HomeMy Public PortalAboutCPC Packet 122320Town of Brewster Community Preservation Committee
2198 Main St., Brewster, MA 02631
cpcmeeting@brewster-ma.gov
(508) 896-3701
MEETING AGENDA
Remote Participation Only
December 23, 2020 at 4:00 p.m.
This meeting will be conducted by remote participation pursuant to Governor Baker’s March 2020 orders suspending certain Open Meeting Law
provisions and imposing limits on public gatherings. No in-person meeting attendance will be permitted. If the Town is unable to live broadcast
this meeting, a record of the proceedings will be provided on the Town website as soon as possible. The Town has established specific email
addresses for each board and committee so the public can submit comments either before or during the meeting. To submit public comment
or questions to the Community Preservation Committee, please email: cpcmeeting@brewster-ma.gov. To view the:
Live broadcast: Tune to Brewster Government TV Channel 18
Livestream: Go to www.livestream.brewster-ma.gov
Audio/video recording: Go to www.tv.brewster-ma.gov
Community
Preservation
Committee
Faythe Ellis
Chair
Sharon Marotti
Vice Chair
Elizabeth Taylor
Clerk
Barbara Burgo
Bruce Evans
Peggy Jablonski
Diane Pansire
Paul Ruchinskas
Roland Bassett Jr.
CPC Assistant
Beth Devine
1. Call to order
2. Discussion and possible votes on completeness, timeliness and CPA eligibility
for the following applications:
a. Housing Coordinator
b. Brewster Rental Assistance Program
c. Veterans Home in Dennis
d. Red Top Road Community Housing
e. Stony Brook Mill Retaining Wall Reconstruction
3. Discussion and possible vote on the completeness of the Dog Park application
and on securing legal opinion on the application.
4. Approval of minutes from 12/9/20
5. Virtual Habitat Dedication of the final Paul Hush Way homes
6. January meeting schedule and warrant article planning
7. Project updates
8. Announcements
9. Items the Chair could not anticipate
10. Next virtual meeting 1/14 at 4PM
11. Motion to adjourn
Date Posted: Date Revised:
12/21/20
Spring 2021 CPC Applications – Legal Opinions
Housing Coordinator
From: Shirin Everett <SEverett@k-plaw.com<mailto:SEverett@k-plaw.com>>
Subject: Brewster: Legal opinions- CPC funding applications
Date: January 10, 2018 at 12:17:04 PM EST
To: "Paul Ruchinskas (pjruch@comcast.net<mailto:pjruch@comcast.net>)"
<pjruch@comcast.net<mailto:pjruch@comcast.net>>
Cc: Jonathan Silverstein <JSilverstein@k-plaw.com<mailto:JSilverstein@k-plaw.com>>, "'Michael
Embury' (membury@brewster-ma.gov<mailto:membury@brewster-ma.gov>)" <membury@brewster-
ma.gov<mailto:membury@brewster-ma.gov>>
Hello Paul,
1. Housing Coordinator: The Assistant Town Administrator and Town Planner request CPA funds to
retain a part-time Housing Coordinator to assist the Town with its affordable housing projects and
programs. According to the job description attached to the application, the Housing Coordinator will,
among other things, review the Town’s SHI, ensure that properties remain deed restricted, assist various
Town boards with affordable housing projects such as the affordable housing buy-down program, assist
with the Town’s Housing Production Plan, identify available housing opportunities, assist in preparing
list of priorities, and engage in other activities designed to promote affordable housing.
Opinion: It is my opinion that CPA funds may properly be used to retain a Housing Coordinator, as the
primary duty of the Housing Coordinator, as described in the job function, is to directly support the
Town in acquiring and creating affordable housing and/or assisting in affordable housing programs
and/or low income households. I note that there are many municipalities that retain housing
coordinators and/or specialists with the use of CPA funds.
Note: See 12/15/20 email below for confirmation that this opinion may be used for this year’s
application.
Rental Assistance Program
From: Shirin Everett
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 8:55 PM
To: 'Faythe Ellis'
Cc: 'Peter Lombardi'; Jonathan Silverstein; 'Sharon Marotti'; 'Beth Devine'
Subject: Brewster CPC Housing Applications for Legal Opinion - Rental Assistance Program
To those of you who received my prior email on this matter, please ignore that email because I sent it
inadvertently before I had finished.
Hello Faythe,
You requested an opinion as to whether the Community Preservation Committee (the “CPC”)
may grant to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund (the “Trust”) monies under G.L. c.44B (the
“CPA”) for the purpose of establishing a Brewster Affordable Housing Rental Assistance
Program (the “Rental Program”) and an Emergency Rental Assistance Program (the “Emergency
Program” and, with the Rental Program, the “Programs”), both of which will be managed by the
Housing Assistance Corporation (“HAC”), a nonprofit organization. Under the Rental Program,
HAC will provide rental assistance to low income tenants for a maximum term of 3 years. Under
the Emergency Program, CPA funds will be provided to low and moderate income tenants who
are at risk of eviction because of the severe economic harm and job loss caused by the Covid-19
pandemic for a period of no more than 1 year. Under both Programs, HAC will make pay no
more than $500/month pursuant to an agreement with landlords, and with funds paid directly
to such landlords. You have asked if the use of CPA funds for the purpose of undertaking the
Programs is consistent with the CPA. For the reasons set forth below, it is my opinion that the
CPC may reasonably conclude that CPA funds may properly be expended to provide HAC with
funds to administer a rental assistance program for the support of income eligible renters.
As you are aware, CPA funds may only be used for the specific purposes set forth in Section 5 of
the CPA. Section 5 states that monies may be used to “acquire”, “create”, “preserve”,
“rehabilitate” and/or “support” community housing. Section 2 defines “community housing” as
housing for low income households (that is, households earning no more than 80% of the area
median income) and/or moderate income households (that is, households earning no more
than 100% of the area median income); the application materials state that the persons
receiving CPA funds under the Programs will meet the CPA income qualifications. The CPA
funds will not be used to acquire affordable housing, as the households assisted under the
Programs already rent their homes, but are having difficulty paying their rent. Further, since I
expect that the Town will not obtain an affordable housing restriction on such homes in
exchange for the assistance, the funds will not be used to “create” affordable housing, in my
opinion. CPA funds are not being used to rehabilitate such homes, but, rather, to allow eligible
persons to continue to live in their homes during times of economic uncertainty. The CPA does
not fully define the word “support”, but states that it “includes, but is not limited to, programs
that provide grants, loans, rental assistance, security deposits, interest-rate write downs or
other forms of assistance directly to individuals and families who are eligible for community
housing or to an entity that owns, operates or manages such housing, for the purpose of making
housing affordable” (emphasis added).
