Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutCPC packet 110922Town of Brewster Community Preservation Committee 2198 Main St., Brewster, MA 02631 cpcmeeting@brewster-ma.gov (508) 896-3701 MEETING AGENDA Brewster Town Hall 2198 Main Street November 9, 2022 at 4:00 PM Pursuant to Chapter 107 of the Acts of 2022, this meeting will be conducted in person and via remote means, in accordance with applicable law. This means that members of the public body may access this meeting in person, or via virtual means. In person attendance will be at the meeting location listed above, and it is possible that any or all members of the public body may attend remotely. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted, and public participation in any public hearing conducted during this meeting shall be by remote means only. 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). Members of the public who wish to access the meeting may do so in the following manner: 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. When required by law or allowed by the Chair, persons wishing to provide public comment or otherwise participate in the meeting, may do so by accessing the meeting remotely, as noted above. 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.Update on Stony Brook Retaining Wall project – Chris Miller, Department of Natural Resources 7.Discussion and possible vote on Historic Preservation Restriction options regarding Schoolhouse #3 project 8.Update on Recreation Commission 10/27 meeting comments related to Article 5 9.Discussion regarding CPC related articles at November 14 Town Meeting 10.Status update from TAP subcommittee 11.Upcoming meeting schedule update 12.Project updates 13.Approval of Minutes 14.Next meeting – November 30 at 4PM 15.Motion to Adjourn Date Posted: Date Revised: 11/7/22 Community Preservation Committee: FY23 Forecast as of 10/24/2022 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 (347,200.00) Schoolhouse #3 CPC expense (10,000.00) Total YTD Obligations - FY23 $ (460,658.00) $ (81,900.00) $ (379,816.50) $ (176,534.88) $ - $ 1,811,570.67 $ 106,539.63 $ 263,605.22 $ 252,674.39 $ 757,756.22 Total net available from all accounts 3,192,146.12$ 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 Development: $20M for CPA on Governor Baker's Desk DStJart Saginor <<stuar' i_)cormunitypreservation.c send..orn> on b€ ' 1 1141 2022 2:S9 PM x iaythe.ellis ticiakco m Update on $20M for CPA Trust Fund: Legislation Now on the Move! We have great news to share with CPA communities - the State Legislature has just passed the long-awaited economic development bill, H.5374, which includes language allocating 820 million in state budget surplus funds for the CPA Trust Fund. On Wednesday night, H,5374 was fled and subsequently sailed through both the House and Senate during Thursday's session. Governor Baker now has 10 days to sign the bill into law. Should that happen, there is still an unanswered question as to when CPA communities could expect this surplus funding to arrive. It's possible that communities could receive their portion of the surplus funds in a second distribution after the annual CPA Trust Fund disbursement on November 15th (something very similar occurred during the 2021 Trust Fund distribution). We expect to learn more next week, so keep an eye on your inbox fair snnra+ •ivzrlats l From: Shirin Everett Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 4:07 PM To: Faythe Ellis Cc: Peter Lombardi Subject: BREW: Question about Historic Preservation Restriction Hello Faythe, For the Town to grant CPA funds to any private (though non-profit) group, it is my opinion that the Town needs to ensure that the grant complies with the Anti-Aid Amendment, which prohibits the Town from using public funds for private benefit without a commensurate public benefit. In my opinion, given that the Historical Society is looking for a sizeable grant, acquiring a historic preservation restriction will ensure that there is a public benefit to the grant, as the Town will protect the unique historical or architectural features of the building from alteration. The question is whether the HPR will be permanent or enforceable for a shorter period. As you know, in order for a HPR to last in perpetuity, the HPR needs to be approved by the Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC). Admittedly, obtaining MHC’s approval is a time-consuming and frustrating process, and many owners chafe at the restrictions, but it is the best means of ensuring that the HPR remains in effect in perpetuity. However, if the Town is amenable, we could do a HPR that is not approved by MHC. Such a HPR will definitely encumber the property for at least 30 years, and has the potential to last for a longer period of time. The restrictions do not have to be too onerous, but the HPR must require the owner to comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards on the repair and rehabilitation of historic building, and obtain the approval of the Brewster Historical Commission to make major changes. Please let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter further. 