HomeMy Public PortalAboutCPC Packet 082422Town of Brewster Community Preservation Committee
2198 Main St., Brewster, MA 02631
cpcmeeting@brewster-ma.gov
(508) 896-3701
MEETING AGENDA
August 24, 2022 at 4:00 PM (Remote Participation Only)
This meeting will be conducted by remote participation pursuant to Chapter 20 of the Acts of 2021. 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 meeting may be viewed by: Live broadcast (Brewster Government TV Channel 18), Livestream (livestream.brewster-ma.gov),
or Video recording (tv.brewster-ma.gov).
Meetings may be joined by:
1.Phone: Call (929) 436-2866 or (301) 715-8592.Webinar ID: 837 7728 4808 Passcode: 326439
To request to speak: Press *9 and wait to be recognized.
2.Zoom Webinar: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83777284808?pwd=NjB3WldRTGRxb0l0WXhIS1J0Y1NOQT09
Passcode: 326439
To request to speak: Tap Zoom “Raise Hand” button or type “Chat” comment with your name and address, then wait to be
recognized.
Community
Preservation
Committee
Faythe Ellis
Chair
Sarah Robinson
Vice Chair
Sharon Marotti
Treasurer
Elizabeth Taylor
Clerk
Roland Bassett Jr.
Christine Boucher
Bruce Evans
Peggy Jablonski
Paul Ruchinskas
CPC Assistant
Beth Devine
1.Call to order
2.Meeting participation statement
3.Declaration of a quorum
4.Public Announcements and Comment – Members of the public can address the
Community Preservation Committee on matters not on the meeting’s agenda for a
maximum of 3-5 minutes at the Chair’s discretion. Under the Open Meeting law, the
CPC is unable to reply, but may add items presented to a future agenda.
5.Financial Update
6.Stony Brook Field improvements project update from Whitecaps
7.Discussion and possible vote on a funding recommendation, source of funding and
committee liaison for the Brewster Historical Society’s request for $292,200 to move
and restore Schoolhouse #3 Application begins on page 60 Fall 2022 CPC
Applications Packet (laserfiche.com)
8.Discussion and possible vote on possible changes and updates to CPC Application
for Funding form (Instructions for Applicants (brewster-ma.gov)
9.Status update on CPA Plan recommendation presentations to other committees.
10.Update on communications/outreach for Annual Public Hearing (9/14 at 5PM)
11.Discussion of Wing Island Boardwalk Forum
12.Approval of Minutes from 8/10/22
13.Project Updates
14.Items the Chair could not reasonably anticipate
15.Announcements
16.Upcoming meetings: Annual CPC Public Hearing – Wednesday, September 14 at
5PM
17.Motion to Adjourn
Date Posted: Date Revised:
8/22/22
Community Preservation Committee: FY23 Forecast as of 7/1/2022
2,860,357.94$
1,144,558.05$
286,139.51$ 1,430,697.56$
4,291,055.50
50%10%10%
Open Space Housing Historical
$ 1,556,879.89 $ 45,369.87 $ 500,351.96 $ - $ 757,756.22
$ 715,348.78 $ 143,069.76 $ 143,069.76 $ 429,209.27
$ 2,272,228.67 $ 188,439.63 $ 643,421.72 $ 429,209.27 $ 757,756.22
Open Space Housing Historical "30%"
$ (51,075.00)
$ (98,000.00)
$ (47,583.00)
(71,534.88)
Requests for Spring 2022 TM (Approved)
Housing Coordinator (66,900.00)
Pennrose CC Five Development (100,000.00)
CPC Admin setaside/Pennrose CC5 Development (5,000.00)
Lower Cape Housing Institute (15,000.00)
Digitization of Ellen St. Sure Collection (22,616.50)
CPC REQUESTS FOR 2022 FALL TOWN MEETING
Holly Avenue Land CR Purchase (250,000.00)
Holly Avenue CPC Legal expenses (14,000.00)
Schoolhouse #3 Relocation and Restoration (292,200.00)
Total YTD Obligations - FY23 $ (460,658.00) $ (81,900.00) $ (314,816.50) $ (176,534.88) $ -
$ 1,811,570.67 $ 106,539.63 $ 328,605.22 $ 252,674.39 $ 757,756.22
Total net available from all accounts 3,257,146.12$
Budgeted Reserved for
CPA
FY-22 Estimated total balance forwarded [1]:
FY-22 Estimated local tax revenue:
FY-22 Estimated State contribution [2]:
Total FY-22 Estimated funds available:
Undesignated Fund
Balance
FY-22 Actual Unreserved Fund Balance with Original Match(4)
FY-23 Estimated revenue
FY23 Estimated Unreserved Fund Balance as of 07/01/2022
with Adjustments
FY-23 obligations as of 07/01/2022
BBJ Property Bond #1
BBJ Property Bond #2
Bates Property Bond
Administration Expense [3]
FY-23 Estimated Funds available
[1] Balance forwarded estimated from prior year includes all unallocated funds, including unspent amounts from projects and budgeted administrative and professional expenses.
(2) State Match revenue is projected at 25%
[3] Administrative expenses are limited by law to 5% of the total CPC budget and include primarily payroll costs, legal and other professional expenses, the annual $4,350 state CPA
Coalition dues.
(4) Iincludes State Grant of 192,400 for McGuerty Road purchase Received in FY22
BONDS
BONDS
1
Eric Dray Consulting Schoolhouse #3
Eric E. Dray
Eric Dray Consulting
71 Prentiss Street
Cambridge, MA 02140
508.566.3797 EricEDray@gmail.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Brewster Community Preservation Committee
FROM: Eric Dray, Preservation Consultant
DATE: August 18, 2022
RE: CPA Application Analysis – Schoolhouse #3
The Brewster Historical Society (BHS) has applied for CPA funds to relocate and rehabilitate Schoolhouse
#3. Preservation applications must conform to the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation (the
“Rehabilitation Standards”). This memorandum will address two questions:
1. Relocation: Is relocation of an historic building an appropriate treatment under the Rehabilitation
Standards?
2. Rehabilitation: If yes to the first question, does the proposed rehabilitation of Schoolhouse #3 in its
new location meet the Rehabilitation Standards?
Relocation
The Rehabilitation Standards themselves do not directly address the question of building relocation. The
closest language is in Standard 1:
A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change
to its distinctive materials, features, spaces and spatial relationships (emphasis added).