Although the CPA expressly permits use of CPA funds for rental assistance programs, such as
the Programs, there are certain limitations on the use of CPA funds. One such restriction is
listed in Section 12(a) of the CPA, which states that: “A real property interest that is acquired
with monies from the Community Preservation Fund shall be bound by a permanent restriction,
recorded as a separate instrument, that meets the requirements of sections 31 to 33, inclusive,
of chapter 184 limiting the use of the interest to the purpose for which it was acquired”. As
mentioned above, I assume that the homes receiving a rental subsidy under the Programs will
not be subject to affordable housing restrictions. The Programs must also comply with the
“anti-aid amendment” of the Massachusetts Constitution, which prohibits municipalities from
granting or lending money for the purpose of aiding any undertaking that is not publicly owned
and controlled by a public instrumentality unless there is a definite public purpose and/or
benefit to the public at large. According to the Department of Revenue (“DOR”), which is
charged with oversight over the CPA, the CPA is primarily an asset-based program, in that the
CPA’s intent is to make housing affordable for long term. If a community grants assistance
directly to individuals, and no restrictions are obtained on the homes in which such persons
reside for the purpose of making such homes affordable to future renters, the community takes
the risk that DOR may find that such grants only benefit the individual, rather than serving the
public interest.
As you are aware, there are a fair number of communities that use CPA funds for projects
similar to the Programs, and they too, like Brewster, do not obtain affordable housing
restrictions on homes. I note that, as a practical matter, it is difficult for communities to
acquire long-term affordable housing restrictions on such homes, as landlords may legitimately
balk at permanently restricting the amount of rent they can charge in the future in exchange for
temporary assistance to the current tenant. Further, it is my opinion the CPA mandates
permanent restrictions only when the Town acquires real property interests with CPA funds;
the CPA does not expressly require a permanent restriction whenever CPA funds are granted to
third parties. Moreover, although such programs do benefit low or moderate income
households, they also help accomplish the larger public interest of preventing homelessness.
The DOR, having considered the foregoing issues, permits rental assistance if such programs are
managed and administered by a local housing authority or nonprofit organization, like HAC,
where the authority or nonprofit enters into an agreement with the landlord to pay funds
directly to the landlord and there is a written lease between the landlord and tenant. The
payments to the landlords, together with the rent paid by the assisted household, approximate
the fair market rental value of the property. In DOR’s opinion, a rental assistance program,
administered in this manner, is consistent with the CPA and the anti-aid amendment because
the CPA funds are being expended in exchange for the non-profit’s management services. In
my opinion, since the Programs constitute the support of community housing, and the grant is
being administered by the HAC, the CPC may reasonably conclude that the use of funds for the
Programs is consistent with the CPA and the anti-aid amendment.
Note that DOR has added a caveat to their opinion on rental assistance programs. While CPA
funds may be used to pay rent to landlords and to pay a nonprofit a reasonable fee for
managing such programs, it is DOR’s opinion that CPA funds may not be used to provide
housing counseling and foreclosure preventing services to income eligible households. The
application materials state that HAC will receive a 5% administrative fee, which is reasonable, in
my opinion. To the extent that the CPA will be used to provide such other services, I
recommend that the Town/Trust inform HAC that CPA monies are subject to the foregoing
limitation.
Please let me know if you have any further questions regarding this matter
Shirin Everett, Esq.
KP |LAW
101 Arch Street, 12th Floor
Boston, MA 02110
O: (617) 654 1731
F: (617) 654 1735
severett@k-plaw.com
www.k-plaw.com
Red Top Road Habitat for Humanity
Veterans Housing in Dennis
From: Shirin Everett
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 3:21 PM
To: 'Faythe Ellis'
Cc: 'Peter Lombardi'; Jonathan Silverstein; 'Sharon Marotti'; 'Beth Devine'
Subject: Brewster CPC Housing Applications for Legal Opinion - Housing Coordinator & Construction of
Affordable Housing
Hello Faythe,
Yes, you may rely on my prior opinion as to the use of CPA funds for the community housing
coordinator or specialist.
In this email, I respond to your questions as to whether the Community Preservation Committee
(the “CPC”) may properly grant funds for the 2 projects that involve the construction of new
affordable homes, one in Brewster (the “Brewster Project”) and the other in the Town of Dennis
(the “Dennis Project”).
The Brewster Project
Habitat for Humanity of Cape Cod, Inc. (“Habitat”) has applied to the CPC for a grant of
$100,000 under G.L. c. 44B (the “CPA”) for the purpose of constructing two 3-bedroom
residential dwellings at 26 Red Top Road (the “Property”) and selling such homes to households
earning no more than 65% of the area median income, with preference given to veterans for one
of the homes (the “Project”). Habitat intends to develop the homes under GL c.40B, and the
Property will be subject to a permanent affordable housing restriction, in the form of a
Regulatory Agreement entered into by Habitat and DHCD.
As you know, CPA funds may be expended only for those purposes expressly stated in the CPA.
The CPA allows CPA funds to be used to “acquire” “a real property interest” in community
housing, to create, preserve, and support such housing, and to rehabilitate affordable housing
acquired or created by the use of such funds. “Community housing” refers to housings that is
sold or rented only to low and moderate income households; since Habitat intends to convey the
homes to those earning no more than 65% of the area median income (which is commonly
referred to as “very low income” housing), the Project meets the income qualifications required
by the CPA. A “real property interest” is defined in Section 2 of the CPA as “a present or future
legal or equitable interest in or to real property, including easements and restrictions…but shall
not include an interest which is limited to the following: an estate at will or at sufferance and any
estate for years having a term of less than 30 years...” (emphasis added). I expect that the grant
of CPA funds to Habitat will be conditioned on Habitat conveying a permanent affordable
housing restriction on the Property to the Town, in that the Town will be made a party to and
have the right to enforce the Regulatory Agreement. In my opinion, the CPC may reasonably
conclude that the acquisition of a restriction in exchange for CPA funds is a legitimate use of
CPA funds. I recommend that the Town enter into a grant agreement with Habitat establishing
the terms of the grant, including a requirement that Habitat make the Town a party to the
Regulatory Agreement.
