Community Preservation Committee Meeting - August 11, 2026

Well, we have a quorum, so we should get started. Perfect.

And just a reminder that this being recorded, so the microphones are on and just kind of mind the mind your side conversations.

Um, and we all received a copy of the minutes and thank you all for those who could make it to the um, uh, July meeting. That's um, appreciate that. Or the June meeting. Was it the June meeting? Yeah, the June meeting. Thank you. Um, I think I was I was fishing at the time, I believe. Right.

Been my excuse a couple of times.

Um, any um corrections? I I have one one correction um just in um at the end. So the the chairperson wasn't you?

Uh yeah. So it probably was um Jim, right? Okay, great.

[snorts] Uh have a motion to accept the minutes um as amended.

I make a motion to accept the minutes from the June meeting as amended.

And uh any other edits or discussion?

Yeah, John.

Just uh um discussion. Why don't we vote on it first? Okay. Just Yeah. So, all in favor?

All right.

Seconded.

And then So, there was a motion.

Chris, I'm sorry. Go ahead, John. There was a motion to uh the gravestone solution invoice.

Yes.

Not to pay that until we get some detail. Did we get the detail on that?

And I brought it tonight just in case you wanted to look at it.

Yeah. That's No, as long we we said if we receive it, the payment went out, right?

Okay. Yeah.

Okay. Great. Thank you.

We have another one tonight.

No, we don't.

I did make a note of that. Excellent.

Um other invoices.

Yes.

I'll mention as kind of one bit of corres I'll call it correspondence. It arrived in the email. Um Kevin Estes uh is the planning board rep to the CPC. He gives his regrets today because he has out of out of town family. Um so he couldn't make today's meeting but he will going forward be the um rep from planning board.

So we do have another one from the gravestone. So, if you want to see the um Okay.

quite a [clears throat] few of them.

All right. We have a few of these.

Um Dartmouth foot bridge. Oh, this is the Cornell pond.

Um Cornell Pond um feasibility.

The amount is $2,400.

Uh and this is for survey uh and plan development.

Pass this on.

And then we have an invoice for um $3,500 which is our annual dues um for the community preservation coalition. Um and this is the same amount as actually probably the previous couple of years.

They have not u changed their dues amount.

And the coalition provides technical assistance. Um they lobby on behalf of the community pres preservation act. Um and they hold trainings and webinars for communities and CPC committees like ours. Uh $569.

The next invoice $569.92.

And this is for kayak rack anchors. This is part of the um the dinghy kayak um um replacements at at the dis landing.

Here you go.

And then we amount of $42 for the dis landing. Um

We may need a for professional services.

Yeah, I didn't receive that. Um, the select board's office did and they did the voucher, etc. And then I got called from the accounting to that had to be signed. So, I don't really know nothing about that one.

Okay.

More information. I certainly can get it.

We may, but folks take a look at it. I'm not quite clear what this is. Um what this is for um I think the only thing we've been waiting for in the dis landing is um there is still an outstanding balance but um it's regards to um signage um and they have a dis landing sign they had inquired a few months ago about whether um that would be within the CPC

budget and um I did remind them that we did have um an expectation for a project like that that when there's signage it would include acknowledgement of CPA funds.

Oh yeah.

And if they had a sign that would acknowledge the CPA funds more than likely um it would be the committee would consider within the budget, but I haven't seen anything more. So I'm not clear on on what the remaining expenses are.

It's very vague.

Yeah. Yeah, cuz I don't think there's been much of construction wise there hasn't been that's been done for I think a few months now. At least that's been my impression. Um and then there's um an invoice for $11,000 for the Joseph Davis Cemetery.

Um Is this the last?

I believe so. Yes. [clears throat] Okay.

So, this is what John was talking about.

We had only received that for the last invoice and then I proceeded to get a lot of other information.

Okay.

So, so is is this u was this already approved?

No. $12,000.

That was $12,000.

This should be the end of it.

And this is an additional 11. correct on that. Okay, gentlemen, if you want to look through and with the 12 and the 11 is is this because I know that uh Becky was saying that um this was the close out, right?

Right.

That was in June.

Okay.

So, we have this this $11,000 Hey, Susan. We have this $11,000 invoice.

This is different than what we looked at before.