The National Park Service (NPS), which promulgated the Rehabilitation Standards, provides a 162-page
bulletin that analyzes those Standards as they relate to certain types of materials and issues. For each
material or issue, the bulletin indicates which treatments are “Recommended” or “Not Recommended.”
Under the heading of Building Site, NPS includes this in the Not Recommended column:
Removing or relocating buildings or landscape features, thereby destroying the historic relationship
between buildings and the landscape.
This would suggest that the BHS proposal to relocate Schoolhouse #3 is not an appropriate treatment under
the Rehabilitation Standards and, therefore, not suitable for CPA funding. However, the NPS bulletin does
not address the question of when a building is relocated in order to save it. Nor does the bulletin recognize
that relocation of buildings was a commonplace occurrence, as was the case with Schoolhouse #3 already.
I think it is reasonable to conclude that the Rehabilitation Standards’ silence on the question of relocation
to save a building is a meaningful omission. NPS’ failure to address such circumstances, in my opinion,
keeps the door open for relocation as an acceptable treatment.
It is also worth noting that I reviewed the database for CPA-funded preservation projects on the Community
Preservation Coalition’s website. I found approved applications to relocate historic buildings in 8 towns
between 2002 and 2018. They all appeared to be similar in that the move was necessary to preserve the
building. In one case, the building had already been moved once before, as is the case here.
2
Eric Dray Consulting Schoolhouse #3
Rehabilitation
While a case can be made that moving (including in this case flaking) and reconstructing a building is
appropriate for CPA funding, questions remain regarding the proposed rehabilitation of Schoolhouse #3.
Rehabilitation Standard 6 governs this question:
Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of
deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in
design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be
substantiated by documentary and physical evidence (emphasis added).
The main issue regarding rehabilitation of Schoolhouse #3 is the lack of physical, pictorial or other
documentary evidence of the building’s appearance as a schoolhouse. This problem might be solved if we
could be sure that another surviving schoolhouse in Brewster can serve as a model. However, in reviewing
the excerpts from the School Committee Meetings for the late-1800s provided with the application, it is clear
that the schoolhouses were not all built at the same time, and Schoolhouse #3 was one of the older
buildings. While BHS’s application includes a photo of Schoolhouse #5, there is no way of knowing, based
on current research, whether Schoolhouse #5 was a twin to #3. The MHC Building Form for that property,
now 403 Pleasant Lake Avenue in Harwich, says it was built as a store in ca. 1880 with no reference to it
being a school. That Form B may be incorrect, and it may have been a schoolhouse first. It might be worth
at least measuring that building to see if it matches the dimensions of Schoolhouse #3.
As it stands now, in my opinion, there is insufficient documentary and/or physical evidence to accurately
reconstruct both the exterior and interior of Schoolhouse #3.
Recommendations:
1. BHS should explore every available avenue to locate documentary evidence, including all possible
sources of historic photos of Schoolhouse #3.
2. Exterior: Conduct further research into Schoolhouse #5 in Harwich, including measuring its footprint,
to determine if it might be a match to Schoolhouse #3 in terms of exterior appearance.
3. Interior: To the extent that BHS has access to Schoolhouse #3 now, they should conduct a thorough
forensic analysis of the building to find evidence of window locations (I understand they already found
framing for the boys and girls doors). They should also look for evidence in the flooring for room
configurations. In some cases, schools were a simple open room. In others, there were small vestibules
for the boys and girls to hang their coats.
There are also questions regarding the proposed rehabilitation. The application does not include measured
floor plans, elevation drawings and material specifications needed to ensure Rehabilitation Standards
compliance.
I am restating Rehabilitation Standard 6 with different emphasis:
Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of
deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the
old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features
will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence (emphasis added).
Of particular concern is the decision to have a poured concrete floor in the new location, and not re-use the
current floorboards as flooring. While the practicality of concrete is understandable, that material is not
appropriate according to Rehabilitation Standard 6. Board flooring is an important historic feature for a
simple utilitarian school.
Recommendations:
1. Provide measured floor plans, elevation drawings and material specifications for review.
2. Re-employ the existing wood board flooring, and match with new board flooring where needed.
Brewster Community Preservation Committee Application Form
Instructions for
Applicants
Before you begin completing the form:
1. Download and save this document under a new name (for
example Projectname.applicant.pdf)*
2. Open your saved document and complete the form fields.
3. If you need more room for answers/information, feel free
to include additional pages in your submission.
4. Need help, or have questions? Send an email to
cpcmeeting@brewster-ma.gov and we will respond
quickly.
1
Community Preservation Committee Application rev. 09/22/21
Town of Brewster Community Preservation Committee
2198 Main St., Brewster, MA 02631
cpcmeeting@brewster-ma.gov
(508) 896-3701 x1149
Dear Community Members,
The Brewster Community Preservation Committee (CPC) is accepting Community Preservation Act (CPA)
funding applications for:
1. Acquisition, creation, and preservation of Open Space
2. Acquisition, preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration of Historic Resources
3. Acquisition, creation, preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration of land for Recreational use.
4. Acquisition, creation, preservation, and support of Community Housing.
5. Rehabilitation and restoration of Open Space and Community Housing that have been acquired or
created using monies from the fund.
CPA funds may not be used for maintenance or the use of land for a stadium, gymnasium, or similar structure.
For examples of projects and additional information, go to: www.communitypreservation.org.
An application form and list of selection criteria are attached.
Applications should be submitted by July 1st for the fall meeting or December 1st for the spring meeting, to
allow sufficient CPC review time for potential presentation to the following Brewster Town Meeting.
Interested parties are urged to submit applications as soon as possible. For further information, please contact
any member of the committee.
Thank you,
Faythe Ellis, Chair
Community Preservation Committee
Faythe Ellis, Chair Historical Commission faythe.ellis@outlook.com
Sharon Marotti, Vice-chair Citizen Representative sharonmarotti@gmail.com
Elizabeth G. Taylor, Clerk Planning Board egtfarm@gmail.com
Roland W. Bassett, Jr., Member Recreation Commission
Barbara Burgo, Member Brewster Housing Authority bjburgo19@gmail.com
Bruce Evans, Member Conservation Commission nanumetbruce@gmail.com
Peggy Jablonski, Member Citizen Representative pegjab@gmail.com
Sarah Robinson, Member Citizen Representative RobinsonFinancialSolutions@comcast.net
Paul Ruchinskas, Member Citizen Representative pjruch@comcast.net
2
Community Preservation Committee Application rev. 09/22/21
Town of Brewster Community Preservation Committee
2198 Main St., Brewster, MA 02631
cpcmeeting@brewster-ma.gov
(508) 896-3701 x1149
Project Eligibility Criteria
Projects must be eligible for Community Preservation Act (CPA) funding according to the requirements
described in the CPA legislation. These requirements include:
• Acquisition, creation, and preservation of Open Space
• Acquisition, preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration of Historic Resources. (See Secretary of the
Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties for rehabilitation projects)
• Acquisition, creation, preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration of land for Recreational use.