The Dennis Project
Cape and Islands Veterans Outreach Center (the “Applicant”), a nonprofit corporation, has
requested a grant of $50,000 from the CPC, which the Applicant will use to construct a 5-
bedroom group home at 1341 Route 134 in the Town of Dennis (the “Property”) for the purpose
of providing housing and supportive services to homeless veterans (the “Project”), with the goal
of assisting veterans to achieve independent and sustainable housing. The Applicant currently
has a funding shortfall of approximately $82,000 to cover the cost of construction, and the grant
of CPA funds will reduce the gap. The Applicant states that the Property will be protected for
such housing in perpetuity due to 5 project-based vouchers that will attach to the Project for the
life of the Project.
In my opinion, if the Town obtains a long-term affordable housing restriction on the Property in
exchange for the funds, the CPA funds will have been properly expended to acquire community
housing, similar to the Town’s acquisition of a restriction for the Brewster Project. If the Town
does not obtain a restriction, but the Property is nevertheless subject to a long-term restriction
held by a public agency, the CPC may nonetheless grant CPA funds to the Applicant if, in the
CPC’s opinion, the funds constitute the support community housing. As you know, the term
“support” is defined in Section 2 of the CPA to include “programs that provide grants, loans…or
other forms of assistance…to an entity that owns, operates or manages such [community]
housing, for the purpose of making housing affordable.” Since the Applicant will own the
Property and operate the Project, and the grant will enable the Applicant to offer bedrooms for
rent at a price that it is affordable to very low (or no) income veterans, it is my opinion that CPA
funds may properly be granted to the Applicant for the purpose of undertaking and managing the
Project. I recommend that the Town enter into a grant agreement with the Applicant establishing
the terms of the grant and obtain a restriction on the Property, if feasible.
Please let me know if you have any further questions regarding these matters
Shirin Everett, Esq.
KP |LAW
101 Arch Street, 12th Floor
Boston, MA 02110
O: (617) 654 1731
F: (617) 654 1735
severett@k-plaw.com
www.k-plaw.com
Stony Brook Mill Retaining Wall
From: Shirin Everett
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:16 PM
To: 'Faythe Ellis'
Cc: 'Peter Lombardi'; Jonathan Silverstein; 'Sharon Marotti'; 'Beth Devine'
Subject: Brewster CPC Historical Application - Mill Sites retaining wall
Hello Faythe,
I reviewing the application materials submitted to the Community Preservation Committee
(“CPC”) by the Town’s Department of Natural Resources, in conjunction with the Town’s
Millsites Committee, seeking $125,000 toward the cost of rehabilitating a retaining wall shoring
up the historic Lower Mill Pond dam. The Lower Mill Pond dam was historically used to control
water levels to power the Grist Mill operations and to provide passage to migratory fish; the
retaining wall supports the dam and functions as a fish run. Its current deteriorated condition
threatens the integrity of the dam, the fish run, and the mill building, all of which improvements
are located at 830 Stony Brook Road (the “Property”), owned by the Town, and listed in the
National Register of Historic Places. The Property, known as the Stony Brook Grist Mill, is also
located within the Old King’s Highway Regional Historic District. You have requested an
opinion as to whether the repair and restoration of the retaining wall (the “Project”) is eligible for
funding under G.L. c.44B, the Community Preservation Act (“CPA”). For the reasons set forth
below, it is my opinion that, since the Property is listed in the National Register of Historic
District and an important part of the history and culture of the Town of Brewster and the region,
and the Project will preserve the Mill buildings from injury and rehabilitate an important historic
resource, the CPC may reasonable conclude that the Project is eligible for funding under the
CPA.
As you are aware, CPA funds may only be used for the purposes set forth and defined in the
CPA. Historic resources, such as the Property and its various elements, may be preserved with
the use of CPA funds, that is, to protect the historic Property from injury. CPA funds may also
be used to rehabilitate or improve historic resources. “Rehabilitation” is defined in the CPA as:
“capital improvements, or the making of extraordinary repairs, to historic resources…for the
purpose of making such historic resources…functional for their intended uses.” In my opinion,
since the repair of the wall will help maintain the integrity of the dam, which in turn will protect
the mill buildings and other improvements, the use of CPA funds for the Project constitute both
the preservation and rehabilitation of the historic Property and is eligible for funding under the
CPA. The Project must comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the
preservation and rehabilitation of historic resources, and it appears from the attached letter from
the Massachusetts Historical Commission (“MHC”) that MHC will coordinate with the Town in
that regard.
Please let me know if you have any further questions on this matter.
Shirin
Shirin Everett, Esq.
KP |LAW
101 Arch Street, 12th Floor
Boston, MA 02110
O: (617) 654 1731
F: (617) 654 1735
severett@k-plaw.com
www.k-plaw.com
Creating opportunities for people to live, work, & thrive on the Lower Cape
___________________________
3 Main Street Mercantile, Unit 7 Eastham, MA 02642
P 508.240.7873 F 508.240.5085 E contact@capecdp.org
www.capecdp.org
December 7, 2020
Community Preservation Committee
Town of Brewster
Town Hall
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631
Dear Committee Members:
The Community Development Partnership (CDP) is writing in support of the Brewster Affordable
Housing Trust’s request for $150,000 for the Brewster Rental Assistance Program. The CDP was
instrumental in facilitating the creation and adoption by several Lower Cape towns of an Emergency
Rental Assistance Program to provide relief for those families and individuals having difficulty paying
rent due to economic constraints created by the pandemic. The requested funding would provide both
emergency pandemic assistance as well as regular rental assistance.
The pandemic has created an unprecedented degree of uncertainty in all of our lives and families need
stability more than ever. The requested funds will help provide renters with the certainty of stable
housing and landlords with needed income. This investment in the community will result in healthier,
more productive citizens.
I ask that you support this request.