Yes. This is in addition to the 12,000 that the committee reviewed at the last meeting.

But I brought cherry tomatoes.

Oo, those are those um sunold.

They're like candy. These things are like candy.

My chipmunks think too.

You get them at Stop and Shop.

Man, break my heart with that question.

That was terrible. I apologize. They are delicious.

[clears throat]

Okay. Um

and this is the additional information that came with the 12,000 right the break time.

Okay, that $11,000 one in that Okay. And they have the average um I know folks are interested in what the average cost of repair was. Okay, that's in here.

Okay.

So take take a moment to look at this background information.

Um Susan, that was at the last June meeting about the greenstones. They wanted more information, right?

So this is this is the more information, right?

Okay.

Because we have another $11,000 bill that's going down that end.

I just want to check and see where that leaves us with the balance.

I think I I did look at that buddy, but now I have I don't remember.

Okay, I use my handy dandy.

All right, let's see.

[snorts] Okay. So, in terms of projects, um

there's an outstand as of the end of June, there's an outstanding balance of 27,500.

Um, with these two invoices, that gets us to 23,000, um, that have come in since June, I believe,

I can get would isn't necessarily clear in that um, see if Becky has said anything different that this is the close out that there are no further um invoices and that everything has been um paid.

Let me see what she said about that.

Okay.

Okay. So, she on um July 9th um she um indicated that that was the last invoice uh final invoice and closeout report.

Um

but that 11,000 I think has come after that. We the committee didn't see the 11 this new invoice.

That's a newoice. Okay.

Okay. Um I guess what I would suggest is um that we you know cons just act on these invoices but um not considered a closeout report.

And let me just get some little clarity from Becky whether there's any additional um since there's still an outstanding balance, you know, are there additional invoices to come and and just kind of a neater, clearer package of this is the close out, this is what we spent, it's all done kind of a thing.

But we can certainly act on these um uh invoices.

All right.

Okay. Okay. So, I think those are the invoices that we have.

You want me to start?

Yeah.

Um motion to pay the $569.92 to uh Pioneer Mooring for the uh Das Landing Kayak rack anchors.

And a second on that.

Second. All right, Susan. All right. Um, any discussion, further questions on that? All in favor?

I opposed. All right. So, that was um approved the invoice for um motion to pay the invoice of 2400 to Comprehensive Environment, Inc.

uh for some work done on the Dartmouth foot bridge and trail feasibility out on um 04 river road conell second.

All right, Jo. Uh any question on that?

All in favor?

I opposed. No, that's unanimous.

motion to pay the um membership fee of $3,500 to the uh community preservation coalition.

Second annual dues. Susan's a second. Um any other discussion? All in favor?

I opposed. No, that's unanimous.

Motion to pay an $11,000 invoice to TNT Gravestone Solutions for work done on the Joseph Davis Cemetery.

Second.

All right. Um all any further discussion on that questions? All in favor?

I opposed. That's unanimous.

Motion to pay the invoice of $412 to F infrastructure and environmental LLC for uh professional services at the DAS landing.

Second.

Right. Any discussion? I I would say um I would ask that if we um um I think it's fine to approve this, but um we should get a little more information about what the what the professional services remaining are on the on the project. I'd be happy to reach out to uh Mr. Melo on that.

Um but on the motion to um approve the invoice or payment for the $400 and something dollars. All in favor?

I opposed. No. So I'll make a note to follow up on that.

Oh, this is Well, we paid this one, right?

We don't need a motion on this $12,000.

was a historical preservation as needed of 200 plus headstones dating from the 18th century at this historic cemetery on Font Corner Road. Through cleaning and repair, this work returned the stones to cleaned and upright condition on their bases with the least alteration to their historic appearance, as you will see in the attached pictures.

Although the project was bid for the restoration of 67 headstones, 90 were actually worked on. [clears throat] When driving by on Font's Corner Road, you can help you can't help but notice the gleaming white of headstones at the backdrop to the Welcome to Dartmouth rock, which is true. They are gleaming.

Um, [clears throat] the project completion date was slated for August 1st, 2026.

Uh, it the project commenced on July 2025 with a biological solution spraying of the gravestones. 25% of the project was completed by the end of November.

74% was completed by the end of May and 100% by the end of June.