• Acquisition, creation, preservation, and support of Community Housing
• Rehabilitation and restoration of Open Space and Community Housing that have been acquired or
created using monies from the fund
CPA funds may not be used for maintenance or the use of land for a stadium, gymnasium, or similar structure.
For examples of projects and additional information, go to: www.communitypreservation.org.
Applicants must be able demonstrate a clear need for the use of public funds for their project.
The CPC may recommend grants for the planning phase of projects where sufficient information is included in
the application concerning the sources of funding that will be available after the planning phase is completed.
The Brewster Community Preservation Committee (CPC) encourages applications that address as many of the
following general criteria as possible:
• Contribute to the preservation of Brewster’s unique character
• Help implement the Vision Plan and other CPC related town planning documents
• Enhance the quality of life for Brewster residents
• Serve more than one of the four CPA purposes
• Save resources that would otherwise be threatened
• Serve a currently under-served Town population
• Demonstrate practicality and feasibility, and ability to implement within budget
• Demonstrate a positive cost/benefit relationship
• Leverage additional public and/or private funds
• Preserve, enhance or better utilize existing Town resources
• Receive endorsement by other Town committees and the Brewster public at large
3
Community Preservation Committee Application rev. 09/22/21
Town of Brewster Community Preservation Committee
2198 Main St., Brewster, MA 02631
cpcmeeting@brewster-ma.gov
(508) 896-3701 x1149
APPLICATION FOR COMMUNITY PRESERVATION ACT FUNDING
Date Application Submitted:
Name of Project Applicant:
Name of Co-Applicant(s), if applicable:
Name of Contact Person:
Contact Person’s Mailing Address:
Contact Person’s Daytime Phone Number:
Contact Person’s email Address:
Proposed Project Name:
Project Address (or assessor’s parcel ID):
Project Synopsis:
Category: ☐ Open Space ☐ Historic Preservation ☐ Recreation ☐ Community Housing
CPA funding requested $ ______________ Total Cost of Proposed Project $
4
Community Preservation Committee Application rev. 09/22/21
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Please describe your project, answering all of the following questions in the order presented. Applications
will be considered incomplete if all requested information is not provided. Include supporting materials
(maps, diagrams, photos, etc.). Please number pages of application.
Form fields are provided after each question for your convenience. If you need more room, you may
provide additional information via separate documents/attachments at the end of the document. Please
do not provide any documentation via on-line links, as the committee will not be checking for updates. Be
as concise as possible.
1. Project Description: Describe the proposed project. Is this part of a larger project or an ongoing project?
2. For Historic Preservation projects: Attach proof of listing on the State Register of Historic Places or a
letter from the Brewster Historical Commission indicating that the resource has been determined to be
significant in the history, archaeology, architecture, or culture of Brewster. Please note that rehabilitation
projects must comply with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties.
Additional information and analysis will be needed for projects submitted by churches/religious
organizations to determine if they comply with the SJC’s Caplan vs. Town of Acton decision.
3. CPA Goals/Criteria: Describe how this project accomplishes the goals and objectives of the CPA (refer to
the attached general and issue-specific criteria and identify which of these apply to the project).
5
Community Preservation Committee Application rev. 09/22/21
4. Community Benefits: What are the community benefits of the project?
5. Community Support: What is the nature and level of support for this project? Include letters of support
and any petitions.
6. Timeline: What is the schedule for project implementation, including a timeline for all milestones? Please
identify any special timing considerations for the project’s implementation. If this is part of a larger project,
is it phased? What is the timeline for the entire project?
7. Credentials: What are the qualifications and relevant experience of those undertaking the project?
6
Community Preservation Committee Application rev. 09/22/21
8. Budget/Need for Public Funds: What is the total budget (sources of funds and uses/expenses) for the
project and schedule for expenditure of CPA funds? All sources of funds and expenses must be clearly
identified. Provide the basis for cost estimates whenever possible. (Note: CPA funds may not be used for
maintenance.)
If this is part of a larger project, what is the budget for the entire project (sources of funds and
expenses/uses)?
Clearly identify what additional funding sources are available, committed, or under consideration and why
public funding would be appropriate. Include copies of commitment letters, if available, and describe any
other attempts to secure funding for this project.
Provide the most recent audited financial report or if none available, an applicant generated financial report
that includes a balance sheet and operating budget. Town-sponsored projects must demonstrate why the
project cannot be funded through the Department’s or Committee’s budget.
7
Community Preservation Committee Application rev. 09/22/21
9. Maintenance: If ongoing maintenance is required for your project, who will be responsible for maintenance
and how will it be funded?
10. Site Control and Appraisal: If the project involves acquisition of real property, provide evidence of site
control (deed, purchase and sale, option, etc.). In addition, provide an appraisal of the property’s value by a
state licensed appraiser using customary appraising techniques. The CPA does not allow funding for
acquisitions if the acquisition price is greater than appraised value.
8
Community Preservation Committee Application rev. 09/22/21
Town of Brewster Community Preservation Committee
CATEGORY SPECIFIC CRITERIA
(Identify which of the following criteria apply to your project.)
Open Space Proposals
Permanently protect important wildlife habitat, including areas of significance for biodiversity,
diversity of geological features and types of vegetation, contain a habitat type that is in danger of
vanishing from Brewster or preserve habitat for threatened or endangered species of plants or animals.
Provide opportunities for passive recreation and environmental education.
Enhance or protect wildlife corridors, promote connectivity of habitat and prevent fragmentation of
habitats.
Provide connections with existing trails or potential trail linkages.
Preserve scenic views or border a scenic road.
Protect drinking water quantity and quality.
Provide flood control/storage.
Preserve important surface water bodies, including wetlands, vernal pools or riparian zones.
Preserve priority parcels in the Town’s Open Space Plan/maximize the amount of open land owned by
the Town of Brewster.
Historical Preservation Proposals
MANDATORY: Must be on the State Register of Historic Places or have a letter from the Brewster
Historical Commission indicating that the resource has been determined to be significant in the history,
archaeology, architecture, or culture of Brewster.
