fi is not great.

24:09 it get my call.

24:12 Okay. All right.

24:19 So, I don't have a lot to add. Um Roger

24:21 did a very thorough job of of letting

24:24 you know how we got to where we are

24:25 today. Um, but I will say just echo what

24:29 he said about the town's commitment of

24:32 funds being very important to the

24:34 application process that when plans to

24:36 proceed with with the executive office

24:38 of housing liberal communities and um,

24:43 you know, we're hoping uh that our if

24:47 the town chooses to commit the $4

24:49 million that that will really make a

24:51 case to EOHLC that we're invested in

24:54 this project and We want to see it go

24:56 forward um because it's a very

24:58 competitive funding round. So, we want

25:00 to be able to help win get where they

25:02 need to be so that the application was

25:04 successful. Um I'd like to turn it over

25:07 to to Gilbert and Lauren right now to

25:10 give a presentation on the proposed

25:12 project at Kent Street. Um and I have

25:15 hard copies of people with

25:18 I'll give I promise I will make it.

25:21 Roger gave such a good introduction. I

25:23 feel like gave a presentation. So you

25:24 mean I put it up here?

25:26 Yeah.

25:26 Yeah. So way to do it is to join

25:28 Zoom and I'll make

25:29 Yeah. Is it the same thing to send a

25:32 package?

25:42 It's the same.

25:43 The same thing. The center packet.

25:45 Yes.

25:45 Okay. Okay.

25:46 If anyone would like a hard copy, if you

25:48 don't have one, I'll just

25:50 Yeah. on my uh on my phone's Wi-Fi. See

25:54 what the Wi-Fi is here?

25:56 Yeah.

25:57 Bernard's

26:01 I was told the number

26:06 617 730207.

26:15 Okay.

26:29 Oh,

26:42 we're going

26:44 to talk to us.

26:56 Um,

27:00 so Michael came back.

27:08 Michael, are you back?

27:09 I I am. I apologize for the spotty

27:12 internet.

27:13 I am. I apologize for the spotty

27:14 internet. can write some notes in the

27:16 chat to the slide if helpful.

27:21 Yeah, we're having we're having trouble

27:22 hearing him in the room.

27:23 Is there a volume issue on our

27:25 No,

27:31 there.

27:31 Yeah. Also, his

27:32 Oh, he's still muted. Yeah, I see. Oh,

27:34 we're getting the caption. I see

27:35 unmuted for a moment, but his window

27:37 never turned green. So, we've never

27:40 Yeah, looks like it's

27:41 I'm trying. I will write notes in the

27:43 chat for you. Sorry for the spotty

27:44 internet.

27:45 Nobody's in the way.

27:47 Okay, she's got to turn.

27:52 Why don't we continue with your

27:53 presentation in the meantime? And if

27:54 Michael can join us, you can jump in.

27:56 Okay, great. And I am joining right this

28:00 moment. It says

28:08 okay record.

28:14 Okay.

28:17 So

28:19 sure

28:42 beginning.

28:47 All right, I'm going to make this very

28:48 quick because I feel like Roger did a

28:50 great job introing us. Um, but thank you

28:53 all for having us here today. Um, Lauren

28:56 Canopari, senior project director at Win

28:58 and Gilbert Wyn, CEO of Wind Companies.

29:01 Um, here to talk about 99 Kent Street.

29:04 So,

29:06 I have a few slides about Win. I'm not

29:08 going to bore you guys with information

29:10 about us. Um, you know, we manage more

29:14 than 100,000 apartment homes in 25

29:16 states. Um, been around for 53 years.

29:21 Um, our development team is in 12 states

29:24 in the District of Columbia. Um, you

29:26 know, obviously our our focus is we do a

29:29 lot of work in Massachusetts and, um,

29:31 you know, we've been at 99 Kemp Street.

29:34 Um, you know, we last rehabed the

29:36 project in in 1997, 1998. Um, and you

29:42 know, we're we're a proud owner operator

29:45 um throughout throughout the East Coast

29:47 and um you know, obviously with a big

29:50 focus on on affordable and workforce

29:52 housing. Um this is our team working on

29:54 the project. um Gilmer W and myself

29:58 um Jotif who's our divisional vice

30:01 president of Gwen Residential um who

30:03 actually was the property manager at um

30:08 Villages Brooklyn

30:10 about 20 something years ago and is

30:12 still with WIN um and still oversees the

30:15 the region. Um Trevor who's our wind

30:17 communities and myself and Marcel who's

30:20 our assistant project director. So, I

30:22 think the important thing to talk about

30:24 is why why are we here today, right? Um,

30:26 as Roger mentioned, we are applying to

30:28 EOHLC

30:30 um for funding to rehab the 99 Kent

30:33 Street project. Um, pre-applications are

30:35 due September 24th with the full

30:37 application due in December. So, what do

30:40 we need to show for our December 24th

30:43 preapp? really to make it um competitive

30:46 um we need to show strong town support

30:50 um including matching funds um you know

30:52 to be invited back to do a

30:53 pre-application and hopefully get

30:55 funding for the project. It's it's a as

30:57 Amy says extremely competitive uh

31:00 process and you know we think we think

31:03 99 Kent Street is is a really compelling

31:06 case for that. Um, you know, the other

31:08 items we want to talk about aside from

31:10 the funding, um, is, you know, a a

31:13 resoning to reduce parking requirements

31:15 on site and help with extending, um, our

31:18 MVTA air rights lease. As you can see,

31:21 um, from this picture, there's um, you

31:24 know, we are built, our parking garage

31:27 and community space is built on top of

31:28 the train tracks, and we have a a

31:31 99-year lease that expires in um, 2075.

31:36 So 99 Kent Street, this is the um

31:39 elderly, you know, 55 plus restricted

31:42 117 unit building um at 99 Kent Street

31:46 um built in 1975. It's been 28 years

31:50 since the last renovation and our our

31:52 affordability expires in in 2027.

31:56 So as Roger said, I think the priority

31:58 of of the town and when and the state

32:00 hopefully our compelling argument is

32:02 affordability is expiring next year.