Um the June 25th um Springtown meeting had approved the $50,000 for the project which is the source of funds. Uh she then lists the invoices which includes the $11,000 invoice. Um, and the total expended is $33,500.

Um, [clears throat] and she tests that all this is accurate.

So um I believe that I just need to um confirm with uh Becky that indeed there would be a um $16,500 um balance unexpended funds um for this project and um and I can report back on that um if Um and then there are photographs attached to this. So this is what take a look at that. I read the first page, but you will see the list of um graves and the photographs. Um,

so I will confirm with Becky that there indeed is the um the outstanding balance and if so um I'll report back to um to the com this committee on in September and then what we um typically what we have to do basically is we recoup the funds but they go into the preservation reserve based on the purpose of the project where the surplus was. So as basically if if indeed there's $16,500

uh surplus u or unexpended that will go into the historic preservation fund and can be used for future projects and stuff. So I will reach out and try to confirm all that. Yes.

Was there any mention of the repair to the wall because I think that was included in the proposal originally.

Yes. Um, and I think one of those invoices was related to that, but it doesn't mention that. So, I can confirm that, too. All right. I will do that.

All right. Confirm wall repair and surplus funds.

Very good.

[clears throat] Thank you for finding that. That's that's exactly the document we're looking for.

Um all right let's see I have one um project update from the cultural center um the advertising uh they were had advertised in for two weeks um in the Dartmouth week and bids for the project were open on July 17th Um the building committee is scheduling uh the review of the bids and interviewing contractors.

Um they've ordered the outside sign um and they are tentatively scheduled to begin um construction in September or October. Um and a letter was sent to the town administrator and select board asking if they could wave the cost of permits. Uh and the building committee has hired Michael Gier to oversee the project.

Um and that is where it stands. So um hopefully by our September meeting [clears throat] we will hear that they've awarded at least awarded a contract and get confirmation on you know how close to their budget does it look like they are.

Very good.

Oh, I have to sign these.

[clears throat]

And the next thing um on our agenda is to um run down the existing um the active projects and any action we need to take about the terms of the projects um of their agreements.

Um so I will just run this um run this down here. Um, see where is the terms thing?

He says, okay, here we go.

[clears throat] the um so we have the ongoing um housing rehab program which we need the that is still on hold until I think um uh Cody's plan is to um reactivate reactivate the rehab program once they have an assistant town administrator hired. Um, so that that would be the person who would kind of take up responsibility for that. So the the paperwork or the the revised uh agreements and review by town council is

done. Now they're waiting for um to hire an individual who among other things would be responsible for overseeing this program.

um housing trust um has an outstanding balance of $485,00019 $11986 um and um we get an annual report on the activity of the trust.

The dog park is complete. And um I went to the um I don't think if I had a chance since then. I went to the the ribbon cutting.

That was pretty wonderful.

A lot of people brought their dogs.

Didn't occur to me. I was like, "Wow, that's pretty cool. People brought their dogs, but it's a dog park." And so um he cut the ribbons and the dogs went in the park and um that was um it was a really nice um ribbon cutting.

It was the dis landing uh expansion um theou expires um expired in June. So, we need to extend I would recommend uh extending that to December 31st of this year. Uh there's an outstanding balance of $19,176.

Um there's still again the signage and we just got an invoice from the so there's still some activity there. We just need a little bit clarity on what what it's going to take to wrap the project up. But there is an outstanding balance and so we should probably uh extend the term of the uhou.

So if I can have a motion to extend the term for theou for the das landing marina expansion [cough] to um December 31st 2026.

So moved.

All right. Any questions or discussion?

All in favor?

I. Any oppose? No. Okay. Um, Dartmouth Cultural Center, their uh previous grant of $260,000 um has an outstanding balance of $246,627.

Um that that first grant expired um June 30th. Um, and I'm recommending here since they're just getting under construction this fall uh that we consider uh extending the term of that grant um to run um concurrently with their second grant. Um and both of which would expire June 30th, 2027.

If I could have a motion to uh extend the Dartmouth Cultural Center grant, existing grant um to June 30th, 2027.

So moved.

And a second.

Second.

Okay. Any discussion?

All right. All in favor? Hi.

Hi.

Uh then we have the dinghy storage uh which we just had um another invoice on. Uh that expired um June 30th and so we need to um I would recommend that we since it's still an active project we extend it to um December 31st, 2026.