Sincerely,
Jay Coburn
Chief Executive Officer
20 Year Pro
Forma
Dennis
Project
Fiscal Year 2021 estimate
6 months
occupancy
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037
Revenue
HUD Vouchers at
$742/month
$19,913.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00
DVS Housing
Contract
$10,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00
DVS Outreach
Contract/apportio
ned to Dennis
$5,250.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00
CIVOC Operating
Account
$4,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,160.00 $8,323.20 $8,489.66 $8,659.46 $8,832.65 $9,009.30 $9,189.49 $9,373.28 $9,560.74 $9,751.96 $9,946.99 $10,145.93 $10,348.85 $10,555.83 $10,766.95
Total Revenue $39,163.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00
Expenses
Salaries
Housing Manager $9,400.00 $15,600.00 $15,912.00 $16,230.24 $16,554.84 $16,885.94 $17,223.66 $17,568.13 $17,919.50 $18,277.89 $18,643.44 $19,016.31 $19,396.64 $19,784.57 $20,180.26 $20,583.87 $20,995.55
Exec Director $3,250.00 $6,500.00 $6,630.00 $6,762.60 $6,897.85 $7,035.81 $7,176.53 $7,320.06 $7,466.46 $7,615.79 $7,768.10 $7,923.46 $8,081.93 $8,243.57 $8,408.44 $8,576.61 $8,748.14
Admin $1,700.00 $3,400.00 $3,468.00 $3,537.36 $3,608.11 $3,680.27 $3,753.87 $3,828.95 $3,905.53 $3,983.64 $4,063.31 $4,144.58 $4,227.47 $4,312.02 $4,398.26 $4,486.23 $4,575.95
CIVOC
Counselors
$1,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,040.00 $2,080.80 $2,122.42 $2,164.86 $2,208.16 $2,252.32 $2,297.37 $2,343.32 $2,390.19 $2,437.99 $2,486.75 $2,536.48 $2,587.21 $2,638.96 $2,691.74
Utilities
Propane/Oil $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $3,090.00 $3,182.70 $3,278.18 $3,376.53 $3,477.82 $3,582.16 $3,689.62 $3,800.31 $3,914.32 $4,031.75 $4,152.70 $4,277.28 $4,405.60 $4,537.77 $4,673.90
Electric $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,060.00 $2,121.80 $2,185.45 $2,251.02 $2,318.55 $2,388.10 $2,459.75 $2,533.54 $2,609.55 $2,687.83 $2,768.47 $2,851.52 $2,937.07 $3,025.18 $3,115.93
Water $500.00 $515.00 $530.45 $546.36 $562.75 $579.64 $597.03 $614.94 $633.39 $652.39 $671.96 $692.12 $712.88 $734.27 $756.29 $778.98 $802.35
Septic Pumping $300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 $0.00
Insurance/liabilty
and property
$2,000.00 $4,000.00 $4,080.00 $4,161.60 $4,244.83 $4,329.73 $4,416.32 $4,504.65 $4,594.74 $4,686.64 $4,780.37 $4,875.98 $4,973.50 $5,072.97 $5,174.43 $5,277.92 $5,383.47
Operations/Maint
enance
Transportation $2,500.00 $2,550.00 $2,601.00 $2,653.02 $2,706.08 $2,760.20 $2,815.41 $2,871.71 $2,929.15 $2,987.73 $3,047.49 $3,108.44 $3,170.60 $3,234.02 $3,298.70 $3,364.67 $3,431.96
Building Repairs $0.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,250.00 $1,500.00 $1,750.00 $2,000.00 $2,250.00 $2,500.00 $2,750.00
Snow
removal/Trash
Removal
$750.00 $1,500.00 $1,545.00 $1,591.35 $1,639.09 $1,688.26 $1,738.91 $1,791.08 $1,844.81 $1,900.16 $1,957.16 $2,015.87 $2,076.35 $2,138.64 $2,202.80 $2,268.88 $2,336.95
Landscape Maint
Donated and by
Vets
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $1,020.00 $1,040.40 $1,061.21 $1,082.43 $1,104.08 $1,126.16 $1,148.69 $1,171.66 $1,195.09 $1,218.99 $1,243.37 $1,268.24 $1,293.61
Capital
Improvements
Reserve
$0.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00
interior Painting $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00
Maintenance
Reserve
$500.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Table 1
1
Mortgage 200k
@4.5%@ 30 years
$12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00
Total
Expenses
$36,256.00 $57,221.00 $58,412.45 $60,023.83 $65,975.61 $62,748.66 $63,443.47 $64,460.54 $65,800.39 $71,563.56 $67,900.57 $69,561.99 $70,648.39 $72,060.34 $78,798.44 $74,963.31 $76,455.56
Net
Income/Loss
$2,907.00 $13,104.00 $11,912.55 $10,301.17 $4,349.39 $7,576.34 $6,881.53 $5,864.46 $4,524.61 -$1,238.56 $2,424.43 $763.01 -$323.39 -$1,735.34 -$8,473.44 -$4,638.31 -$6,130.56
Project Reserve $2,907.00 $16,011.00 $27,923.55 $38,224.72 $42,574.10 $50,150.44 $57,031.98 $62,896.44 $67,421.05 $66,182.49 $68,606.92 $69,369.92 $69,046.54 $67,311.20 $58,837.75 $54,199.44 $48,068.88
2
2038 2039 2040 2041
$39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00 $39,825.00
$20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00
$10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00
$10,982.29 $11,201.93 $11,425.97 $11,654.49
$70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00 $70,325.00
$21,415.46 $21,843.77 $22,280.64 $22,726.25
$8,923.11 $9,101.57 $9,283.60 $9,469.27
$4,667.47 $4,760.82 $4,856.04 $4,953.16
$2,745.57 $2,800.48 $2,856.49 $2,913.62
$4,814.12 $4,958.54 $5,107.30 $5,260.52
$3,209.41 $3,305.70 $3,404.87 $3,507.01
$826.42 $851.22 $876.75 $903.06
$300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00
$5,491.14 $5,600.97 $5,712.98 $5,827.24
$3,500.60 $3,570.62 $3,642.03 $3,714.87
$3,000.00 $3,250.00 $3,500.00 $3,750.00
$2,407.06 $2,479.27 $2,553.65 $2,630.26
$1,319.48 $1,345.87 $1,372.79 $1,400.24
$2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
$1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00
3
$12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00 $12,156.00
$78,275.85 $79,524.81 $81,103.14 $88,011.51
-$7,950.85 -$9,199.81 -$10,778.14 -$17,686.51
$40,118.03 $30,918.21 $20,140.08 $2,453.57
4
Revenue and Expense Assumptions
Veterans Home in Dennis
www.capeveterans.com
REVENUE
Rent:
• Rent subsidized by 5 HUD Section 8 Project Based Vouchers from Barnstable.