MANDATORY: Project must meet Secretary of the Interior Standards for rehabilitation and/or
restoration of Historic Preservation Properties.
MANDATORY IF REQUEST IS FROM A CHURCH/RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION: The
project must satisfy the analysis outlined by the SJC’s Caplan vs. Town of Acton decision.
Protect, preserve, enhance, restore and/or rehabilitate historic, cultural, architectural or archaeological
resources of significance, especially those that are threatened.
Protect, preserve, enhance, restore and/or rehabilitate town-owned properties, features or resources of
historical significance.
Protect, preserve, enhance, restore and/or rehabilitate the historical function of a property or site;
Demonstrate a public benefit and/or public access, or
Otherwise provide permanent protection for maintaining the historic resource.
Project site should not be privately owned unless there is demonstrable public access and benefit.
Community Housing Proposals
Increase the supply of year-round affordable rental housing for all types of households, such as young
singles and couples, families, and seniors.
Build support for addressing housing needs through partnerships with conservation groups and non-
profit and for-profit developers.
Create housing that is affordable and appropriate for very low-income seniors and people with
disabilities.
Increase local capacity to plan, advocate for, and create affordable housing, preserve the affordability
and condition of existing affordable units, and monitor affordable housing restrictions.
Increase the variety of mixed-income housing choices in Brewster, particularly in or near commercial
areas in order to support Brewster’s economy and accommodate household growth.
Provide at least 10% of Brewster’s year-round housing units as affordable housing in order to meet
local and regional needs.
Ensure long term affordability.
Commit to a resident selection process that promotes diversity and does not include a local preference.
9
Community Preservation Committee Application rev. 09/22/21
Recreation Proposals
Support multiple active and passive recreation uses.
Serve a significant number of residents and visitors.
Expand the range of recreational opportunities available to all ages of Brewster residents and visitors.
Benefit other Brewster committees providing recreational resources to residents.
Promote the use of alternative corridors that provide safe and healthy non-motorized transportation.
Promotes or enhances accessibility. (Please elaborate in application.)
10
Community Preservation Committee Application rev. 09/22/21
Town of Brewster Community Preservation Committee
APPLICATION REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS
Step 1 – Complete the application (with numbered pages) and submit with all attachments either:
• Electronically to cpcmeeting@brewster-ma.gov, or
• Deliver a thumb drive containing the complete application with all attachments*
• to:
Community Preservation Committee
Town Hall
2198 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631
• *Do not submit access to additional documentation via links as the committee will
not be checking for updates.
Step 2 – Community Preservation Committee Review and Public Comment
A. Application Review:
The Brewster Community Preservation Committee (CPC) will review submitted applications to
determine whether:
• Proposed project is eligible for Community Preservation Act funding after review by Town
Counsel.
• The application, including the project description and any supporting documentation, is
complete.
• The application is sufficiently developed in terms of work plan and timely for further
consideration. When necessary, the CPC will ask applicants to provide additional information,
and the CPC may accept modifications to the original proposal based upon that information
and/or discussions with the CPC.
B. Project Review Guidelines are as follows:
• When the CPC has determined that the 3 criteria in the application review process listed
above (A) have been satisfied, the CPC will refer an application to the appropriate committee
for review and comment:
• Historic Preservation applications will be referred to the Brewster Historical Commission for
review and recommendations.
• Community Housing applications will be referred to the Brewster Housing Partnership for
review and recommendations.
• Recreation applications will be referred to the Recreation Commission for review and
recommendations (unless the application originated with the Recreation Commission).
• Open Space applications will be referred to the Open Space Committee for review and
recommendations (unless the application originated with the Open Space Committee)
C. Public Comment – The CPC will seek public comment on proposed projects at regular scheduled
meetings.
D. CPC Recommendation – After Application Review (A), Project Review (B) and Public
Comment (C), the CPC will make recommendations, pro or con, on all applications and will
11
Community Preservation Committee Application rev. 09/22/21
notify applicants of the CPC’s determination. Applications that are approved will be
recommended in the form of warrant articles to be voted on at the next Town Meeting.
The Brewster Community Preservation Committee (CPC) will make a recommendation to Town
Meeting for warrant articles that seek Community Preservation funds only if satisfactory information is
received from a project applicant indicating that:
1. Sufficient funds will be available to complete the project(s).
2. Every application shall include a project budget with a list of project sources and
uses/expenses of funds and a schedule for completion.
3. The source and estimated value of any expected ‘in-kind’ contributions shall be
specified.
4. The Brewster CPC may decline any application that is not responsive to these
requirements.
5. The CPC will establish the preliminary terms and conditions for any recommended
grant as part of its vote to recommend it.
6. Specific terms and conditions/requirements will be contained in the conditional award
letter from the CPC.
Step 3 – Town Meeting Approval. Town Meeting has the final authority to award funds from Brewster’s
Community Preservation Fund. Should Town Meeting vote approval, for non Town-sponsored awards, a Grant
Agreement will be executed between the Town and the applicant that will incorporate the terms and conditions
included in the award letter among other items. No CPC funds shall be expended until the Grant Agreement is
fully executed.
Step 4 – Funding and project oversight by the Community Preservation Committee
• Funding will be available following Town Meeting, subject to submission of documents, including
the Grant Agreement if necessary, as required by the Community Preservation Committee.
• In general, the Town and CPC will execute a grant agreement with the applicant that will describe,
among other issues, the conditions for CPC disbursement of funds, including any funds held back
until project completion. The CPC must review and approve all agreements.
• Historic Preservation projects will require monitoring to ensure that work meets the restrictions as
outlined in the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Historic Properties.
• In general, grant agreements will require that the project be completed and CPC funds expended
within two years.
• The CPC will appoint one of its members as the liaison for each approved project. The liaison will
frequently be in contact with persons responsible for each project and will require regular reports in
person and/or in writing to the Committee. The liaison will also provide the initial approval for any
project funding request.
• Two sets of bills must be submitted directly to the CPA Administrative Clerk (one original for the
Town Accountant and one copy for the CPA Committee files). These must be approved/initialed by
the Committee Clerk/Treasurer prior to being submitted to the Town Accountant.
Step 5 – Final Report after project completion. The Community Preservation Committee requires a final
grant report. The Committee reserves the right to withhold some funds until a final report is received
and approved by the Committee.