Um, I'm suggesting that because I don't think there's a lot of work and so if I think we just keep it on a shorter time frame, maybe that'll help um wrap it up.

And if I have a motion to extend the dising dinghy storage improvement project um term to 1231 December 31st, 2026.

So move second. Um any discussion? All in favor?

Okay.

And we have the housing production plan.

Um and that has an outstanding balance of $23,740.70.

Um theou again expired June 30th. So I'm recommending we extend it to uh December 31st, 2026. not clear to me how much more um uh needs to be done uh before a plan is um in front of the select board or planning board for approval. Um but there has been public input and I think there's been uh some drafting of recommendations. So this is assuming that it's moving along. Um, so if I

could have a motion to extend the housing production plan, uh,ou term to December 31st, 2026.

So move.

Okay. And any discussion?

Second.

All right. All in favor? [snorts] Second.

Any opposed? No, it's unanimous.

the Aonicansit um park disas landing master plan. Um and Joan, you might have a thought on this. Um but um it expires on December 31st, 2026. There's nothing to do now, but do you just anticipate you think it's something that's going to probably go beyond that in terms of a We the board just heard about it for the first time. Oh, last month. So, I would anticipate that it would go longer than that.

Okay.

Because, you know, there's there's no funding for it at this time. There's no plan for funding and, you know, we need to review it.

Yeah. Okay. Great. I mean, we'll take that up in um in our January meeting or December meeting actually.

um and harbor dredging design. Um that um I need to I don't have a confirmation of whether there is any additional work on that. So I still don't have that. I should have um gotten in touch with Cody on that one before this meeting. So I still need to follow up on that.

Um there's a $10,000 balance, but when I talked to Donna Fernandees, it was her understanding that that the um this project was complete. So what she was doing is checking on whether or not there's in there's um $10,000 should have been invoiced against um the CPA funds.

Northern green scenic greenway active project. Um it expires December 31st the term uh does. Um and then we have the Davis Cemetery which expired the end of June. Um but it looks like we are we are done with they're done with any further incurring any further costs. I just need to confirm with Becky that there isn't any anything further that has been incurred that still needs to be

invoiced. So I don't think there's any action on this uh DCTV um phase two that's the bid documents that's complete and the Aken house um water moisture mitigation is complete and so I think um with those actions um we are good and we'll take this up in December which we try to do this every six months take a look at what the existing terms are and decide what action needs to be done. Okay, buddy.

Yes, before we move on, um just a comment and some discussion on the dog park. Um I don't I saw some I can't remember where I read it, but I I took a visit out there, but um they're planning on charging a fee to get into the facility.

my recollection that was never mentioned to us when we approved the funding for this project. Um, and people who know me that's I've served on this board a number of years.

I'm a proponent of [clears throat] public access to all um facilities that we are funding through the uh tax dollars. um and to a certain degree some impeded uh unimpeded access.

So apparently they plan on the the the equipment is there where you're going to need a um a key, a badge to access it. It's going to be electronic and uh you're going to have to prove your dog is vaccinated and pay the fee.

Um [clears throat] and there was a sign there. I was able to get, but there was a sign there that it was going to be soon to be activated.

So, my point is I'm I'm very disappointed that cuz if I had known that if that was presented that way, I would have raised some concerns about using public funds uh to a facility that's locked to anyone who wants to rent. Now, I love dogs. I currently don't own a dog. Mhm.

Um I would love to walk into that facility uh and just experience the dogs running around, maybe bring my grandchildren or something.

I can't do that because I won't have the pass and I don't own a dog that's vaccinated. Um that was those were my tax dollars that were used to build that facility and I don't have access to it. Mhm.

Um, so I don't know how the rest of the board feels, but um, I would like to notify them and caution that and is there a better way? I know what they're trying to achieve. You know, they're trying to achieve some safety and protection for their dogs. Uh, but they're excluding some people who funded that project.

Um, and I don't think that's right. I certainly wouldn't have voted for it if they were firm on No, that's the only way we're gonna run the operation.

Joan, I don't Yeah. No, I just wondered Joan if that's come up with the wreck.