• Vouchers are $742 per month per room.
• Chapter 115 veteran benefits are an eligible funding source for qualifying state veterans.
• Assume an average of 90% occupancy to cover turnover and maintain a conservative estimate.
Department of Veteran Services Housing: Contract is $38,326; of that amount, $20,000 will be allocated to
this project. No inflation included given historic trend of no increase in 20 years
Department of Veteran Services Outreach Contract: totals $172,000; $10,500 of this amount will be
allocated to this project to cover a portion of salaries for staff dedicated to this project. The remainder or
$163,000, covers our other services offered to Cape veterans.
CIVOC Operating Account: $8,000 from this account allocated to this project to cover salaries for staff
dedicated to this project with 2% inflation
EXPENSES
Salaries: salaries allocated based upon estimated percentage of weekly hours for staff dedicated to this
project.
Utilities: estimated costs for two gas furnaces required to heat and cool the home; also includes estimates
for electric and water at 2% inflation, as well as septic pumping every three years.
Transportation: estimated costs to subsidize transportation for residents to appointments, work etc… either
by our van, bus, taxi or Uber at 2% inflation.
Insurance: liability and property insurance coverage at 2% inflation
Building Repairs: estimated costs to maintain and repair normal wear and tear in the home. Veterans will
perform repairs within their capability.
Snow removal/landscaping: estimated costs that assumes some work done by the veterans and donated
landscaping.
Capital and Maintenance: Reserves: annual amounts set aside in an account to cover major repairs over the
20-year period, and to insure that at year 20 we have a well-maintained home.
Interior Painting: Assumes every five years a major repainting will done, aided by the resident veterans.
Mortgage: assumes a $200k mortgage at 4.5% for 30 years
Project Reserve: excess funds will be set aside in a dedicated account to fund negative cash flow in the out
years.
From: Adam Gracia
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2020 11:31 AM
To: Faythe Ellis
Cc: Sharon Marotti
Subject: Re: Brewster CPC Veterans Home Dennis additional info requested
Hi Faythe!
Hope the holiday season is treating you well! Your request got the gears turning and I wanted to run
something by you to hear your thoughts.
Not to get into the weeds of it but this CPC round is my first rodeo when it comes to engaging municipal
funding. I think I'm capable but still have much to learn, especially with regard to what each CPC will
fund. I've had my blinders on with a focus on construction, but with regard to CPC funds that doesn't
necessarily have to be the focus.
The numbers below reflect a 1/3 request for funding for each line item, outside of the one construction
related request, staggered over 3 years so that funds will be exhausted within the 3 year window
required by CPC guidelines. Attached you'll find the 20 year pro forma, as well as an explanation of the
assumptions.
Brewster CPC Request FY Breakdown
FY22 FY23 FY24 Total Request
Case Manager $5,200.00 $5,304.00 $5,410.08 $15,914.08
Counselor $667.00 $680.00 $693.60 $2,040.60
Capital Reserve $834.00 $834.00 $834.00 $2,502.00
Hardscaping and Irrigation $29,543.32 $0.00 $0.00 $29,543.32
Totals $36,244.32 $6,818.00 $6,937.68 $50,000.00
If this funding model is applicable and makes more sense than a straight $50K construction support
request I can write up a letter or whatever would be needed to provide the details and context behind
these numbers. Let me know your thoughts when you have a chance.
Side note: I felt a little dense when it dawned on me, but would you or any of the committee like to tour
the House? You had mentioned before that you drive by it so I don't know why I didn't extend the
invitation sooner!
Warm Regards,
AG
From: Chris Miller
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2020 2:01 PM
To: Faythe Ellis; Doug Erickson (derickson@capecod.net)
Cc: Peter Lombardi; Sharon Marotti
Subject: RE: Follow up to CPC of Mill Sites Retaining Wall application review
I have attached letters of support from the Brewster Select Board and the chair of the Alewife
Committee.
Budget discussion:
The engineering design has reached the 33% conceptual design stage and project partners are currently
reviewing this submittal. We expect final permit ready designs (67%) in January 2021, at which time we
should also have a better construction cost estimate.
At this point, here is the working budget for the project, and how the requested Community
Preservation Committee (CPC) funding would be allocated.
Design:
We have hired Tighe & Bond (T&B) to do the engineering for the retaining wall. Their design services
are funded by the Cape Cod Conservation District (CCCD) with no required local match. $42,700 Lump
Sum.
Permitting:
Wetlands permits (Notice of Intent) will be completed by town staff from my department using the
Tighe & Bond engineering plans. We also anticipate local permits including building department, and
Old Kings Highway Historic District.
Massachusetts Historic Commission will also require submittals. When the dam was replaced in 2012,
we used Public Archaeologic Laboratories (PAL) to assist with the historic submittals and
evaluation. Their services were approximately $5000 and we anticipate approaching them for this
project due to their history with the site. We also anticipate that there may be a need for other
engineering submittals and we estimate those to be approximately $2500.
Bidding/Monitoring
Once the project has been permitted, we will develop an engineering contract to prepare bid
specifications and to conduct construction monitoring during the project. This was also done with the
dam reconstruction and was a valuable service to ensure the final product met the required historic and
fish run specifications. We anticipate these services to be approximately $20,000.
Construction Phase:
The Natural Resource Conservation Service has reviewed the project and estimate construction costs at
$386,667.00. They have provided $290,000.00 and require a local match of $96,667.00; this is the bulk
of the CPC funding request. It is important to note that these funds cannot be used for the permitting
phase of the project as described above.