32:04 want to extend it and we've committed to

32:05 do that for 99 years. Um so here's what

32:08 the project looks like. Um you know it's

32:13 the tenants really have a lot of pride

32:15 in it, take great care of it. Um you

32:17 know this is kind of the community space

32:20 and the greenhouse as is uh and what

32:24 needs to be done. So, here's a unit

32:25 that's been renovated, but you know, our

32:27 goal as this for this project is to

32:30 really gut, you know, kitchens and

32:32 bathrooms, all new kitchens, all new

32:34 bathrooms. Um, this talks a little bit

32:37 about what we like to do. Plumbing,

32:38 fixtures, appliances, flooring,

32:39 lighting, thermostats. Um, the nine ADA

32:43 units, we would fully gut the entire

32:45 units to make them code accessible.

32:46 They're not up to current ADA codes. um

32:50 common area improvements. A big priority

32:52 for the site is offering services to the

32:55 senior residents. We have a pretty

32:57 extensive services program now. We'd

32:59 like to expand that um and improve the

33:02 community spaces to offer not only, you

33:05 know, better services, but also bring in

33:06 providers, nursing providers, meal

33:09 providers, things like that um for the

33:11 tenants. And then some exterior upgrades

33:13 to um sidewalks and landscaping and

33:16 things like that. So, um I know this has

33:20 all been previewed with you and you've

33:22 seen the presentation, but just to get a

33:23 little bit uh this rehab that we're

33:26 talking about today, um funding for is

33:30 really the second phase in a two-part um

33:33 rehabilitation. The first phase is a

33:35 deep energy retrofit that's starting at

33:37 the end of this year. Um and we have

33:40 already received over $10 million in

33:43 awards from DOE, MHP, and Massave. um in

33:48 order to do this. So, it's it's in

33:50 progress. It's starting probably the end

33:52 of this year or very beginning of next

33:54 year. And that will essentially be a

33:57 total reskinning of the exterior of the

33:59 building, new all new windows, um

34:03 upgrade to the electrical system, um new

34:05 HVAC system. Um so that's, you know, a

34:10 pretty big project. Um, so that's kind

34:13 of what we consider that's the exterior

34:15 project that's happening now to um make

34:18 the project more efficient. Um, and in

34:21 addition to that $10.5 million we've

34:23 been awarded, WIN is putting in um $7.2

34:27 million into the project to kind of

34:29 complete that. So this is this is a

34:31 pretty major project that's about to be

34:33 underway and then our rehab will come

34:34 in, do the interior of the units, kind

34:36 of marry the two projects together. I

34:39 know someone on the select board had a

34:41 question about um electrification of the

34:43 building. So the current um building has

34:46 gas powered boilers and heat. This will

34:50 essentially completely electrify the

34:52 building. So it will be um electric

34:55 heat, electric hot water. We are going

34:57 to maintain one backup

35:00 boiler that is gas powered that will be

35:03 supplemental for the building. So, not

35:05 used on a daily basis, but if something

35:06 fails, they will have a gas powered

35:08 backup. Um, but aside from that, it'll

35:11 be essentially a full electrification

35:13 um of the building. And this is how the

35:16 beautiful new exterior um will look.

35:20 So, when we're talking about this um you

35:23 know, the the 99 Kent Street project

35:26 that we're applying for now, we're

35:27 applying for it as a twin deal. So, two

35:29 separate projects using both four and 9%

35:34 tax credits. And that's one of the way

35:36 Roger mentioned that we were able to

35:38 reduce our ask to the town um of

35:40 Brookline. But so, it's it's two

35:42 separate deals, but one building um and

35:46 additional funds, you know, the funds

35:48 we're applying for outside of um

35:55 outside of the Brooklyn funds. Um, you

35:59 know, we're applying for another $6.5

36:01 million of soft debt in addition to

36:03 large amounts of state tax credits, 4%

36:06 credits, 9% credits, and of course, um,

36:09 we're putting in our deferred developer

36:11 fee, some deferred developer fee, and

36:13 we're, as Roger mentioned, we're putting

36:15 in a seller note, um, back into the

36:17 project as well to make make this work

36:19 and be able to get all of the work done

36:21 that we want to do. Oh, one thing I also

36:24 wanted to mention, sorry, I'm not just

36:25 going to go back for one second. Um,

36:27 something that I missed on the scope of

36:28 improvements that we just added to the

36:30 scope is we're going to sprinkler the

36:32 building. So, the BR building doesn't

36:34 have any sprinklers right now. We're not

36:35 required to have any sprinklers. Um,

36:38 kind of as we've been talking about

36:40 this, it's an important like like life

36:43 health safety thing to add. So, that's

36:45 going to be another thing that's going

36:46 to be added as part of this

36:48 rehabilitation

36:49 hopefully. Um so you know here we have

36:52 the uses of the funds how the money is

36:54 being spent that you know the total CDC

36:56 is about total development cost about

36:58 $73 million for this project. Um I know

37:02 Roger mentioned 115 of the units will be

37:05 affordable. There's often a question of

37:07 why do we leave two units out? Um that's

37:11 because there are two units two tenants

37:14 currently at the property who are over

37:16 income. Um and we don't we are always

37:19 committed when we do these in place

37:21 rehabs not to lose any tenants as part

37:23 of that. So those two existing tenants

37:25 will stay those will become market units

37:27 so they can stay in their units and then

37:29 the other 115 units will become

37:31 affordable for 99 years.

37:34 Um so some of the challenges I mentioned

37:37 so of course this is an occupied rehab.

37:39 Tenants will stay in place during their

37:41 during construction of their units.

37:42 We'll have a place for them to go during

37:44 the day. Um and then the nine units that

37:47 are being completely got renovated,

37:50 bring them up to code. Those tenants

37:51 will be moved out. Um we have, you know,

37:54 we have a lot of experience doing this

37:55 and and um have a consultant that comes

37:58 and helps us and moves everybody and

38:00 make sure that everybody's safe and um

38:03 you know, taken care of during the

38:04 during the rehab. Um obviously being on

38:07 top of the train tracks makes things

38:09 complicated. We need help with an

38:11 extension to the air rights lease and um

38:15 you know we need some help with zoning

38:19 parking um a reduction in our parking

38:21 requirement. Um that will give us more

38:23 flexibility with the garage and you know

38:26 we've talked had some conversations

38:28 about uh entering into a partnership

38:30 with the town to lease spaces or you

38:33 know selling the garage and leasing

38:34 spaces back to us. Um, so that's

38:36 something we're still trying to figure

38:37 out to maybe have more funding and more

38:40 sources for the project. Um, so as Roger

38:43 mentioned, timeline, the real big thing

38:46 is this preapp is due September 24th.