Right. So, it was presented to us at the last meeting. We were not aware that they were going to charge any fees until but what what was presented to us was that there have been complaints of people from people that were afraid to you bring their dogs there because of concerns of other dogs being not vaccinated and putting their dogs at risk. So they came up with a fee schedule. They looked at surrounding

towns and cities and towns who charge a fee to access this and it it was under the premise that for the safety of the dogs. Um I you know the board you we you know did make it we made some um changes to the fees especially for seniors but um I you know I I share John's sentiments because I don't think that you know I you know I agree that it's

it's excluding some people but um but the board did approve the the fees to go through and there's going to be a system that the the from my recollection the fees are like $25 for a year and I think it's $10 for seniors but um you know and you know and I don't have enough uh information on you know I'm not a dog owner either but uh I understand the people's concerns for the

dogs and I don't know what the I've never experienced watching dogs at a dog park. So, it's hard for me to say if this is not important enough. I don't, you know, I'm I'm not, you know, that's not my level of expertise. So, so but that, you know, I do, you know, I do understand what John's saying. Yes, it should be open to people, but I don't know if there's another mechanism to ensure vaccination.

What What is the fee for? What is what what what does where does the money go?

The money goes back to making uh preparations in you know uh repairs in the park. It's going to be like almost like a revolving fund. The money goes back to maintaining the park, the dog park.

Okay. So, this is for their maintenance of the of the park, the upkeep of the park. If there's anything, you know, repairs or you know, that's what the money is supposed to go.

That sounds like two different things.

Exactly. How does it sound related to that?

It sounds like two It is.

That's what And I've never I know there is a dog park in New Bedford that you have to be like a member, but other than that, I don't know anyone else who But they said there they claim that there's a fee for the dog park in maybe that's being a member. I don't know.

Yeah.

I don't know what that is. All I know is that one. Like I don't know any other dog. like all the places I've lived, it's never been I I I can't speak on that because I I I don't I don't have that. But I do but I do understand that. Yeah, I do sh that.

You know, I do understand the question about that. I question that as well. Um, you know, I don't um I can bring it back to the board and you know, is it rabies vaccination that people are concerned about?

Vaccinate. Yeah. And There was another one I can't remember there. I don't know if there's another vaccination that but mostly rabies and vaccinations but there's I don't know if there's any way to that we we questioned if there was another way to monitor that and they said that there was not but but the system would be you know similar to the beaches and that we you know we charge a fee to go to the beaches but

that's they basically the fee for the beaches is parking you know is basically a parking fee I mean you can't register your dog in town unless they have rabies vaccination, right? But some dogs are not some dogs are not registered. Some dogs and that that was well that's not legal. You have to register your dog in town.

I understand that. I I understand. Could they like could there be like if you're honestly trying if like the vaccination is the issue then there should be well I don't know what their membership form looks like but you just need to give and I think that's every town you've got to register your dog I agree but if if someone shows up at the dog park can gain access to the facility

and they choose not to register the dog there's nobody there monitoring right if somebody there's nobody there monitoring if a dog can get into the you know uh so how how do you get into the park? How do you have a key if you you have a key if there'll be a fob? So the so it's going to be like a fob that they're going to be able to swipe to get into the

So if so if one pays the fee you get a fob, right? And you can get and you can get and so we you know there's it's it's there's other discussion on it we're asking for because there's other you know we're trying to you know there's no uh electricity there. So that that's one problem because we want to see if somebody how will we know even if an incident happens between two dogs

uh you know if there's a fight or one injures one dog injures another. That was a question that was brought up. We'd like to be able to monitor who's at the park who's at the the park because there's no there's no one there monitoring that. So it doesn't prevent dogs from getting injured in there.

Yeah. It doesn't this this this system does not prevent that because we can't keep track of who's at the park and you know we all have a fob and it could be your dog and your dog there but we don't know who's you know so so it's I think it's you know something that we're going to you know we're looking into more about getting a little bit more information on so

but I'll bring this back to the board yeah For me, this is getting more and more upsetting for me.

Yeah, this was none of this was discussed when we reviewed this project about charging fees, limited access.

Uh I understand the concern on rabies and dogs, but the fee they're charging is going to maintenance. That was never discussed.