Budget summary:
Services Funding source Funding Local Match (CPC,Town) Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design CCCD $42,700 $0 $ 42,700.00
Permits CPC/Town $7,500 $ 7,500.00
Construction NRCS $290,000
CPC $96,667 $386,667.00
Bidding/Monitoring CPC/Town $25,000 $ 25,000.00
=====================================================================================
======
$332,700 $129,167 $461,867
Requested CPC funding: $125,000
Stoney Brook Mill Site Historic Designations:
The Mill Site is on the National Register of Historic Places. The National Archives link
is: https://catalog.archives.gov/id/63794027
The application was submitted in May 2000, and the site was designated June 15, 2000. The 71 page
official record is too large to attach but a copy is also on the Town web site, under the Stoney Brook Mill
Sites Committee: https://brewster-ma.gov/files/millsitehistorical.pdf .
The site is also within the Old Kings Highway Historic District.
Historic Background:
The Stony Brook Grist Mill and Museum is a water-powered grist mill on the site of the original fulling
mill in Brewster’s Factory Village. The history of Factory Village begins with Plymouth Colony Governor
Thomas Prence purchasing Stony Brook (then called Saquatucket) and surrounding lands from local
Native Americans. The brook is supplied by the outflow of seven interconnected ponds and drops
twenty-six vertical feet in its two-mile rush to Cape Cod Bay. By 1663, a water powered grist mill began
grinding local grown grain into meal and flour for home use.
In 1665 a fulling mill shared the water power. Here homespun woolen cloth was brought to be cleaned
and “pre-shrunk” before being home sewn into family clothing.
In 1760, the fulling mill and thousands of dollars’ worth of homespun woolen material burned. Fifty four
years later (1814) the Winslow family built a woolen mill on the fulling mill foundation to produce the
first factory-made woolen cloth in America.
Thus in the early 1800’s began a thriving commercial community shown on maps as Factory Village.
There was a tannery, a cobbler’s shop (forerunner of today’s United Shoe Machinery Co.), carding and
cotton mills. In fact, everything from overalls to mittens, paper and ice cream were manufactured in
Factory Village.
Today’s Stony Brook Grist Mill is the sole remaining structure from Factory Village. Built in 1873 from
dismantled saltworks boards, it sits on the foundation of the original fulling mill. In 1940, the Town of
Brewster purchased the abandoned mill and surrounding property for $1,000 and established the
Millsites Committee to oversee this important historical site.
For many years, the town miller ground corn using a small “farmer’s mill.” In 2009, a new larger water-
wheel and millworks were built using Community Preservation Act funds. The completed restoration is a
working representation of a 19th Century Grist Mill. Visitors can see the mill in action and purchase
fresh ground cornmeal. The upstairs Museum features photos of Factory Village, a large collection of
Native American stone tools, an antique barn loom, and many artifacts from 19th Century Brewster life.
Since its purchase in 1940, limited improvements to enhance public access, safety, and interpretation
have been made. They include clearing underbrush, laying out unpaved footpaths, constructing wooden
footbridges, adding a small surface parking lot and picnic benches, restoring the grist mill building,
restoring the Mill Site dam, and erecting a few small interpretative signs and plaques.
Stony Brook/Factory Village also represents one of the earliest conscious acts of historic preservation in
Barnstable County. Its historical significance and special sense of place was recognized in the late-1930s
by a broad-based coalition that included local citizens and officials, property owners, and the Cape Cod
Chamber of Commerce. Through their efforts, the "Old Grist Mill" and lands immediately adjacent to
Stony Brook were purchased by, or donated to, the town for use as a museum and cultural/recreational
site.
The entire Stony Brook/Factory Village area was included within the Old King's Highway Regional
Historic District in 1973, and has been subject to design review since 1975. Together, those two early
preservation efforts, have helped Stony Brook/Factory Village to survive as the region's best preserved
historic industrial village, and to maintain an unusually high degree of historic integrity of location,
design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and associations. The Mill Site was listed on the
National Registry of Historic Places in June of 2000.
The 2012 replacement of the historic dam at the site included notification and review by the
Massachusetts Historic Commission (see attached). This project will require a similar level of review and
approval.
I hope that this additional submittal is sufficient for your review of our CPC application.
Thank you,
Chris
--
Chris Miller, Director
Brewster Department of Natural Resources
cmiller@brewster-ma.gov
Town of Brewster
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631-1898
Phone: (508) 896-3701
Fax: (508) 896-8089
December 15, 2020
Ms. Faythe Ellis, Chair
Community Preservation Committee
Brewster Town Hall
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA. 02631
Chair Ellis,
Please accept this letter of support for funding for the Stoney Brook Mill Retaining Wall project
submitted under the Historic Community Preservation category.
The unique industrial heritage of Stony Brook/Factory Village has been preserved by the Town
of Brewster as the Stoney [sic] Brook Mill Sites. Set aside in 1940 for public use and enjoyment,
this historic property is focused on Stony Brook, and encompasses land on its east and west
banks, both north and south of Stony Brook Road. Since its purchase in 1940, limited
improvements to enhance public access, safety, and interpretation have been made. They include
clearing underbrush, laying out unpaved footpaths, constructing wooden footbridges, adding a
small surface parking lot and picnic benches, restoring the grist mill building, restoring the Mill
Site dam, and erecting a few small interpretative signs and plaques.
Stony Brook/Factory Village also represents one of the earliest conscious acts of historic
preservation in Barnstable County. Its historical significance and special sense of place was
recognized in the late-1930s by a broad-based coalition that included local citizens and officials,
property owners, and the Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce. Through their efforts, the "Old Grist
Mill" and lands immediately adjacent to Stony Brook were purchased by, or donated to, the town
for use as a museum and cultural/recreational site.
The entire Stony Brook/Factory Village area was included within the Old King's Highway
Regional Historic District in 1973, and has been subject to design review since 1975. Together,
those two early preservation efforts, have helped Stony Brook/Factory Village to survive as the
region's best preserved historic industrial village, and to maintain an unusually high degree of
historic integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and
associations. The Mill Site was nominated to the National Registry of Historic Places in May of
2000.
Office of:
Select Board
Town Administrator
Doc ID: d01ba9bb71f328af398656d156a9a7cb5c7f56ac
The Retaining Wall project aims to preserve and restore the existing stone retaining walls that
form the boundary of the Stony Brook channel. The existing loose laid stone retaining walls are
showing signs of collapse and erosion of the materials behind the walls. The walls also supports
the headrace pond that is used to power the mill wheel.