38:49 There's one of the main questions is

38:51 does the town is the town offering

38:53 matching funds? And that's why we're

38:55 here and we really want to be able to

38:56 say yes because that's what makes a

38:57 project competitive given the amount of

39:00 resources we're asking for from the

39:01 state. So, the goal would be we apply

39:04 the full application in December, get

39:06 approved beginning of next year, and

39:08 close by the end of next year. Um, with

39:11 an 18-month construction schedule, we

39:14 would hopefully close in uh complete

39:16 construction mid 2029.

39:19 Um, I also just wanted to very quickly

39:22 touch on the villages of Brooklyn. So,

39:25 separate project, right? So that was my

39:28 I know Bernard this is one of Bernard's

39:29 comments was it was confusing the

39:31 presentation mixed everything together.

39:33 So everything I just talked about was 99

39:35 Kent Street. Now talking about villages

39:38 of Brookline what are we offering there?

39:41 This isn't the project that we're asking

39:43 for funding for but I know it's

39:45 obviously a concern because there's 193

39:48 families living there um as well. So

39:51 following the expiration of the of the

39:54 LITC restriction and extended 40T

39:56 protections um there are two red burden

40:00 households there. So we've been working

40:02 with these households to secure subsidy

40:05 for them um you know secure vouchers and

40:09 if we can't help them find a subsidy

40:11 then you know we have agreed to limit

40:14 their rent increases um for you know in

40:17 the year over year to the change in CPI

40:19 just 3%. So, we're um as long as people

40:22 are certifying their income, we're

40:24 keeping their units affordable and

40:26 making sure their rent burden households

40:28 aren't um you know losing their house

40:31 losing their housing or or being rent

40:33 burdened. Um we're also committing to

40:37 renovating um the affordable units of

40:40 Village Brooklyn over the next 5 years,

40:42 approximately 12 units per year. Um and

40:45 that's a pretty pretty um heavy scope of

40:48 renovation. includes new kitchens, um

40:51 appliances, bathrooms, painting floors,

40:54 um basically anything where we feel like

40:57 they've they're beyond their useful

40:59 life. You know, we have subtenants there

41:01 who have been in the same units for 30

41:02 years. They need new carpet, right? Or

41:05 they need carpet replaced for flooring.

41:07 Um so, you know, this is working

41:10 individually with each resident. every

41:12 unit is surveyed and you know if tenants

41:15 would like you know have things that are

41:17 beyond their useful life and would like

41:18 them replaced or committed to working

41:20 with them um or scope plan committing to

41:23 scope all units by the first of the year

41:26 um with approximately 12 units um

41:29 completed per year. So I just want to

41:32 touch on those two things at Village of

41:33 Brooklyn villages because I know there's

41:35 been a lot of questions and concern

41:38 about that property as well. So, I know

41:41 I went really quickly through that, but

41:43 um I think you're more important to take

41:45 questions and I hope that was a helpful

41:50 description. Go ahead.

41:52 Yes.

41:52 Yeah. Um I thank you for also touching

41:56 Village Way. I know there's a lot of

41:57 folks in the community that are very

41:59 concerned about the vacant use. Um, and

42:01 I know it is in the MOA, but I'm hoping

42:03 you can touch on it um for extending

42:07 this renewal of the housing assistant

42:09 payment contract with the BHA and what

42:11 the plans are for that.

42:13 Yes. So, that contract expires in 2044.

42:16 Um, and basically we're committed to

42:20 renewing that contract, right? um we you

42:23 know would like essentially we're

42:26 committed to keeping those units

42:27 affordable for 99 years. Um you know the

42:32 plan is to renew that contract. If it's

42:34 not renewed then you know our agreement

42:36 is to partner partner with the town

42:38 where we kind of you know contribute

42:41 half of the of the you know funding to

42:45 get there. the town contributes the

42:46 other half and we keep those units

42:48 affordable um at a similar level of

42:50 subsidy going.

42:53 So that's better.

42:54 And so with the combination of that and

42:57 the two additional

42:59 uh units that you talked about, the

43:01 assumption is that the affordability

43:04 uh that currently exists in village way

43:06 will continue.

43:09 The goal is the goal is for for the

43:12 units that are affordable to continue to

43:14 be affordable.

43:17 Thank you.

43:18 Anyone else with questions at this

43:20 juncture? Michael. Um so thank you for

43:22 uh answering the couple of questions

43:26 that I raised earlier about um the

43:29 current heating cooling source um and

43:32 the building being all all electric. Um,

43:34 one of the reasons why I I raise these

43:37 questions is because at some point over

43:40 time as we continue to transition off

43:42 gas, um,

43:45 having the town push for, um, basically

43:49 shutting down of gas pipelines, um, is

43:52 was a necessary part of that strategy.

43:56 Um, so I'm wondering when you say

43:57 there's a backup generator um that is

44:00 gas powered, is that utility supplied or

44:03 is that independently supplied at this

44:05 point? How do you enision how do you

44:07 envision that changing over potentially

44:09 changing over time?

44:10 I don't know. I mean it's so it is

44:12 utility supplied, right? Essentially

44:14 it's a you know a boiler a backup boiler

44:18 that will be utility supplied with gas.

44:20 Um, but I I mean we are constantly

44:24 this is obviously a conversation I think

44:26 we're having in a lot of places right

44:27 like electrification is the goal for and

44:30 I think that's

44:31 wind's goal you know we're going to all

44:33 electric when we're building new

44:34 properties um it's more complicated here

44:37 obviously part of this energy project is

44:39 upgrading the entire electrical system

44:40 to support all of this because it's not

44:42 as simple as just like changing it

44:44 um right so I think that's I think we're

44:46 we're moving towards that and I think

44:48 maybe

44:49 the next goal is getting off of of gas

44:52 alto together.

44:58 Anyone else?

45:00 Okay, continue.