Uh that the park department now needs a maintenance fund to maintain the doggy park. That was never part of the part of the project. My issue again is public funds went to do that. I'm a taxpayer and I can't get in that facility unless I have a dog that's registered and vaccinated. I can get into a beach even though they charge a fee. I can walk to any beach into town. Uh I can walk onto

the D landing even though there's a fee to use your boat. I can walk into a lot of facilities uh that charge a fee. uh and this should be the same I think. Um you know certainly what can we do now?

We can certainly send the message that if any future funds are going to be uh allocated for a project or park some you know the tough questions are going to come out because I don't want to get uh be in this situation again where we find out after the fact that we're limiting uh the access um the safety you know you know Joan was talking about you know they're concerned about the dogs well

I'm concerned about my grandkids going down the beach on after the season uh is over and there's no lifeguards that's a conscious choice choice that we make as grandparents and parents or individuals and we use the phys facility and it should be the same for the dog park. I don't want to go in there because the dogs aren't okay. Don't use the facility if you can't prove the dogs are vaccinated or you know we need to

protect the animals. No one's protecting my grandchildren when they go to the beach after hours. There's no cameras there. There's no one there to save them.

What's the concern with the dog park?

It's I think the wrong approach. Uh this is not the project that I thought we were getting for the uh for the town.

Chris. Yeah.

Yeah. I was I agree with everything that John said and on top of that, if they were if they're so concerned about the safety, then why aren't they putting the money towards a monitor or somebody to check that the dogs are all vaccinated and stuff, but it seems like if they're getting a a license, which they have to have, but you know, if you if you're concerned about safety, then get

somebody to check each dog coming in and use the money for that. But I don't think a fee should be charged at all.

Are you talking about a staff person?

Talking public staff, right? At least the money that they're saying is because of safety would go towards a safety solution and not maintenance.

But I still don't think that the fees appropriate.

This this project has been around for a number of like years. Um, and you know, it's um, so I'm also thinking that it probably would be helpful to go back to our files and kind of look at, you know, what was the original description of this project and and how it was going to be supported. I mean, goes back years and I understand things can change, but it might be a good

good to get, you know, look at our what we know about the background. Um and I was not part of this committee when the when the so I don't know what you know my colleague you know you know was you know and I know that wasn't presented I know we were not aware of the charges until I think it was our last meeting which was was in June. We were not aware of it

until that's I I don't recall exactly when the meeting was, but we we just we we just learned about it.

So that is not something that the board was made aware of prior [clears throat] to Yeah.

the presentation.

Yeah. So I I would suggest um uh let's let's first kind of research our record for this project. What was what was you know what was proposed presented? you know, etc. Um, and let me come back for a September meeting with this is what our files say. Um, and then, you know, I think then we can talk about how to follow up with, you know, um maybe even both the park board, you

know, and and the dog park folks. Um, but let's let's just kind of make sure we're clear about what our record probably get what our record says.

Yeah, I agree. Before we speak up, we're going to know the facts. My recollection, buddy, is that this was a volunteer organization and it was going to be run by volunteers. I don't recall any mention that it was going to be run by the park department and the park department was responsible uh for the maintenance. My recollection was that this volunteer organization was going to uh it find

and that doesn't appear to be it seems as though controlling it and they you know want to charge fees but uh the fees are going to the maintenance um anyway let's see what we yeah let's look at that I think we all it was years ago we all value the the public access in any of the projects and so is it is concerning if this is looks to be limiting. Um, you could be a dog owner

in town and a registered dog, but you wouldn't necessarily you wouldn't be able to walk onto the you wouldn't be able to use the park. And that's we need to really understand um and question that.

And I think there was a question. I think it because the Dartmouth parks is a regional park.

I think there may be I I think other people can get access out outside of the not limited to Dartmouth uh residents.

Correct.

Uh you know and the and certainly the entire park was funded with state funds and other funds besides the town.

But this particular project was partially funded by CPC money that we as taxpayers pay into.

Okay. and um I can't access at the moment I won't be able to access it.

Okay. So, I'll go report back.

The minutes are not up yet from them.

Yeah, I'll report back for our September meeting. This is what our kind of documentation shows. Um Okay. [snorts] [clears throat] Um, the next thing I have is the um the sign for the um cultural center. Um, and they sent I think I we distributed that. Oh, that's a nice color one. I have this bland one. Mine is little.