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 11/07/2022 Overview of the Proposed Change to the Community Preservation Act Bylaw – Article 5 What is the Community Preservation Act (CPA)? In May 2005, Brewster voters adopted the Community Preservation Act which appropriates a 3% surcharge on the Town’s real estate tax revenues. The money is reserved in a separate fund to finance projects and programs for the purposes of preservation of open space, recreation, community housing and historic preservation. The state distributes matching funds which vary from year to year. Brewster’s CPA funds have supported about 70 community preservation projects since 2005. The CPA also defines the role and membership of the Community Preservation Committee (CPC) and details how the town’s CPA funds will be allocated for each CPA eligible category. Why is the CPC recommending a change to Brewster’s CPA Allocation Formula now? The CPC expects that there will likely be a funding shortfall in the near future for CPA eligible projects. For the first time, the CPC expects to have to choose between eligible projects in making funding recommendations to Town Meeting voters. Faced with this prospect, the committee spent the past year developing a new 5 Year CPA Plan. After holding robust public outreach, the new plan was completed this winter and adopted by a unanimous CPC vote in March 2022. Brewster’s CPA Plan includes 2 recommendations which approval of Article 5 would enact into the town CPA bylaw: 1. Adopt CPA Statutory Formula and 2. Establish a Target Allocation Policy to address top community priorities of open space and community housing. What is the CPA statutory formula and why is the CPC recommending adoption of it? The CPC believes the statutory formula will allow the committee the maximum flexibility in all four issue areas to recommend eligible projects. If adopted, the allocation formula change will become effective July 1, 2023 and current account balances in each category will be carried over. Category Historic Preservation Community Housing Open Space Outdoor Recreation Reserve (includes 5% for Administrative expenses) Move from Current Formula Minimum Set- aside 10% 10% 50% 0% 30% (Community Housing, Historic Preservation or Recreation) To Statutory Formula Minimum Set-aside 10% 10% 10% 70% (Any CPA eligible project) 11/7/22 What is the CPA Plan Target Allocation Policy? The non-binding target allocation policy provides guidelines for the CPC that will inform how these funds may be spent over a multi-year period above the minimum thresholds of the statutory formula. By looking at aggregate spending in each category over several years, it allows the CPC and the Town more flexibility, depending on what projects apply for funding year to year. The CPA Plan and TAP policy will be reviewed and updated every five years to meet then current Town needs and priorities. Through our outreach in developing this plan, two CPA categories emerged strongly as top priorities (Open Space and Community Housing), with Historic Preservation and Recreation as still important but as a lower priority. What is the Community Preservation Committee (CPC)? By statute, the CPC consists of 9 members, one member each appointed by the Historical Commission, Conservation Commission, Planning Board, Recreation Commission, Brewster Housing Authority and four individuals appointed by the Select Board. This committee membership is designed to include individuals who have an understanding of each of the CPA eligible funding areas. The committee is responsible for vetting applications for CPA eligible projects, including determining if there is sufficient CPA funding available, and making project recommendations to Town Meeting so voters can decide whether or not to fund them. Thank you for your consideration of Article 5. Faythe Ellis, CPC Chair Sarah Robinson, Vice Chair Elizabeth Taylor, Clerk Sharon Marotti, Treasurer Roland Bassett Jr. Christine Boucher Bruce Evans Peggy Jablonski Paul Ruchinskas Community Preservation Committee Minutes of October 12, 2022 Page 1 of 6 vd 2198 Main Street Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898 (508) 896-3701 FAX (508) 896-8089 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE Virtual Meeting Wednesday, October 12, 2022, at 4:00 p.m. MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 12, 2022 Present: Community Preservation Committee (CPC) – Chair Faythe Ellis, Vice-Chair Sarah Robinson, Treasurer Sharon Marotti, Clerk Elizabeth Taylor, Roland Bassett, Paul Ruchinskas, Bruce Evans, Peggy Jablonski (4:20) Absent: Christine Boucher Also Present: Cindy Bingham, Select Board; Sally Gunning, Brewster Historical Society; Eric Dray, Consultant; Paul Daley, Brewster Historical Society; Hal Minis, Brewster citizen; Charlie Sumner, Brewster citizen; Pat Hues, Brewster citizen Chair 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.Public Announcements and Comment- none 2.Financial Update This is the same report from the last meeting. Nothing new to report. No questions. 