45:02 Um, I just have a couple of things to

45:04 add. That was great. Thank you. Um, I

45:06 just wanted to say that the MOA that was

45:09 in your meeting packet is still evolving

45:12 a little bit. We're still going back and

45:13 forth between our legal council and

45:16 women's legal counsel. So, um, what you

45:19 have before you now will most likely

45:21 change a little bit. Um, but what Lauren

45:25 presented is the overall scope of that

45:28 agreement. And Lauren also mentioned a

45:30 letter um that when prepared for the

45:33 town that outlines um the some of the

45:39 things that they are um agreeing to do

45:42 at at the villages of Brookline, which

45:44 Lauren just talked about. So the

45:45 renovations and the rental protections

45:47 there for the tenants. Yeah. So those

45:49 yeah those are outlined in a kind of

45:51 side letter that commits says what we're

45:53 committed to that we will sign is

45:55 obviously part of this.

45:58 What are the issues that are still

45:59 outstanding in the MOA? Um there's some

46:03 language in the MOA that Wind's legal

46:06 council added that talks about uh the

46:09 town's

46:11 ongoing commitment to um

46:16 to what Lauren just described. And then

46:18 we also there's also some language that

46:21 talks about if the housing assistance

46:24 payment contract to renew the project

46:26 based vouchers isn't available, what

46:29 that will look like. Um, so we're still

46:32 going back and forth on that. So I don't

46:34 really want to delve into it um because

46:36 we haven't reached agreement on that

46:37 yet. But

46:38 yeah, I think it was that and I think it

46:39 was also

46:41 um you know we'd like like the town to

46:44 say that they'll support us, you know.

46:47 So just said we're here right now,

46:48 right? 30 years have gone by. The

46:50 project needs work done, you know. So,

46:54 our goal is that, you know, we we're

46:56 committed to keeping the project

46:57 affordable for 99 years, but we'd like

47:00 in 30 years from now, we'd like help,

47:02 you know, again, with the state and and

47:04 advocating for this project to be

47:06 renovated or rehabbed as needed. Um, so

47:09 there was just some language around

47:10 that, but um I think we're close. I

47:13 think it's, you know, kind of a little

47:15 bit of legal use going back and forth,

47:17 right? And apologies for not having that

47:19 completed.

47:20 Yeah, I think that should be tried. I I

47:22 did send you back another draft now.

47:24 Hopefully. Yeah. So hopefully it's

47:26 Well, my my concern has always been that

47:30 the relationship between and the tenants

47:32 not be a relationship that we're we're a

47:35 part of and and I think that MOA is is

47:39 um is sufficient with respect to that

47:42 that issue. I just want to make sure

47:44 that we're not sort of seeping into

47:47 No, and I think um I think you're

47:50 sensitive that

47:51 we are. I think that was and I think

47:53 that was a concern that the tenants

47:55 brought up that we were very sensitive

47:56 to that, you know, we're working with

47:58 the tenants association very closely

48:01 directly right now. So yeah, and I think

48:03 they don't want they don't want the town

48:05 to say something on their behalf, right?

48:07 They want their voices to be heard and

48:08 they so I think we've been working with

48:10 them pretty closely.

48:12 Any

48:15 other questions?

48:17 I have a question regarding the

48:18 affordable housing trust fund balance.

48:20 So this 4 million is that currently

48:22 sitting in the affordable housing trust

48:24 fund? Yes.

48:24 And so this would be upon our approval

48:26 that 4 million would be depleted

48:27 immediately or how does that work?

48:29 Um it would be um encumbered. So

48:32 effectively it would be not available

48:35 for anything else. And um the uh the

48:38 unencumbered trust fund balance is a

48:41 little bit north of at the moment at 6

48:43 million. So it would largely it would it

48:46 would not fully depleted but it would

48:48 largely depleted and our priority top

48:51 priority for the trust fund is to build

48:53 it up for the known other first priority

48:57 of walnut high phase two which likely

48:59 would be close to 10 million. So we're

49:02 starting with a very low base after we

49:04 commit this. But the actual

49:06 dispersement of our um encumbered $4

49:09 million would um as I mentioned briefly

49:12 now it's advanced but still only near

49:15 the point of um you know postclosing. Y

49:19 so that's still a little ways off. So

49:21 and so Melissa that uh free cash

49:24 waterfall gets a uh gets calculated

49:27 against the unencumbered.

49:29 Right.

49:29 Got it. And just one, Roger, you had

49:32 seen the updated balance. So I know

49:34 this, but um the waterfall payment from

49:36 the prior fiscal year or the one that

49:39 allocation that um just posted to the

49:42 trust recently, so we're we're up a

49:45 little bit above 7 million right now.

49:47 And once this is encumbered, it'll be a

49:49 three.

49:49 Okay.

49:50 Around.

49:50 Got it. Michael,

49:52 um you you had mentioned uh earlier

49:56 about the state the state grant being

49:59 competitive. Um and you know, obviously

50:02 we all want to do as much as we can in

50:04 order to make that happen. I'm wondering

50:06 what the contingency is. If for some

50:09 reason we don't get the state funding,

50:12 what happens to this project? Uh what

50:15 happens to the uh encumbered funds from

50:18 the town, etc.? Um yeah, that's a great

50:21 question. Um we're committed to reapply

50:24 as well. I think oftentimes what happens

50:26 is uh with competitive it's we're

50:30 qualified to receive these funds. So

50:32 it's more a question of what the

50:33 competition in that given year is. So we

50:35 would reapply and then we would reapply

50:37 again and then we reapply again. We're

50:39 basically we're committed to four rounds

50:42 of applications. And I I think as as

50:46 long as the town stays committed as it

50:48 is and helps us kind of prioritize the

50:51 lobby, I round should be sufficient to

50:54 get it done.

50:55 And that's that's a frequent occurrence

50:57 that

50:57 Yeah, that happens often to us where

50:59 Yeah. We But I apply,

51:02 right? For everybody. Yeah. But I feel

51:03 like often, you know, um especially when

51:06 we have support like this, it's not this

51:08 round, it's the next round.

51:11 Yeah.