Yeah, yours is little. Um and um the one thing and this kind of another thing that's been around for a long time that then you're sort of like, you know, probably worth revisiting. Um so the the sign has first they were looking for um the CPC logo. I said, 'Well, we we never really adopt we never adopted a logo years ago. We never adopted a logo.

Um and um and yes, our sign requirements in our standard agreement say use our logo.

We've never we never really adopted one.

Um, [clears throat] but our signage uh requirement also has this phrase in it and it struck me as like you know that's probably something we need to revisit as well. So they are correct in um in their signage because we say they need to acknowledge community preservation funds use for this project. So they do and they use the language that's actually in the standard agreement that I think we've

had in place since I think like 2009 or 2010 a while. Um which says this project is supported by funds from the community pres preservation committee Dartmouth Mass.

Well really I think kind of it's really town meeting that awards the funds. We don't we we um we don't give anybody funds. We make our recommendations to town meetings.

So, it's probably language that ought to be um fixed in our standard agreement.

Um but um I don't know if they've already gone ahead and kind of have produced this sign. Um, if they have, I think my recommendation is it is exactly what we said. Um but if they hadn't yet um I was going to recommend that um the sea committee would be willing to um uh revise that sentence to be something like this project is supported with community by or with community preservation act funds from the town of

Dartmouth.

Um, and if folks are um fine with that, so the the sign reader would be this project is supported with Community Preservation Act funds from the town of Dartmouth. And folks, I make a motion that we would recommend that they uh revise their sign.

You could go a little bit further as we don't it's not 100% the town of Dama.

They're a state matching fund. So, you know, how far do we chase it? Do we recognize this, too? So, um, at least in our agreement, we want to disapprove it, but yeah.

Yeah. So, is there a second on that? And or moved. So, moved.

Right. Any other discussion? And I I will if they've if they've done the sign, that's fine. Uh, if it hasn't kind of gone to production, then we'll see if we can tweak it. Um, all in favor? I opposed. No. Um, but it reminded me like I probably should dust off that our standard agreements. We've gone through at least two or three town administrations since that document was put together.

Probably not bad to just take a look at it and uh um tweak that. Um, [clears throat] if there's anybody interested in working on that, a couple of us could just look at that and just mark it up. Um, and we probably would want to check in with Gary um because there's [clears throat] some references to town uh policies um on the use of CPA funds and stuff like that, accountants kind of policy.

we should probably check in with him and says that was something that was put together um years ago. Is that something that they still actually refer to? Is he um but if there are any volunteers who want to read this document and mark it up um I'm certainly going to do that. Um at least I will. But if anybody else wants to volunteer, I'll take a look at Okay. Yeah. I think lit literally John I

think it's pull it off the you know look at it on the website and and just read it for common sense and clarity.

Um it's probably it hasn't been been looked at for so long. We've probably have learned things.

Was it listed under the website?

Uh yeah it'll be the um um the uh grant agreement I think it's called on the website.

And then some of it might be just common sense and clarity.

Some of it might be things you would mark and say, "Are we still is the town still doing that?" You know, when it references uh one thing or the other. And I'll do the same. Um [cough] and uh and maybe what we can do is just be a little subcommittee and just compare notes via email or something like that. Um so just to be official if um can I have a motion to

appoint John Susa and I um to review be a working subcommittee to review the standard um um program agreement andou and come back with any recommendations for revisions a future date.

So moved. Okay.

Second.

Any discussion? All in favor?

Fine.

Okay.

All right. And then

[clears throat and cough] Okay.

[snorts] we discussing the you skipped the um askman valley.

Oh yeah, if I just kind of I'm sorry I got I was looking at my paper and I reordered reordered our agenda. So I thought you were waiting for the end.

Well um I don't think it was too planned myself.

Yes, but let's just Yeah, let's go back to that item. I wasn't didn't want to forget it, but I kind of jumped ahead with the other uh items in uh number four.

Okay. So, we had the pass commandset valley uh application which was withdrawn from consideration for the June town meeting and now um uh Cody Hadad and Mr.

Rasmmanson from uh Buzzard Bay coalition have asked that um this be considered for the October town meeting. Um there are occasions in the past where we have done that with applications and we've received them. Um but um they were u held over for another town meeting.