3.Discussion and possible vote on a funding recommendation, source of funding, and committee liaison and stipulations for the Brewster Historical Society’s request for $322,200 to move and restore Schoolhouse #3. Faythe said the Historical Society’s request is for $347,200 as per the updated application emailed to folks yesterday. The committee asked for Sally Gunning to provide more information around the numbers for the application. Sally Gunning addressed the committee regarding the changes. She said they are talking about putting in walling and, in doing some research, there is some visible horizontal walling in keeping with what was in schoolhouse #2 and found in other older schoolhouses in New England. We have added $25,000 to cover the request for walls and ceilings for about 2000 square feet. Faythe asked Eric Dray for his thoughts. Eric Dray said he is glad to see that item added in, it is important to include the interior as a schoolhouse. He asked if it included the anti-rooms. Sally Gunning asked Paul Daley to comment on that. Paul Daley responded that it did include the anti-rooms as well as what we can salvage and use from those rooms. He also considered that it is possible that these schools included bead board, he was trying to make it flexible – floors wide pine flooring, and beaded board on the ceiling. Eric Dray responded that it will be a research project to make sure we have the correct Approved: VOTE: Community Preservation Committee Minutes of October 12, 2022 Page 2 of 6 materials for the rooms. He recommends the CPC include in the grant agreement some sort of process as to what the interior will look like to continue to ensure that it complies with the standards. Faythe said the recommendation from the Historical Commission with the condition of elevation drawings and floorplans. In Faythe’s quick look, is that in the scope of work? Sally Gunning said yes, but not the floorplan. Sally Gunning said we added in plans but will not expend the money for that until we are sure it is a go. Paul said relating to the Conditions. He said basically, it was regarding Phase 1 and Phase 2 and maybe spelling that out – including the interior work that will be done using the Foundation Grant. That could be a way to have Eric continue to review that as part of the CPC Award. Eric Dray asked for clarification of Phase 2. Sally Gunning said it was just about the furnishings, videoing, and exterior signage for education. Eric Dray said he thinks the CPC needs to focus on the building itself. Furnishings are ephemeral – they come and go and aren’t as important to pay attention to. Paul said he thought Eric would follow through on the monitoring until the work was complete – ensuring the town’s investment. Sharon wondered about the additional fees for the monitoring, and if they were included in the amount requested? Faythe said no, but as we typically do with these awards, is to set some money aside for Eric Dray to do that monitoring. She asked if Eric had any sort of estimate of the number of hours that would be logical for us to go with. He said he couldn’t imagine more than 10 hours. We have learned that erring on the conservative side has worked in the past. Paul said he would err on the higher side, especially if there is a historic preservation restriction and we need Eric to consult on that as well. Faythe said she thinks $10,000 would be the right amount and if it is not spent, it goes right back into that historic category. Faythe asked if the number $347,200 is funding for 100% of the project. Sally Gunning said it was for all the information on the scope of work. Faythe asked if there was anything that would extend it beyond that amount. Sally Gunning answered the furnishings, but we are not prepared with that number yet. Faythe said she would want a condition to be that Eric Dray signs off on the elevation drawings and plans. Faythe wants to make sure that the funding amount they are recommending is enough to complete the project restoration. Paul asked about the contingency of 5% or 10% - was it built in? Is he comfortable with that number for unexpected things. Paul Daley said he feels that he added in enough of a cushion with the $347,200 so they should be good. Faythe said the funding recommendation would be total - $357,200. $347,200 request plus the $10,000 for consultant services. Source of funding is Historical. Liaison would be Sharon Marotti. Conditions: measured drawings, elevation plans, and floor plans; 5%-10% standard hold-back for completion. Faythe said she would look at the Cobb House Award Letter and look to propose a similar framework; have Eric Dray review it, and then we would want to have the Award Letter, reviewed by Eric, reviewed by legal, approved by the Committee, and signed by Sally Gunning before Special Town Meeting on November 14th. Motion to approve the BHS application for the moving of Schoolhouse #3 from its current location to Windmill Village at a total cost of $357,200 - $347,200 Award to BHS and $10,000 for CPC Administrative expenses. MOVED by Sharon Marotti. Seconded by Roland Bassett. Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Peggy Jablonski – yes, Sarah Robinson – yes, Chair Ellis - yes. VOTE 8-yes 0-no Community Preservation Committee Minutes of October 12, 2022 Page 3 of 6 Motion that the committee liaison will be Sharon Marotti and the stipulations of the award letter will include our requirement for measured drawings, elevation plans, and floor plans to be signed off by the historical consultant, and any other conditions that are recommended as part of further review. MOVED by Faythe Ellis. Seconded by Sharon Marotti. Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Peggy Jablonski – yes, Sarah Robinson – yes, Chair Ellis - yes. VOTE 8-yes 0-no 4.Discussion and possible re-vote on a funding recommendation for the Open Space Committee’s request for $264,000 for the town to purchase a Conservation Restriction on the property at 0 Holly Way. Faythe noted that she had an email from Elizabeth that the numbers for the article and the application had changed due to a change in the grant status. She asked her to explain this change again because it changes the numbers and wondered if a re-vote was necessary. Elizabeth said she doesn’t think the numbers have changed – didn’t we originally have $264,000? Faythe said on the application, it changes the financial background of the article. Elizabeth said we applied for a state land grant but didn’t get approved because of a glitch. The land was pre-acquired by the Compact of the Cape Cod Conservation Trust. If you do that, you need to do your pre-acquisition only once the grant has been published on the State website. So, the pre-acquisition was over a year ago, and the state land grant was set up in February or March and wouldn’t be in their guidelines. Our total costs will be $250,000 for the land and $14,000 for possible expenses. Normally, when the compact pre-acquires land, it is done right before we make an application to the CPC and go to Town Meeting. But this time the town was going through the Sea Camps acquisition process, and we weren’t allowed to bring this to the committee in a timely manner. We are going to be asking to pay the total amount of $264,000 including money for expenses. Paul said the money hadn’t changed; it was only the info on the land grant in the summary. Faythe surveyed the committee and said it sounds like everyone is comfortable with our original vote. 5.Presentation and discussion of Citizens Petition Article - Town Code Amendment – Community Preservation Committee Bylaw – Proposed changes. Faythe wanted to clarify this item by saying it is not a citizen’s petition article, it is a suggestion from 3 citizens to the Select Board with regard to proposed changes to that Article. Hal Minis thanked the Committee. It is a version of the amendment to the CPA article that we would like you to consider. He is here as a citizen with many years of professional experience working with local government. He agrees it was time for the allocation process to be revisited. He thinks the process should be in the article that amends the CPA and how it changes the formula. What this does is to put in the article your strategic planning process, the state minimums are established as the minimum required allocations, it speaks to the targeted allocation policy, and those targets for the next planning period. We tried to make it correspond to the outcome of the process, and it allows citizens to confirm this is the right way to allocate the money that is raised from their tax dollars. Charlie Sumner said, as Town Moderator, he won’t be moderating this article. He participated in the process the CPC went through and was the architect of the original language from the land grant stage. Community Preservation Committee Minutes of October 12, 2022 Page 4 of 6 He is fully supportive of the outcome of the process, the only difference he would have is over time, there is a tremendous amount of money administered through the CPA program, and he knows Brewster’s model is different than the vast majority of other communities. However, Brewster’s model has served our community well over these many years. We should vest this decision in Town Meeting. He realizes that every 5 years we will review this matter and establish priorities and go back to Town Meeting to modify them. He believes this decision to be made on Town Meeting floor. We have worked with the Town Administrator and Legal Counsel to come up with language that would work, and we could support. Pat Hughes reiterated what Hal Minis and Charlie Sumner said. As a citizen, she wants Town Meeting to see what has been done and agree to the allocations put forth. We all, as a community, should be voting the allocations and the discretionary allocations, both of which she supports. Bruce said maybe the idea of going to Town Meeting and really addressing more people is a good idea. Paul asked about the consultation of the DPW. He doesn’t believe they’ve ever had a DPW request. Hal Minis answered that was part of the original article. Elizabeth said she thinks this is an improvement and may allow the article to pass because there are a lot of people out there worried about Open Space losing that 50%. This codifying of the issue might help get it passed. She encourages the committee to accept this new wording. Peggy wants to be clear that we are saying these are target allocations of the 30/30/10 and would still have flexibility. Is the word “target” in that final warrant article? We would still be able to go beyond the target allocations because this is non-binding. She wants to preserve the opportunity that might present itself that would require more than the target. Hal Minis said he believes the language does just that. Pat Hues said one of the values of having the allocations in the article is that every one of the citizens at Town Meeting understand the framework in which you are operating in terms of the money. With that clarity, when you come to Town Meeting with a larger project, people already know that the 30% was not binding, and you would make the case as to the importance of the project that is requiring more money. It would really help the citizens in understanding and the CPC for what it has to do on behalf of the town. Motion to approve the article presented to us just now. It would change our article by adding section 17-4b. MOVED by Elizabeth Taylor. Seconded by Peggy Jablonski. No vote was taken – see below. Hal Minis said the revision that town counsel recommended has more changes than just that article. Sarah asked Hal to bullet point those changes. Hal Minis went over the changes: 17-2 minor change, new section A – annually the committee shall consult the existing