MEMORANDUM
To: Community Preservation Committee
From: Faythe Ellis, CPC Chair
Regarding: Status of CPA Plan/Funding Formula Warrant Article Presentation Schedule
Following are the current dates/times of presentations:
Recreation Commission August 25 at 5PM
Planning Board TBD
Historical Commission September meeting – estimate is 9/23 at 10 AM
Brewster Housing Authority TBD
Conservation Commission September 13 at 6PM
Open Space Committee TBD
First Request
PUBLIC HEARING
BREWSTER COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE (CPC)
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2022 AT 5:00 PM
The Brewster Community Preservation Committee (CPC) will hold a Virtual Public
Hearing on Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 5:00 pm. The purpose of the hearing is
to provide and gather information on the community preservation needs and
possibilities in the areas of community housing, historic preservation, open space, and
recreation. The CPC resources of the Town of Brewster will be reviewed, and the
information gathered at the hearing will be useful in assessing any funding applications
that the CPC may be recommending to the voters at the May 2023 Annual Town
Meeting.
Speakers, your reply is requested: If you are planning to speak at this hearing about
applying for CPA funds in the next 12 – 18 months, please reply to this message with
your name and email by 9/7/22. Thank you for helping us plan ahead to ensure a
smooth meeting, using a virtual format.
All interested parties are invited to attend and questions and comments are welcome.
Agenda is posted at www.brewster-ma.gov. Look under CALENDAR, and click on the
meeting to be taken to the Agenda.
Second request
PUBLIC HEARING
BREWSTER COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE (CPC)
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2022 AT 5:00 PM
The Brewster Community Preservation Committee (CPC) will hold a Virtual Public
Hearing on Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 5:00 pm. The purpose of the hearing is
to provide and gather information on the community preservation needs and
possibilities in the areas of community housing, historic preservation, open space, and
recreation. The CPC resources of the Town of Brewster will be reviewed, and the
information gathered at the hearing will be useful in assessing any funding applications
that the CPC may be recommending to the voters at the May 2023 Annual Town
Meeting.
Speakers, your reply is requested: If you responded to us prior to today, you have been
sent an email with speaker instructions.If you have not yet contacted us and are
planning to speak, please reply to this message with your name and email by
09/12. Prior to 09/14/22, we will send you additional information about participating as
a speaker. Thank you for helping us plan ahead to ensure a smooth meeting, using a
virtual format.
All interested parties are invited to attend and questions and comments are welcome.
Agenda is posted at www.brewster-ma.gov. Look under CALENDAR, and click on the
meeting to be taken to the Agenda.
2022 Public Hearing Email Notification List v.08.24/22
Email Name Committee/OrganizationCommittee/Organization
Committee Chair email list (Erika Mawn)All town committee chairs
Department Head email list (Erika Mawn)All town deparment Heads
nchatelain@brewster-ma.gov Ned Chatelain Select Board
mchaffee@brewster-ma.gov Mary Chaffee Select Board
dwhitney@brewster-ma.gov David Whitney Select Board
khoffman@brewster-ma.gov Kari Hoffman Select Board
cbingham@brewster-ma.gov Cindy Bingham Select Board
Plombardi@brewster-ma.gov Peter Lombardi Town Administrator
Dkalinick@brewster-ma.gov Donna Kalinick Asst. Town Administrator
jScalise@brewster-ma.gov Jill Scalise Housing Coordinator
Award recipients
President@Brewsterhistoricalsociety.orgSally Gunning Brewster Historical Society President
Director@Brewsterhistoricalsociety.orgTamsen Martin-Cornell Brewster Historical Socity Director
Jay@capecdp.org Jay Coburn Community Development Partnership
Andrea@capecdp.org Andrea Aldana Community Development Partnership
mdisanto@pennrose.com Matt DiSanto Pennrose
rsacchetti@pennrose.com Rio Sacchetti Pennrose
Rkiracofe@pennrose.com Ryan Kiracofe Pennrose
JohntDickson@gmail.com John Dickson Pleasant Bay Community Boating
ohmankathy@gmail.com Kathy Ohman FORWARD
Joe@capeveterans.com Joe Smith CIVOC
wcullinan@habitatcapecod.org Wendy Culling Habitat for Humanity
bwade@habitatcapecod.org Beth Wade Habitat for Humanity
jmperry@caperep.org Janine Perry Cape Rep Theater
chuckhansoncc@gmail.com Chuck Hanson Brewster Whitecaps
friendsofBrewsterdogpark@gmail.com Friends of Brewster Dog Park
Director@mashpeehousing.org Kimberly Cohn Brewster Housing Authority
Also
Amy@brewsterconservationtrust.org Amy Henderson Brewster Conservation Trust
Martin Kamarck Brewster Conservation Trust
susan.bridges@brewsterponds.org Susan Bridges Brewster Ponds Coalition
cgonet@firstrealtymgt.com Claire Gonet Wells Court
nicole@hech.org Nicole Moniz HECH
RDwyer@ccmnh.org Bob Dwyer CCMNH
rcourtnell@comcast.net Ruth Courtnell Brewster Community Network
Kim@hech.org Kim Bourgea Harwich Ecumenical Council
amcmanus@lathamcenters.org Ann McManus Latham Centers
leslieagardner1@cox.net Leslie Gardner Cape Cod Center for the Arts
ebergquist@hotmail.com Eileen Bergquist Brewster Ladies Library
cstamour@brewsterladieslibary.org Cindy St. Amour Brewster Ladies Library
mark@thecompact.net Mark Robinson COMPACT
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of August 10, 2022 Page 1 of 8
2198 Main Street
Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898
(508) 896-3701
FAX (508) 896-8089
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
Virtual Meeting
Wednesday, August 10, 2022, at 4:00 p.m.
MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 10, 2022
Present: Community Preservation Committee (CPC) – Chair Faythe Ellis, Vice-Chair Sarah Robinson,
Treasurer Sharon Marotti, Clerk Elizabeth Taylor, Roland Bassett, Paul Ruchinskas, Peggy Jablonski
Absent: Bruce Evans, Christine Boucher
Also Present: Cynthia Bingham, Select Board; Donna Kalinick, Assistant Town Administrator; Martin
Kamarck, Brewster Conservation Trust
Chair Faythe Ellis called the meeting to order at 4:02 pm and announced a quorum.
This meeting will be conducted by remote participation pursuant to Chapter 20 of the Acts of 2021. 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.