51:12 So I I have a question regarding the uh

51:16 extension of 99 years for these units

51:18 being affordable. So 115 of the 117 will

51:24 uh receive that 99year extension because

51:26 two of the units the families currently

51:28 there do uh not meet the threshold. What

51:32 happens though if the same were to occur

51:36 for a family and one of the other 115?

51:39 Would they be asked to leave? would they

51:41 be extended a similar courtesy as to

51:45 um you're saying for this current I I'll

51:48 actually address your other question too

51:49 because interest the implication of the

51:51 other question will just be in the

51:52 future um so yeah if between today and

51:56 closing

51:57 um somebody else goes over income they

52:02 would be able to stay and the likelihood

52:04 is that they would even still qualify

52:06 for tax credits because they're able to

52:08 go up to I think 140% % of the area

52:11 median income without overqualifying.

52:14 Um so the likelihood so we implicit in

52:18 that would be to say we're not going to

52:19 rerand a vacant unit to a market ten.

52:22 So we won't have that issue. So it'll

52:24 just be the folks that are there if they

52:27 happen to go over income under the

52:28 grandfathering rules of the tax credit

52:30 program they would still be eligible and

52:33 still keep them affordable. The only

52:35 time they wouldn't be is if they go over

52:37 140% from their current 60% which is

52:40 pretty unlikely in the next six or seven

52:42 months

52:42 to get yeah be a big

52:45 a very big salary increase between now

52:47 and then for that to happen.

52:49 But but just I implicit in that was what

52:52 happens 30 years because we're going to

52:54 99 years. Um there there's federal rules

52:58 around that. So, let's say uh 30 years

53:01 from now we're going to do this again

53:04 and somebody is above 140%.

53:08 The federal rules allow that person to

53:10 stay as long as they wish. They're never

53:12 kicked out. It's just that the next

53:15 available unit always has to be

53:16 affordable.

53:18 So, like you can hypothetically have

53:21 less than all affordability, but every

53:22 time it payates you have to react.

53:25 So, once they move out, that unit would

53:26 be reacting. That's sort of how it all

53:28 works because I don't want to displace

53:29 them.

53:30 So I guess the the the other sort of

53:33 piece of this in terms of installation

53:35 is for those two units, those two units

53:38 are currently occupied by people who

53:40 have

53:42 um over income, right? So they have to

53:45 be market because they were income when

53:47 they moved in and then they've lived

53:48 there for so long.

53:49 No, actually those no those are

53:50 different. So those there were uh

53:53 certain units that were not encumbered

53:54 by affordability. That's right. And

53:56 those were starting in 2014. And those

53:58 two units that are over income were

54:00 rented as market rate units. That's

54:02 right.

54:02 Okay. So the so so if at some point

54:05 those people move out, those would

54:06 remain market rate units.

54:08 Yes. Correct.

54:10 And there's there is there any path that

54:13 would convert those two units to

54:15 affordable

54:16 at the next rehab?

54:18 Yeah, we could do I mean there's I would

54:20 say two paths. One would be at the, you

54:22 know, when we're sitting here 30 years

54:24 from now, we could have two. The other

54:26 more quick path would be to the extent

54:29 that that's important to the town, we

54:30 could enter into some negotiation of

54:33 what

54:34 town support and state support would be

54:36 there to

54:38 create those later. It's affordable. You

54:39 don't have to do that as part of the

54:41 rehab. We could do that

54:42 two years from now if we wanted to.

54:45 Couple other questions I have. So one of

54:47 them regarding the AMI 30% and 60% what

54:52 determines that distribution is it

54:55 mostly based on investment presumably

54:58 30% AMI you would need a bigger

55:01 investment from state federal local

55:03 so right now there's no 30% units at the

55:05 property um as part of this application

55:08 that's another thing that makes it

55:10 competitive is to add 30% units um so

55:13 we're doing we're adding some 30% units

55:15 um approximately

55:18 15% on each 4% and 9% project. Um so

55:22 there will be 30% units, 60% units, and

55:25 then the two market rate units.

55:26 And and to answer your question, the the

55:28 reason we're able to that's all baked

55:30 into the numbers. Um, but one of the

55:32 things that's helpful at this project is

55:34 that there's already 40% of the units,

55:38 40

55:40 a federal housing assistance payment

55:42 contract, which

55:44 means that you're getting the rent from

55:46 HUD at a at a fixed level.

55:48 And so whether the person is earning 60

55:50 or 30 doesn't affect the rent level that

55:52 the property receives for those 40%

55:55 units. that allows this property to be

55:58 very competitive with the state because

56:00 it can do more 30% units than others

56:03 because it has that housing assistance

56:05 payment.

56:07 A significant percentage of the units

56:09 are two-bedroom and is there some kind

56:12 of age restriction on all family members

56:17 that are living in this unit? Because if

56:19 there is, I'm curious as to why there

56:20 would sometimes be two bedrooms because

56:23 guests are allowed for up to a certain

56:24 period of time. Are these sibling

56:26 groups?

56:27 Uh, that's a great question. This dates

56:29 back um many this dates back to 1975. So

56:33 um the

56:36 elderly folks, let's say um someone has

56:38 a caregiver that wants that that

56:40 qualifies to live with them. That that

56:42 would be in the second unit. Sometimes

56:43 there's medical reasons why the husband

56:46 and wife can't or the the spouses can't

56:48 live together in the same room. So they

56:50 or and then yes sometimes there's

56:52 children with an elderly

56:55 um lease holder. So this you can under

56:58 this lease as long as the head of

57:00 household is 55 or older they can have a

57:04 child.

57:05 Um so that's kind of what the three

57:07 reasons why a two might be useful.

57:09 Okay. Yeah.

57:11 Yeah. My understanding is that with

57:12 respect to the market rate units in

57:15 Village at Brooklyn, uh we're still at

57:18 uh sort of workforce or upper workforce

57:21 rent levels.

57:22 Yes. There's various different

57:24 restrictions there. Um there's some that

57:27 are still affordable, some that are in

57:29 40t, some that Yeah. So there's there's

57:32 a variety of rental restrictions. I

57:35 think I can I can provide you a more

57:37 detailed breakdown if that's helpful.

57:38 Yeah, that would be it.