board. Section B – every five years ending in (he was unsure)… the committee shall conduct a public process to develop a Community Preservation Plan (CPP); establishing goals for expenditures in each of the eligible categories; the CPP shall include a target allocation policy (TAP) setting forth non-binding guidelines for the next 5 years; allocation of CPA funds among eligible categories expressed as percentages of estimated annual revenues; subsection 2 – following the adoption of the CPP under section b-1, the non-binding TAP shall be presented to Town Meeting as a proposed amendment. Under Section 17-3, the CPC shall make recommendations no less than annually to Town Meeting; section 74a – annual minimum recommendations, the CPC shall recommend that Town Meeting spend the fixed figures of 10% Open Space and Rec; 10% for Community Housing; 10% for Historic. New section B – each of the fiscal years 24-28 until otherwise voted by Town Meeting the non-binding TAP shall be as Community Preservation Committee Minutes of October 12, 2022 Page 5 of 6 follows: 30% Open Space; 30% Community Housing; 10% Rec; 10% Historic; 20% allocated as recommended by CPC. Peggy said she was not comfortable voting on something she hasn’t seen. She would like to see the legal counsel version of this information and cannot locate it. Charlie Sumner said that always the cautious thing to do is to get the final language and make sure you are voting on what you think you are. You would still have time to see the final language and vote on it then. Faythe said since she got cut off because of technical difficulties, she is wondering if the Brewster Conservation Trust has opined on the proposal. They answered they had not. Faythe asked Cindy Bingham from the Select Board to comment. Cindy Bingham answered the Select Board is hoping this committee will make a recommendation first before they vote. Paul said conceptionally, he is in favor of the changes. That may be one way to do this without taking a vote. Faythe said this was why she worded the agenda as a discussion that could be taken to the Select Board. To summarize the conversation, she supports this iteration and would be fine recommending it to the Select Board. Paul agrees. Elizabeth also. Sharon agrees but does like the deletion of each of the years as the goals are set for a cumulative 5-year period. Sarah is in favor. Rollie would abstain on this because Recreation has not discussed this yet. Faythe said they have a majority recommendation to the Select Board that this wording is acceptable to the majority of the CPC members with that one edit recommended to 17-4b. Hal Minis said it is fine with him. Charlie Sumner said that is fine and the correction can be worked out with the Select Board and the Town Administrator. Pat Hues said she is looking forward to getting on the floor of Town Meeting and supporting this article. 6.Review and possible vote on draft CPC Town Meeting Articles Faythe said the first for consideration is the Town Code Amendment Article. She would like to have the committee look at and vote on the summary changes we are proposing. She yellow highlighted the changes she was recommending. She included the end of year balances for each of the categories. We also talked about including the Target Allocation percentages. Paul said to put the carry over reserve balances in the last paragraph than in the place it is now. Motion to accept those changes and move the FY ending balances to the bottom of the summary. MOVED by Elizabeth Taylor. Seconded by Paul Ruchinskas. Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Sarah Robinson – yes, Chair Ellis - yes. VOTE 7-yes 0-no Peggy Jablonski left the meeting before the vote was taken. Motion to approve the draft with the changes based on our approval of our funding recommendation. MOVED by Sharon Marotti. Seconded by Elizabeth Taylor. Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Sarah Robinson – yes, Chair Ellis - yes. VOTE 7-yes 0-no Community Preservation Committee Minutes of October 12, 2022 Page 6 of 6 Lastly, the Burke Article with the change already discussed as the deletion to the reference of the grant - no need to revote. 7.Discussion and possible vote on possible changes and updates to CPC Application for Funding form (Instructions for Applicants (brewster-ma.gov) Faythe said at a prior meeting, Sharon and she signed up for the task of going through the application and recommending edits and, in particular, weaving in references to the CPA Plan. The version in the packet yellow highlights the changes recommended. She went through the highlighted changes by page. Motion to update the application with those edits. MOVED by Sharon Marotti. Seconded by Paul Ruchinskas. Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Sarah Robinson – yes, Chair Ellis - yes. VOTE 7-yes 0-no 8.Approval of Minutes from 9/14/22 Public Hearing - defer 9.Project Updates: defer 10.Upcoming meetings: October 26, 2022 at 4PM Virtual Faythe said, in the packet, she called out the Mill Stone Project forum coming up tomorrow. That is an important project. MOTION made by Elizabeth Taylor to adjourn the meeting at 5:55 pm. Sharon Marotti second. Roll Call Vote: Elizabeth Taylor – yes, Bruce Evans – yes, Roland Bassett – yes, Paul Ruchinskas – yes, Sharon Marotti – yes, Sarah Robinson – yes, Chair Ellis – yes. VOTE 7-yes 0-no Respectfully submitted, Beth Devine, Recording Secretary Packet of additional documents available on website for public review.