1.Financial Update
a.FY22 Reconciliation- prepared by Mimi Bernardo, Finance Director
b.FY23 estimated budget- prepared by CPC
Faythe said the FY22 Reconciliation is prepared by Finance Director Mimi Bernardo and asked Sharon
to walk us through. Sharon said the spreadsheet originally sent didn’t transfer over, but she sent us a
different version and hoped everyone had this sheet in front of them. This is a reconciliation of all the
accounts as well as the undesignated fund balance- any leftover funds in the budgeted reserve and any
carry over funds from previous years. The starting balance $611,454; initially, all the negative
transactions are transactions approved at Spring TM 2021. Prior to the close, the account was in a
negative balance. The income from taxes and the State is not posted until later in the year which is the
second part of that reconciliation. The original allocations were based on our estimates which were
much lower than what we received, so each one of those estimates needed to be trued up with the
additional funds received- about $452,000. Those funds were spread out to Open Space, Historic, and
Housing. She did not spread out to the 30% fund as that will close out to undesignated fund balance
anyway. We have an ending balance of $757,756 starting the year in the undesignated fund balance.
FY23 starts out with those balances. Estimated tax revenue of $1,145, 558 and estimated State
contribution at 25% this year (up from 15% last year). The spreadsheet also includes items approved at
Spring Town Meeting and other items and how they would affect the budget. Open Space $2,272,228;
Housing $188,439; Historic $643,421; and budgeted reserve $429,209; undesignated fund balance
$757,756 which will give us $4,291,055 as a starting total balance. Paul said in effect the 30% funds are
estimated to have just a little over $1M at the end of this year if everything works out. Faythe answered
Approved:
VOTE:
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of August 10, 2022 Page 2 of 8
yes. The ending balance might change slightly as Mimi Bernardo hasn’t completely closed the books yet
and something small might come in that we haven’t accounted for yet.
2.Discussion and possible vote on a funding recommendation for the Open Space Committee’s
request for $270,000 for the Town to purchase a Conservation Restriction on the property at 0
Holly Avenue
Faythe turned the floor over to Elizabeth to do the Open Space Committee presentation. Elizabeth said
this is a 4.9-acre parcel in the Baker’s Pond area. It is in an area of town that Brewster and Orleans have
been working on for many years for watershed protection and recreational use as well. It is one of the
largest assemblages in land in the State because you couple it with 147 acres in Baker’s Pond, 1800
acres for Nickerson, and another 400 acres in Orleans. This is one of the last available parcels, and we
had hoped to purchase a few years ago but everything was put on hold by the town to follow through
with the Sea Camps properties purchase. In order to protect the parcel and keep it available, the
Compact of Cape Cod Conservation Trust bought the parcel. We are at a point where Brewster
Conservation Trust is going to pay $110,000 for purchase and we are being asked to pay $270,000 for
the conservation restriction. This connects over 2 miles of trails and give access to the back area of
Nickerson State Park. It is an excellent parcel filling in the “missing link” in this area. Faythe said the
total cost of the parcel is $360,000 as the purchase price the Compact has paid. Elizabeth will go in and
change that on the first page. $374,000 being asked to spend including $14,000 in additional expenses.
Faythe asked about what the request amount means: $250,000 for the conservation restriction where the
$20,000 for expenses are for what? Elizabeth said the $14,000 was for an additional set aside for any
legal expenses, registry fees, etc. Paul wanted to commend Elizabeth the thoroughness of the
application. He thought the $20,000 seemed a little high, but the $14,000 seems more reasonable.
$14,000 was Elizabeth’s estimate for possible costs: $4500 for grant application services and appraisal
for $1500, so it is $20K, not $14K. Some of this would come out of FY23, otherwise it would come out
of Admin Expenses. Faythe said she thought the date of the service would drive whether it could be
charged against what Town Meeting approves. For Town Meeting date, Elizabeth said it would go back
to $14,000.
Motion to approve the Open Space Committee’s request for $250,000 for the Town to purchase a
Conservation Restriction on the property at 0 Holly Avenue with an additional $14,000 to cover
CPC expenses related to appraisal and legal services.
MOVED by Sarah Robinson. Seconded by Paul Ruchinskas.
Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sarah
Robinson – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Peggy Jablonski – yes, Chair Ellis – yes
VOTE 7-yes 0-no
Next item is the funding source. Faythe said her suggestion be that the funding source come from Open
Space Funds. The second piece would be the liaison. Elizabeth would be willing to do that.
Motion for the funding to come from the Open Space fund and Elizabeth Taylor as liaison.
MOVED by Sharon Marotti. Seconded by Peggy Jablonski.
Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sarah
Robinson – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Peggy Jablonski – yes, Chair Ellis – yes
VOTE 7-yes 0-no
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of August 10, 2022 Page 3 of 8
3.Discussion and possible vote on request for $3500 from FY2023 Administrative Funds for
general CPC historic preservation consulting
Faythe said we have done this in prior years, there is an increase this year due to the hourly rate increase
from the consultant.
Motion to approve $3500 to be set aside from FY23 Administrative Funds for general historic
preservation consulting.
MOVED by Elizabeth Taylor. Seconded by Paul Ruchinskas.
Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sarah
Robinson – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Peggy Jablonski – yes, Chair Ellis – yes
VOTE 7-yes 0-no
4.Discussion and possible vote on Brewster Historical Commission request for $10,000 from
FY2023 Administrative Funds for continuation of Form B project
Faythe said the historical commission has been working on this project bit by bit. We are doing it in
pieces for time for the work to be done in the time allotted with time for the commission to review
things, etc. We have approximately 70-80 more homes to do. This request will take care of an additional
31 homes for this year to keep the project moving forward.
Paul asked after this $10,000, what is available? Faythe answered approximately $30,000.
Motion to approve the sum of $10,000 to be put aside for the Historical Commission continuation
of the Form B project.
MOVED by Roland Bassett. Seconded by Peggy Jablonski.
Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sarah
Robinson – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Peggy Jablonski – yes, Chair Ellis – yes
VOTE 7-yes 0-no
5.Recap of Select Board Meeting regarding approval of 5 Year CPA Plan
Faythe said she went through the plan with the SB and focused on the recommendations of the Plan. The
Select Board voted to approve the plan and the recommendations within it. There were questions
regarding the target allocations and how we envision that working with the statutory formula. She asked
Cindy Bingham to comment. Cindy Bingham said she felt Faythe did a terrific job. She did bring up the
target vs. just having it be a standard 30%. She knows this will come up at Town Meeting and we need
to keep bringing it up so others will understand what this all means. No further questions.