The project aims to reconstruct a properly engineered retaining wall that would then be faced
with the existing stones to preserving the historic character of the site. The goal is to not show
any concrete and to retain the historic look of the walls.
The Brewster Natural Resources Department has obtained grant funds to perform the engineering
design and for the majority of the construction costs. We urge you to provide Community
Preservation Funding to assist with final permitting and local match to the federal construction
grant.
Sincerely,
Mary Chaffee, Chair
Brewster Select Board
Doc ID: d01ba9bb71f328af398656d156a9a7cb5c7f56ac
Audit Trail
Title
File Name
Document ID
Audit Trail Date Format
Status
CPC Letter of Support: Millsites Wall Reconstruction
Draft Letter of S...tion Project.docx
d01ba9bb71f328af398656d156a9a7cb5c7f56ac
MM / DD / YYYY
Completed
12 / 15 / 2020
14:15:09 UTC
Sent for signature to Mary Chaffee
(mchaffee@brewster-ma.gov) from ryoung@brewster-ma.gov
IP: 131.109.131.20
12 / 15 / 2020
14:15:59 UTC
Viewed by Mary Chaffee (mchaffee@brewster-ma.gov)
IP: 73.227.44.169
12 / 15 / 2020
15:58:43 UTC
Signed by Mary Chaffee (mchaffee@brewster-ma.gov)
IP: 73.227.44.169
The document has been completed.12 / 15 / 2020
15:58:43 UTC
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of December 9, 2020 Page 1 of 5
2198 Main Street
Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898
(508) 896-3701
FAX (508) 896-8089
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
Virtual Meeting
Wednesday, December 9, 2020 at 4:00 p.m.
MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2020
Present: Community Preservation Committee (CPC) - Chair Faythe Ellis, Vice-Chair Sharon Marotti,
Clerk Elizabeth Taylor, Roland Bassett, Peggy Jablonski, Bruce Evans, Paul Ruchinskas; Diane Pansire
Absent: Barbara Burgo
Also Present: Cynthia Bingham, Select Board; Donna Kalinick, Assistant Town Administrator; Jillian
Douglas, Brewster citizen
Chair Faythe Ellis called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm
This meeting will be conducted by remote participation pursuant to Governor Baker’s March 2020 orders suspending certain Open Meeting Law provisions and
imposing limits on public gatherings. No in-person meeting attendance will be permitted. If the Town is unable to live broadcast this meeting, a record of the
proceedings will be provided on the Town website as soon as possible. The Town has established specific email addresses for each board and committee so the public
can submit comments either before or during the meeting. To submit public comment or questions to the Community Preservation Committee, please email:
cpcmeeting@brewster-ma.gov. To view the:
Live broadcast: Tune to Brewster Government TV Channel 18
Livestream: Go to www.livestream.brewster-ma.gov
Audio/video recording: Go to www.tv.brewster-ma.gov
1.Review of citizen email forwarded to CPC Chair
Faythe addressed the committee to bring up an email that was sent from Jillian Douglas regarding an
email she sent regarding helping renters during the pandemic to help support people struggling to find
housing in the pandemic, encouraging the committee to take several steps in order to do so. The letter is
part of the public packet on the website. Jillian Douglas attended the meeting to say there is just so much
impact that we haven’t already seen with so many people still in peril at this point of the pandemic.
Faythe thanked Jillian for the input.
2.Discussion and possible votes on the completeness of five applications received by application
deadline and on securing legal opinions on those applications
Faythe wants to review for completeness and if not, she will go back to the applicant to ask for
information. If there is sufficient information, she will then go on to Legal with each application. Her
intention is to have the next meeting vote on completeness, timeliness, and CPA eligibility. This is just
the first go round of the applications.
Approved:
VOTE:
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of December 9, 2020 Page 2 of 5
The first application is for the Housing Coordinator Position. Faythe found everything there and more
that the application asked. For this one, Faythe said she was going to ask Legal if we could rely on their
previous opinion. No further comment.
Motion to refer this to Legal for confirmation of Legal Opinion still standing.
MOVED by Roland Bassett. Seconded by Diane Pansire.
Roll Call Vote: Sharon Marotti – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett –
yes, Paul Ruchinskas– yes, Diane Pansire – yes, Peggy Jablonski - yes, Chair Ellis - yes
VOTE 8-yes 0-no
Rental Assistance Program submitted by the Brewster Affordable Housing Trust Fund.
Faythe received a couple corrections from Jill Scalise. The resubmitted application is now dated, and
she also sent two letters of community support which she will include in the next meeting – one from
CDP and one from the Select Board.
Paul recused himself as he is a Board Member of HAC who is running the program.
Motion to authorize Faythe Ellis to submit this application to Legal for an opinion regarding CPA
eligibility.
MOVED by Roland Bassett. Seconded by Sharon Marotti.
Roll Call Vote: Sharon Marotti – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett –
yes, Diane Pansire – yes, Peggy Jablonski - yes, Chair Ellis - yes
VOTE 7-yes 0-no
Millsites Retaining Wall submitted by the Brewster Department of Natural Resources and the
Millsites Committee. Faythe wanted to point out that she is a member of the Millsites Committee. She
felt the way this was filled out, Chris Miller, Director of Natural Resources says it falls into Open Space,
Historic and Recreation. She wants clarification to narrow that down to know which committee to refer
it to going forward. Elizabeth said it cannot be Open Space because it is not a parcel that we bought
through Open Space with CPC funds. Paul said he would deem it an Historic Site Project and that
should be the category. Faythe also thought it would be helpful to have some letters of community
support included. Perhaps from the Select Board or Alewife Committee. Paul agreed.
Also, Paul was wondering if the site needs to have something stating the site is on the National Historic
Register. Also it would be useful if Chris Miller could break down the estimates for construction and
how much for softer costs, like permits and the like. It would be useful to know when the bids come in.
It is early in the process, but there should be some ballpark numbers. Faythe will go back to Chris
Miller for that information. Bruce mentioned that he considers the costs stunning for this project.