57:39 I think to to answer your question, what

57:41 we're committing to for long term

57:43 uh would be there are two ways to

57:46 qualify for um

57:48 for 40B for the subsidized housing

57:50 inventory. Either 20% of the units are

57:53 50% AMI or 25% at 80% AMI. Those are the

57:57 two ways that will be we'll be right

58:01 now. Um all those units are probably

58:03 closer to 30% AMI because they're under

58:05 a HAP contract. But what we're

58:07 committing to long term is to either do

58:10 20 of 50 or 25 of 80 um so that the town

58:13 continues to qualify those as 40

58:15 million. So we'll do we'll do one of

58:17 those.

58:17 My concern is or my question is uh with

58:21 respect to the market rate units we

58:26 they're at a probably 100 or 120% AMI or

58:32 does that even apply to those units?

58:35 Yeah. And the question is, you know,

58:36 what what what are the rent levels

58:38 there?

58:39 Uh yeah, so that the rent levels would

58:41 differ from the income restriction.

58:44 Yeah. So some of the rent levels because

58:46 they were affordable and because we've

58:48 agreed to sort of limit rent rent

58:50 increases now to 10% instead of marking

58:53 them up to market.

58:54 Um this is sort of in a negotiation with

58:56 the with the tenants.

58:58 Um

58:59 right now they are in a middle income

59:01 like we are saying 110 120%. But over

59:05 time, I would imagine they go to market,

59:07 they just go much slower than they would

59:09 have because of the 10% increase.

59:11 I just want to get it to be able to

59:14 understand that, you know, we're not

59:16 only maintaining affordable units as

59:19 that's usually um understood, but also

59:22 middle inome

59:24 housing.

59:28 Amanda

59:28 um so I just a a little bit of a

59:31 question on process and a little bit of

59:33 a statement. I think it's a great

59:34 opportunity to preserve a substantial

59:36 amount of affordable senior housing at

59:38 99 Kent. I'm really glad that about the

59:42 negotiations that have happened to

59:45 extend some affordability protections to

59:47 the village because I think it's it's

59:49 really important um that they are not o

59:52 overlooked in the process. Um

59:55 and it seems to me that if the MOA is

59:58 still being discussed, we are going to

1:00:01 vote on um authorizing the release of

1:00:05 funds authorizing um advocacy basically

1:00:08 for 99 Kent. Um and we were supposed to

1:00:12 vote on conditional approval but if of

1:00:15 the MOA but if there is still some

1:00:17 negotiation taking place um for for me

1:00:21 personally I would like to know that the

1:00:25 intent of affordability protections for

1:00:27 the village are not going to go away

1:00:29 with whatever negotiations and the MLA

1:00:31 are going

1:00:33 that's not yeah that's not we're we're

1:00:35 this is like we're we're talking about

1:00:37 like very small like that those things

1:00:39 are 100% in

1:00:41 It's not changing um unless the ch town

1:00:44 changes the first amendment, but we're

1:00:45 committed to all of that. Yeah, that's

1:00:47 that's definitely not changing and we

1:00:48 will um I just sent a revised version

1:00:51 over yesterday so we can you know

1:00:54 provide a a version when it's more

1:00:58 finalized. But yeah, those the

1:01:00 commitments for the affordability at 99

1:01:02 Kent and Village are in there.

1:01:09 That would be an important statement to

1:01:11 make sure is reflected in.

1:01:17 Sorry, Michael just sent me some notes

1:01:19 and I think we've covered everything.

1:01:23 Yes.

1:01:24 Thank you.

1:01:25 All right. So, any more questions,

1:01:27 comments from board members?

1:01:30 Oh, sorry. Just one brief comment on um

1:01:34 Roger's point on members of the HAD

1:01:36 being really useful. I would love to

1:01:37 figure out a way when this kind of topic

1:01:39 comes up to include their expertise

1:01:41 earlier in the process uh going forward

1:01:44 because I I think you are right we are

1:01:46 lucky and that we have some really

1:01:47 wellqualified members of the HAB that um

1:01:50 I would love their their guidance as we

1:01:53 go to challenges like expiring going

1:01:56 forward.

1:01:56 I do have to say some of like the most

1:01:58 detailed like intensive questions I've

1:02:02 ever received from a public board. So it

1:02:04 was it was uh clear that there was a lot

1:02:07 of experience there. So great.

1:02:09 Thank you select board for appointing

1:02:11 Wesley Reed because she hit the ground

1:02:13 running and is just as much

1:02:14 knowledgeable as Jonathan.

1:02:17 So reinforce that and yes

1:02:23 if I could just say something. So um for

1:02:26 those who don't know, um I grew up in

1:02:29 Brooklyn about a mile away. Um, my

1:02:32 father grew up in Brookline since 1939.

1:02:35 This is our hometown and we care very

1:02:37 much about this project. This is first

1:02:39 among equals

1:02:41 from the 120 developments we've

1:02:44 developed over the years. Very proud of

1:02:46 it. And um what I think is an

1:02:48 interesting fact for all of you because

1:02:49 I think this speaks to both the town's

1:02:52 um kind of uh dog on a bone

1:02:56 affordability uh needs and and our

1:03:00 partnership is that when it was

1:03:01 originally developed, it actually wasn't

1:03:03 an quote unquote affordable housing

1:03:05 project. In 1975, it was mostly um a

1:03:09 middle income housing project. is 80% of

1:03:12 80% AMI units on and that was going to

1:03:15 expire basically 30 years in. It was in

1:03:18 1997 that the town and wind worked

1:03:21 together to add tax credits to that and

1:03:23 actually created the affordability

1:03:24 that's expiring today. So it's actually

1:03:27 started more of a middle income in a

1:03:29 market. it turned into an affordable

1:03:31 housing and now it's going to turn, I

1:03:33 think, back into what essentially will

1:03:35 end up being 50% affordable and 50%

1:03:37 market, which is something that just

1:03:40 personally I push for. I love mixed

1:03:42 income housing. I think that's the

1:03:44 proper way uh to to sort of create a

1:03:46 community. But I just wanted to point

1:03:47 out that like this has really evolved

1:03:50 over time with the partnership with the

1:03:51 town. And I think I'm I'm very proud of

1:03:54 how it's ending up. I think the town

1:03:55 should be uh because a lot of 70s era

1:04:00 HUD housing has gone to market over the

1:04:03 years or has fallen into disarray. It's

1:04:06 kind of unusual for this to result in a

1:04:09 family elderly mixed income regime that

1:04:11 that lasts. So, um just wanted to say

1:04:13 that that thank you for the profound

1:04:16 partnership and I'm looking forward to

1:04:17 the next 99 years. Thank you.