6.Discussion and possible vote to recommend the Select Board place an article on the fall town
meeting warrant to amend the CPC bylaw to strike sections 17-4 and 17-5 in their entirety
Faythe said in preparation for Spring Town Meeting, we had a vote in March to recommend the Select
Board place an article on the fall town meeting warrant to amend the CPC bylaw to strike sections 17-4
and 17-5 in their entirety. This is simply to make sure that our motion to the Select Board would now be
on our Fall Town Meeting Warrant. She said some questions came up regarding talking more about this
and thinks this is that opportunity. She is happy to give folks the floor to do so.
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of August 10, 2022 Page 4 of 8
Elizabeth said she thinks we will still run into problems. She doesn’t think the conservation interests in
the town will be very happy with that because there is nothing concrete to say the 30% will actually
happen.
Faythe included a letter that she received from the Conservation Trust. She apologized for the late notice
but didn’t receive it from the mailbox until mid-July. Sharon said it is hard for us to say it will be a
solidified 30% because we don’t know what our requests will be. Faythe said she would agree with that
and she would also say it is a policy encompassing a number of years. Sarah asked what the
Conservation Commission would be more happy with? Elizabeth said she thinks the Open Space
interests are not sufficiently feeling this will happen. The 30% is entirely based on who is on the CPC.
So, if that changes, anything can happen, and she doesn’t believe they are very supportive at this time.
She will not speak for the Brewster Conservation Trust. Elizabeth said they want more of a guarantee
and there is no guarantee. Peggy said, as she read through the letter, the line that says the trust would be
prepared to accept the 30/30/10 formula, considering we spent about a year looking at all different forms
of allocation. We were basically recommending those as targets. She doesn’t think in the information
that goes along with this in the warrant, it doesn’t explain it accurately. When Pat Hues got up at the
Town Meeting and brought that up, we ended Town Meeting, so there wasn’t an opportunity to discuss
this. There’s still opportunity for the allocation of more. It comes down to - are folks willing to have
targets vs. a guaranteed allocation. She believes we are going to struggle with how we portray our
adherence to the targets vs. a guarantee. Faythe said that one of the comments she received informally
said that the summary article should include the target information. Faythe feels it would be good to get
on the agendas of key committees and make her presentation to them discussing the statutory formula
and the target policy. She thinks the Recreation Commission, the Planning Board, the Historical
Commission, the Housing Authority, and the Conservation Commission. In addition, she thinks other
committees that would be good to get in front of with this information would be the Open Space
Committee, the Housing Partnership, and the Affordable Housing Trust. Sarah thinks this is a very good
idea. However, she doesn’t think it is because they don’t understand, it sounds more as if they are not
confident the percentages or targets will hold true. Faythe agrees, but also feels as though this
committee, the current group and prior members, have been very supportive since the committee was
established. She feels the committee structure is such that it is very balanced and designed to take a very
balanced approach of such things and that can be used as a guide to how the committee approaches these
decisions. Paul said a few of us have been on in the 15/16-year history and have supported requests from
every single area. He thinks reaching out to committees is incredibly ambitious in a relatively short
amount of time. He agrees with Sarah that the Open Space and Conservation community understands
what’s at stake, but he still thinks it helpful to go to them again and the other committees as well for a
better clearer understanding. Peggy would recommend we invite all those groups to one meeting. She
would like to see a conversation across all of those and have those folks who are guaranteed the
percentages now, hear the concerns of the other groups in the allocation process. She worries that it
turns into people just talking to their own group and trying to advocate with whoever as opposed to
having a holistic conversation regarding the process we went through - explain the long process we went
through, how many inputs we sifted through to get to this new recommendation. Faythe said she thought
by getting in front of individual boards, she might be able to reach more citizens that may watch those
particular boards meetings to reach a broader audience of those citizens. Also, the Select Board and the
Finance Committee have meetings where we present our articles which presents more opportunity to
discuss and question.
Martin Kamarck, President Brewster Conservation Trust addressed the committee
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of August 10, 2022 Page 5 of 8
Martin Kamarck doesn’t think that many people would argue that flexibility is not a good thing or that 5
years is not a reasonable planning horizon or that the two clear priorities of the Town of Brewster for
public expenditures are community housing and open space. So, the 30% and 5 years with an effort to
build in flexibility all make sense. There is some concern that reversion to the statutory minimums, and
Faythe’s marathon commitment to further broaden the outreach in terms of understanding the plan are
all really good things in terms public understanding and of addressing the concerns of accountability.
The more that plan is understood to be in the context to the amendment to the bylaw, the more
accountability to adhering to the plan will be involved. Even so, he thinks there will be those who will
raise concern. If at the end of 5 years, you are way off the target, what are the consequences? The
answer is there are none. There is another important nuance to be aware of – what we’ve experienced
with the 50% allocation enshrined, it becomes a planning tool for both of us. Open Space and Housing
are usually multiyear processes with large amount requests. When a guaranteed minimum is guaranteed
in a bylaw, that money can accumulate, and one can plan. It is our responsibility to come to the CPC
with qualifying projects. It is helpful to know that the money is there, and we aren’t missing projects that
are multiyear and complex. This is a concern expressed in the contrast as to what is a policy and what is
a bylaw allocation.
Donna Kalinick said she wants to note that both the Housing Partnership and the Brewster Affordable
Housing Trust sent letters of support for the adoption of the statutory process bylaw and for the CPC
process and target allocations. We felt that way even though from what she heard from the financial
reports there is almost $2M in Open Space and about $60K in Housing at year end. We believe in the
process, the CPC has supported the housing initiatives, having worked with us collaboratively. You have
a process where applications come in, they are sent to subcommittees to be vetted, are brought back for a
recommendation, and ultimately brought to Town Meeting for residents to vote on. It isn’t just the 9
members on this committee who weigh in on the applications that go in front of the CPC. Also, she does
believe from an administrative standpoint, that having flexibility is really something that would be a tool
for the town to use, particularly with the two Sea Camps parcels and not really knowing what CPC
applications could be related to those parcels in the next 5-10 years.
Motion to recommend the Select Board place an Article on the Fall Town Meeting Warrant to
amend the CPC bylaw to strike sections 17-4 and 17-5 in their entirety.
MOVED by Sarah Robinson. Seconded by Peggy Jablonski.
Peggy brought up that there is a comment section in this draft, and we may want to look at that based on
the feedback on the sessions to be held, and may want to put more information there.
Faythe said she would put a caveat that the summary information is subject to revision on what
was included on the Town Meeting Warrant.
Sarah agreed. Seconded by Sharon Marotti.
Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – no, Roland Bassett – no, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sarah
Robinson – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Peggy Jablonski – yes, Chair Ellis – yes
VOTE 5-yes 2-no
7.Discussion and possible vote to approve transfer of $150,000 to Brewster Affordable Housing
Trust for rental assistance programs, as authorized by May 2021 town meeting
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of August 10, 2022 Page 6 of 8
Donna Kalinick addressed the committee and said this was related to the next agenda item as well. At
the end of each FY, since the Trust has been in existence, she has worked with the Finance Director to
create a spreadsheet that shows the expenses and revenues and that is divided up between CPC funds
and other funds - part of the reason for this is that there is a requirement for the trust to report back to the
CPC any CPC funds that are expended by the Affordable Housing Trust. This is true of all trusts in the
Commonwealth. We discovered that the $150K for rental assistance that was approved, was never
actually formally transferred to the Trust. This is truly just an accounting issue.
Motion to transfer $150,000 to Brewster Affordable Housing Trust for rental assistance programs,
as authorized by the May 2021 Town Meeting.
MOVED by Paul Ruchinskas. Seconded by Sarah Robinson.
Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sarah
Robinson – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Peggy Jablonski – yes, Chair Ellis – yes
VOTE 7-yes 0-no
8.Review of FY22 CP3 form
Donna Kalinick said we broke this down into categories. The first is the creation of affordable housing.
There was a total of $3,227 expended broken into two different types – first was hiring a consultant to
review the financial proforma in the proposal to manage and develop Millstone Road to develop
community housing. We spent $1,410 to have the financial proforma reviewed and presented to the
Trust as part of the review and recommendation for the award process. The other monies were related to
legal fees. The second category – preservation of affordable housing - we have been working on two
primary properties – one located on Yankee Drive and the other on Shaun Circle. When this award was
made to the trust of $500K, it was for the trust to preserve any units on our subsidized housing
inventory. A lot of the expenditures were related to legal fees. Ultimately, in working with the State, the
Town does now own 212 Yankee Drive with the understanding that it would remail affordably deed
restricted in perpetuity. So, there were legal fees related to this property. Some of the legal fees were
paid through the tax/title funds that are available to the Treasurer Collector when they are going through
the taking process. There was also a home inspection that needed to be paid as well. We are actively
working with the State and the bank to come to an agreement for the repairs needed to bring that
property back to a livable condition. The expenses in this category are relatively low this year. Now that
Town Meeting transferred custody of 212 Yankee to the Affordable Housing Trust, we are now actively
working on the scope of work and procurement to have the work done at this location. We expect that to
be anywhere from $100,000-$200,000 to get that work done. With price increases and going back
through the house that has been sitting with water damage, it will likely need to be gutted because we
don’t know the extent of the mold in the house. We expect to be expending a lot, if not all, of the
$300,000 for this purpose. We may have to come back to the Committee for a portion of the hold back
$200,000. Even though we didn’t expend money for the rental assistance program, there have been
many programs put in place due to the pandemic to assist local residents. We have been in touch with
HAC, and they were able to assist 40 Brewster households with either Federal or State programs. Those
programs will be ending and some of those households will need to shift into the local rental assistance
program. There are already a few applications waiting. Had it not been for the pandemic, we probably
would have spent this money already. The total that was expended of CPC funds is $4,877. You’ll see
from the EOY account balances, the balance of CPC funds is $518,805 which includes interest accrued
throughout the year, and Mimi Bernardo allocates the interest based on the percentage of money from
each fund to those funds.
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of August 10, 2022 Page 7 of 8
9.Review and provide feedback on the FY23-24 Select Board goals/strategic plan
Faythe asked if anyone had any comments or suggestion to pass back to Peter Lombardi to pass on to
the Select Board. She had one – item under community character – she thinks that the Cape Housing
Institute does touch on those topics as it relates to housing. Committee members are welcome to attend
Cape Housing Institute, and it would address some of those topics.
Elizabeth has some suggestions but will hold off until she has her planning board meeting.
Sharon asked, under community infrastructure – continue hydration station project – where does that
stand? Is that in the works? Faythe said it was presented at one of our public hearings pre-pandemic. It is
her understanding that with the pandemic, it was shelved. Donna Kalinick said there is now one at the
Captain’s Golf Course, one at Stoney Brook Field, one at the Dog Park, and we are working on one
outside of Town Hall. The Water Superintendent has been put in charge of this project and will be
working on a plan for others over the next year. The funds were allocated from the Water
Commissioners and other funding in place. Golf did pay for one of theirs. There are still more to go.
10.Approval of Minutes from 7/13/22 and 7/27/22
Motion to approve the Minutes from 7/13/22 as presented.
MOVED by Paul Ruchinskas. Seconded by Peggy Jablonski.
Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sarah
Robinson – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Peggy Jablonski – yes, Chair Ellis – abstain
VOTE 6-yes 0-no 1-abstain
Chair Ellis abstained as she was not at the meeting.
Motion to approve the Minutes from 7/27/22 as presented.
MOVED by Roland Bassett. Seconded by Sharon Marotti.
Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sarah
Robinson – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Peggy Jablonski – yes, Chair Ellis – yes
VOTE 7-yes 0-no
11.Project Updates:
Faythe said Chuck did send an email suggesting he can make our next agenda for a White Caps
update. She thanked Rollie for being the liaison on that.
Faythe said the Huckleberry Roof Project did go through. We are processing a check for the
payout to pay off those roofs. The money is on its way.
Faythe also wanted to remind everyone that at our next meeting, she plans on reviewing our CPC
application and asked the committee to please look over for recommendations or suggested
changes.
12.Matters not reasonably anticipated by the Chair- none
Community Preservation Committee
Minutes of August 10, 2022 Page 8 of 8
13.Upcoming meetings:
a.Next meeting and discussion of format: August 24, 2022
b.Annual CPC Public Hearing – Wednesday, September 14th at 4PM
a.Faythe said we will be virtual at the next meeting
b.Reminder that our Public Hearing will be on September 14th
We will schedule the hearing for 5PM.
Faythe also wanted to remind everyone that the end of this week is the deadline for comments on the
town website for the Comprehensive Plan draft.
MOTION made by Sharon Marotti to adjourn the meeting at 5:37 pm. Paul Ruchinskas second.
Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sharon
Marotti – yes, Sarah Robinson – yes, Chair Ellis – yes.
VOTE 6-yes 0-no
Peggy left the meeting before the vote was taken.
Respectfully submitted, Beth Devine, Recording Secretary
Packet of additional documents available on website for public review.