Motion to authorize Faythe Ellis to submit this to Legal for an opinion as to CPA eligibility.
MOVED by Roland Bassett. Seconded by Diane Pansire.
Roll Call Vote: Sharon Marotti – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett –
yes, Paul Ruchinskas– yes, Diane Pansire – yes, Peggy Jablonski - yes, Chair Ellis - yes
VOTE 8-yes 0-no
Cape and Islands Veterans Outreach Center for the Veteran’s Home in Dennis. Paul thinks it would
be useful to have an Operating Budget included. Typically they would provide a development budget
but also an operating budget for expenses to run the home. We want to make sure we have enough
revenue to cover their expenses in running the center. Faythe questioned the building is due to be
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of December 9, 2020 Page 3 of 5
completed quite soon. If we approve this, our funding wouldn’t be available until July 1st, is that
accurate? Paul said it would be a question for Legal. They are having a $200,000 line of credit which is
what these funds could be used to pay off the line of credit. Elizabeth said this could also be put on
Special Town Meeting which would make the funds available immediately after town meeting.
Motion to authorize Faythe Ellis to submit this to Legal for an opinion as to CPA eligibility.
MOVED by Roland Bassett. Seconded by Diane Pansire.
Roll Call Vote: Sharon Marotti – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett –
yes, Paul Ruchinskas– yes, Diane Pansire – yes, Peggy Jablonski - yes, Chair Ellis - yes
VOTE 8-yes 0-no
Habitat for Humanity the Red Top Road Community Housing. No questions or comment.
Motion to authorize Faythe Ellis to submit this to Legal for an opinion as to CPA eligibility.
MOVED by Roland Bassett. Seconded by Sharon Marotti.
Roll Call Vote: Sharon Marotti – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett –
yes, Paul Ruchinskas– yes, Diane Pansire – yes, Chair Ellis - yes
VOTE 7-yes 0-no
Peggy did not vote as she was unavailable at this time.
Faythe wanted to have a discussion regarding using the new electronic format and touch base with the
committee on how it went for them. Diane screen shared and showed the committee how the packets
have bookmarks for each document. She asked for anyone who had suggestions regarding
streamlining the process to let her know.
3.Update on status of Crosby Barn Phase 2A award letter amendment and grant agreement
Faythe wanted to shout out to Beth and a thank you to Donna Kalinick - really appreciate the hard work
and support to get these done in the new electronic process.
4.Follow up to Charter Commission request for comment on draft charter
They are still looking for comment, Faythe encouraged the Committee to do so if they have any
additional comments than what was already submitted.
5.Project updates
Faythe included the update to members that Cape Rep sent out which included a discussion that we
worked with them to get their project into phase 2A.
Faythe also included an update from Jill Scalise regarding the Buy Down Program. Diane said she
couldn’t tell what property this was referring to or what the point of it was. Faythe asked Donna to speak
to that. Donna Kalinick said we had a buy down that occurred before Jill Scalise came on board, the
Assessor’s office said that the affordable deed was never recorded. She and Jill Scalise have been
working to make sure that the deed restriction was recorded. Jill Scalise was just letting us know it had
been done and updating the Committee.
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of December 9, 2020 Page 4 of 5
Faythe said we are getting a submission for the Dog Park Committee for our next meeting, and it is a
$300K request.
Sharon had asked Donna Kalinick for updates on Brewster Woods. Construction is set to begin the
December 8th, and there is a 3 week schedule for the next three weeks. Donna Kalinick said it did start
yesterday, and the first thing they will do is clear the land. She reversed 911 to abutters being sensitive
to the fact that this portion of the work is probably the most emotional for people. We have been in
constant contact between the Housing Authority, Wells Court and being the go-between between them
and the contractor. They are trying to do the best job they can in letting everyone know what is going on
at the site.
6.Approval of minutes from 11/25/20
Motion to approve the Minutes of November 25, 2020 as written.
MOVED by Roland Bassett. Seconded by Sharon Marotti.
Roll Call Vote: Sharon Marotti – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett –
yes, Paul Ruchinskas– yes, Diane Pansire – abstain, Peggy Jablonski - yes, Chair Ellis - yes
VOTE 7-yes 0-no 1-abstain
7.Announcements
Faythe received notice from Colette regarding conflict of interest training, so she encouraged the
Committee to check their email for same.
Faythe also mentioned she was on a seminar regarding how CPC and Affordable Housing Trust can
work together productively. There was a reference made to Brewster being a “rockstar” and she was
very proud to hear. The Housing work we are doing is impressive and people are noticing.
Elizabeth wanted to know about adding money to the Buy-Down Fund, or are we waiting until it gets
lower. Faythe wanted to know who would be responsible for submitting that request. Donna Kalinick
said maybe Jillian Douglas could answer that question, she doesn’t know who made the original request.
CPC should put this on a future Agenda item for discussion. Paul said it came from Town
Administration, Jillian Douglas submitted it. Jillian Douglas said that, yes, it was the administration at
the time being prompted by the Housing Partnership. We do need to figure out initiating and
maintaining going forward allowing the town to track it better. Sharon said she thinks there is about
$90k available, so it’s not down to $0. Faythe will make it a future agenda item.
Peggy was wondering about the Cape Cod Sea Camps and what is being discussed. Donna Kalinick said
she would take the comment and relay it to the Town Administrator.
8.Items the Chair could not anticipate - none
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of December 9, 2020 Page 5 of 5
9.Next meeting: 12/23/20 at 4PM
MOTION made by Diane Pansire to adjourn the meeting at 4:43pm.
Sharon Marotti second.
Roll Call Vote: Bruce Evans – yes, Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Roland Bassett
– yes, Peggy Jablonski – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Diane Pansire – yes, Chair Ellis - yes
VOTE 8-yes 0-no
Respectfully submitted, Beth Devine, Recording Secretary
Packet of additional documents available on website for public review.
Join Us in Welcoming
Seven New Families
to Paul Hush Way, Brewster!
VIRTUAL HOME
DEDICATION
5pm Wednesday,
December 30th
Questions? Call Tara Cronin at 508-362-3559 x 16 or email Tara@habitatcapecod.org
WELCOME H
O
M
E
!
Meeting link
https://us02web.zoom.
us/j/87225981505#
No Password Required