1:04:21 All right. So with that, I think we may

1:04:24 be prepared to take a series of votes.

1:04:26 So I move that we

1:04:30 I think we should make sure right with

1:04:31 the MOA then

1:04:33 um I wonder if we given that the MOA is

1:04:36 still in the final stages of being

1:04:38 addressed. I wonder if we might

1:04:40 hold the votes until next week. Is that

1:04:42 right?

1:04:42 Um

1:04:43 or are there certain votes that we

1:04:44 should take now?

1:04:46 Yeah, there's general consistent

1:04:47 I think you could take the the vote of

1:04:49 supporting their application for sure.

1:04:51 Um, I think the if

1:04:56 I wish I wish I have Michael's opinion

1:04:58 here. I think we could you could move

1:05:00 forward with the vote on the 4 million

1:05:03 um preliminary commitment and supporting

1:05:06 their application and acknowledging the

1:05:08 letter um that they provided. But I

1:05:10 think we should definitely I I think we

1:05:12 should hold off on the MOA just until we

1:05:15 finalize that.

1:05:17 Roger, do you do you agree?

1:05:19 Um, I think so. And I I was at one

1:05:22 procedural question. Is the

1:05:25 formal execution of MOA an absolute

1:05:29 requirement for the select board to

1:05:31 provide the conditional letter of

1:05:33 commitment on 4 million? Do they have to

1:05:35 follow in sequence?

1:05:38 So the way the MOA is written, it it um

1:05:42 would be executed after

1:05:45 the um after this leadboard votes

1:05:48 approval on the funding because if

1:05:49 there's a line in the MOA that lists

1:05:52 what they they approved it. Um so

1:05:54 so execution of the MOA would fall in

1:05:56 that bucket of conditions.

1:05:58 Yes. So you could issue the um the

1:06:02 letter the wing needs to to provide the

1:06:04 state the town's preliminary commitment.

1:06:07 Right. So so it seems to me that we

1:06:09 could vote on 4B, 4 C and 4 E and hold

1:06:13 off on memorandum of agreement till we

1:06:15 see it. Of course, which is 4 D. So that

1:06:18 would be my suggestion unless other

1:06:20 board members feel differently.

1:06:22 I'm okay with that. I just want to note

1:06:24 when we vote on 4B that it's with the

1:06:27 understanding that nothing substantial

1:06:30 is going to be changing about that like

1:06:34 minor legally stuff I'm not so worried

1:06:36 about maybe because I'm not a lawyer but

1:06:42 all right so with that I move that we

1:06:45 authorize $4 million of affordable

1:06:47 housing trust funds on the terms and

1:06:49 conditions recommended by the housing

1:06:51 advisory board so long There are no

1:06:54 major modifications to those

1:06:56 recommendations to be utilized for the

1:06:58 substantial rehabilitation and extension

1:07:00 of affordable housing restrictions at

1:07:02 the senior rental housing at 99 Kent

1:07:04 Street for 99 years and authorizing the

1:07:06 select board chair to sign related

1:07:08 documents on behalf of the select board.

1:07:11 Bernard

1:07:11 yes.

1:07:12 Michael,

1:07:12 yes.

1:07:13 Amanda,

1:07:13 yes.

1:07:14 And I also vote yes. I move that we

1:07:17 authorize the town administrator,

1:07:19 director of planning, community

1:07:20 development, and housing and community

1:07:22 planning director favorably recommends

1:07:24 to the state or other funding sources

1:07:27 grant applications that support the

1:07:28 rehabilitation and affordability of

1:07:30 homes at 99 Kent Street. Bernard,

1:07:33 yes.

1:07:33 Michael,

1:07:34 yes.

1:07:34 Amanda,

1:07:35 yes.

1:07:35 I also vote yes. I move that we

1:07:38 acknowledge the letter from wind

1:07:39 companies to the town stating their

1:07:41 commitments to renovate units and to

1:07:43 extend rent protections for two income

1:07:45 qualified tenant households at 77

1:07:48 Village Way with changes proposed by the

1:07:50 town. Bernard,

1:07:51 yes.

1:07:52 Michael,

1:07:52 yes.

1:07:53 Amanda,

1:07:53 yes.

1:07:54 And I also vote yes.

1:07:56 All right. Well, thank you very much for

1:07:57 coming and for the very thorough

1:07:58 presentation and asking our m answering

1:08:02 our multitude of questions.

1:08:04 Thank you so much. Thank you everybody.

1:08:06 appreciate it. Good luck with the state.

1:08:14 He's one of the first to do this.

1:08:16 Thank you.

1:08:17 Thank you very much.

1:08:21 All right. So,

1:08:21 how about a break?

1:08:22 How about Sure.

1:08:24 We are ahead of schedule.

1:08:26 All right. if you'd like

1:08:27 or I can just go to like

1:08:34 David

1:08:35 the question probably has been answered

1:08:38 but are these agreements attached to the

1:08:41 property if they were to sell these

1:08:43 properties

1:08:44 yes

1:08:45 because when they

1:08:49 process property in in they flipped it

1:08:53 as soon as they got the third It is

1:08:56 touched by

1:08:59 you know I didn't see one right outside

1:09:00 on the right I think

1:09:03 you guys all

1:09:07 uh straight ahead I think on the right

1:09:09 sorry Bernard

1:09:11 we muted the room

1:09:19 all right I

1:09:22 would like to allow Anthony to provide a

1:09:25 vote to 4B, 4 C, and 4E. So, Anthony, do

1:09:29 you approve the question of authorizing

1:09:30 four million affordable housing trust

1:09:32 funds?

1:09:33 All right. So, yes, for Anthony on 4B.

1:09:35 Anthony, do you approve authorizing the

1:09:38 town administrator, director of plan,

1:09:39 community development, and housing,

1:09:40 community planning director to favorably

1:09:42 recommend state or other funding

1:09:43 sources, grant applications?

1:09:45 Yes.

1:09:46 All right. And do you uh acknowledge the

1:09:50 letter from wind companies to the

1:09:51 channel stating their commitment to

1:09:52 renovate units and extend rent

1:09:54 protections? Yes. Thank you, David, for

1:09:56 allowing me to vote on this.

1:10:01 Now, we will move to review the public

1:10:03 bodies handbook.

1:10:10 So,

1:10:13 um we have uh a new draft of the public

1:10:18 bodies handbook that is being um worked

1:10:22 through has been worked through. Um

1:10:24 we've been implementing re uh potential

1:10:28 comments from uh individual select board

1:10:30 members uh and working through to uh get

1:10:34 to where uh hopefully we uh need to be.

1:10:36 I will note um there are some comments

1:10:39 um came in over the weekend that we

1:10:41 still need I still need to implement. Um

1:10:43 so I'm apologize to kind of switching

1:10:45 back and forth between two versions

1:10:46 here. Um but you can see here um the

1:10:51 biggest the biggest changes um

1:10:54 substantively um are um one a

1:10:59 requirement um

1:11:01 um

1:11:03 is uh one a language about vacancies. Um

1:11:07 if you scroll down to page um

1:11:12 page eight or sorry page seven of the

1:11:14 manual um

1:11:17 there's now new language about vacancies

1:11:20 um and this is the after discuss you

1:11:22 know with discussion to the um

1:11:27 um

1:11:32 so if you scroll down to see the select

1:11:34 or endeavor and fill vacancies on public

1:11:37 bodies as soon as practiced. Posted

1:11:39 positions will remain open until filled,

1:11:41 but typically the select board will

1:11:42 endeavor to conduct interviews and fill

1:11:44 positions no earlier than 30 days and no

1:11:46 later than 60 days from posting.

1:11:47 Vacancies on public bodies requiring

1:11:49 specialized expertise may take longer to

1:11:51 fill. Select board also typically

1:11:52 endeavors to interview every applicant

1:11:54 and may decide not to do so in the

1:11:56 chair's discretion if an application is

1:11:58 submitted after a sufficient number of

1:11:59 candidates have been interviewed. So,

1:12:01 this sets a certain level of expectation

1:12:03 from the public, but doesn't foreclose

1:12:06 you from after a 60-day period if you

1:12:08 feel like you need to hear from more

1:12:10 applicants or you want to hold the

1:12:11 position open, particularly if it's one

1:12:13 requiring specialized expertise. Um, but

1:12:16 it sets right it gives the community a

1:12:18 sense of, you know, when they should get

1:12:20 their application in if they want to be

1:12:21 considered for a position.

1:12:26 Can I make one note and I'll just

1:12:28 explain my comment like this now

1:12:31 formalizes the definition of a vacancy

1:12:33 basically being not when someone does

1:12:35 not resubmit for reappointment but when

1:12:38 someone steps down early for one reason

1:12:40 or another.

1:12:41 Yes. uh

1:12:44 so that it it should be important and I

1:12:48 don't think that it necessarily needs to

1:12:50 be reflected in the handbook but then

1:12:52 essentially when we are considering

1:12:55 candidates for reappoint and we are

1:12:57 trying to make it on a regular calendar

1:13:01 schedule um then we're also considering

1:13:04 new candidates for appointment at the

1:13:06 same time um apart from vacancies which

1:13:09 are their own category

1:13:10 yeah I do think it would be helpful to

1:13:12 spell that out to be very clear because

1:13:14 this will be a bit of a departure from

1:13:17 prior protocol.

1:13:18 We can definitely do that. Um so we can

1:13:20 make clear that this that there's a

1:13:23 difference between an open position and

1:13:25 a position that's being considered for

1:13:26 reappoint.

1:13:28 So um

1:13:31 right then the the vacancy is right just

1:13:33 to spell out that someone has stepped

1:13:36 down early. It is a vacancy. we are

1:13:37 filling it not on the normal calendar

1:13:39 time that we are thinking about based on

1:13:42 when the person has stepped down. Um and

1:13:45 then reappoint we are I I don't actually

1:13:48 know that we have put this in here but

1:13:50 we are trying to make it sort of at the

1:13:53 same time each year right

1:13:55 hopefully yes um and that brings us to a

1:13:57 question of well reappointments if

1:13:59 someone misses the August 31st deadline

1:14:01 that you have set in one of your prior

1:14:03 meetings is that now considered a vacant

1:14:06 position and then that person who maybe

1:14:08 re reapplied three or four weeks later

1:14:11 are they now a new candidate do you want

1:14:12 to reinter

1:14:16 I think that's that's I'm sorry. Go

1:14:18 ahead.

1:14:18 Isn't Isn't interviewing at the

1:14:20 discretion of the chair anyway? So, do

1:14:23 we have to make a rule about that?

1:14:25 No, I just would like for my purposes in

1:14:28 scheduling. I have a couple of reappoint

1:14:30 applicants who missed the deadline. Do

1:14:31 you want to interview them or put them

1:14:33 on for reappoint? Because are they now

1:14:36 considered new applicants? So I

1:14:38 personally would like when when the vote

1:14:41 happens to not have separate categories

1:14:43 of reappoint and appointments um to have

1:14:46 one conversation. So just to take one

1:14:48 example from what happened previously,

1:14:50 we were voting on candidates for parks

1:14:54 and wreck for reappoint. Two of the

1:14:55 three put in for reappoint. Um and we

1:14:58 voted on them in a separate meeting and

1:15:00 then we just had the special meeting to

1:15:02 fill the third of those seats. I would

1:15:04 much prefer going forward to say we have

1:15:09 what would have been uh six candidates

1:15:15 these are incumbents and so we know them

1:15:17 and you have a little more familiarity

1:15:19 with them but then the comation becomes

1:15:21 which of those six get appointed to

1:15:23 those three seats um with the knowledge

1:15:26 it's sort of like it's an incumbent star

1:15:28 in the discussion as opposed to a

1:15:41 not going to be rubber stamping

1:15:42 incumbents in the future, which is not

1:15:44 to say they won't have an advantage. Uh

1:15:46 but if we're not going to be rubber

1:15:47 stamped