So, and we had talked about it in February and so I had let folks know I given a copy of the the issues that we had brought up. But first, just to open up conversation on this proposal and may I have another tomato, please?

No.

Oh, man.

Are we are we going for it here?

Yes. open open for there's nothing in here that uh Concom has actually agreed to hold the CR on this and we know there's like a capacity issue there. So it states that they will.

Mhm.

Um but there's no letter from them.

There's I didn't Well, at least I didn't see anything, right, that says they will agree to do it.

Y and to me that's a that's an issue because we know they're at capacity.

Mhm. So, we need to get I think what we had thought that probably rings true still from back in February that we need a letter from the conservation commission that they will hold the restriction or what their plan is for the restriction being held by the town because they they can also choose to um uh join jointly hold it with another entity.

And then my notes from February say that this would need to be amended for the town to be the co-licant. Is that what that letter from Cody did?

Um yeah, we have an email, but I think we can get a letter. We should something more get something on a letter head. Yeah.

Yeah.

And I know we talked about where is the public access, where's the parking. I just remember there being a lot of open questions last time. Mhm.

Um there's no PNS.

Um no appraisal.

Mhm.

And then I I would like to see better due diligence on now that we've um been through the June town meeting. the community support and outreach section.

Mhm.

Um in the application basically says that Buzzard Bay Coalition has a lot of members and some of them live in Dartmouth and that they're going to kind of rely on CPC to get the word out and just doing our due diligence and looking back to Junetown meeting. Um, I think they can do better than that.

And what is there anything specific to either ask or recommend?

Well, I I mean that's the hard part.

Like I I think it would be um ownorous to have to send letters to all the abutters.

[snorts] Um so I don't I don't know what the solution there is, but just sort of like getting ahead of um problems we saw in Junetown meeting about the how aware the community is about the proposals that are in front of us because there's no statutory requirement for like like you have a zoning and zoning board of appeals kinds of things like that or regulatory requirements for I had a thought about that um based on

the last town meeting which I thought actually was a really constructive town meeting. Um Jessica um I can't pronounce her name right the the the outreach and media person in town. I've been getting emails from her and I don't know if some of you all do but I'll get an email which she has a she has an email blast and I will get one about need people who are interested in in Dartmouth water quality or the

town is need is has vacancies in this and I'll get I get an email from her. So she's working off and probably continues to build um a um distribution list. So one of the things that occurred to me, you know, thinking about that town meeting is um you know we our requirement is we like to hold public hearing portion of our meeting to review projects and get comments on projects and we do that by

um putting in the legal notices. Um, but those are things that rarely people people read. I mean, you know, we've we've met the letter of what you need to do for a public meeting uh or hearing.

Um, but I'm wondering if if she would be willing to, you know, when we have something like, you know, we're going to at our September meeting, we're going to have a um public hearing on the following proposals that are before the committee.

and that she puts that in a little email blast. [snorts] Um, would she be willing to do that? Um, that would satisfy me.

Yeah. And I think just like a little more due diligence on Yeah. And a little note that if you want to, you know, see more the proposal, copy the proposals on our web page. That was another thing that people weren't aware that you know you can go to our web page you would have seen all five you know proposals that were under consideration and so what we would do

here is we put that take those down put this one up uh because now we're considering it um but that that might get more of a word out yeah John I agree everything Sue was Um, for me the big white elephant in the room is the 40B was approved for the entire parcel.

Now the town is looking at through and Buzz's Bay acquiring approximately 50% of the parcel.

What happens to the 40B? I'm sure it's not going away, but what does that look like?

Um, is the 40B going to come back? I And again, I don't remember the particular list. Let's say off the top of my, you know, there was a 75 units in there now may is it going to get reduced by half?

Yeah.

Are they going to come back to the table again and now with a modified plan and squeeze 75 units into half the parcel? Um I don't think they were ever going to build on this parcel, were they? This is like along the riverfront that's like down.

Um I Yeah, I don't know.

I believe I'm not sure.

Yeah.

On that.

I didn't think I I thought this was my understanding was it was a separate parcel over where Okay. So then the biggie E uh is where is the public access to this when you're looking at their u aerials that they provided. Um I lost we did have a I did have a note from February that says does this require subdivision?

Yeah, that was part of what we talked about.

That's a question that we have for them.

Yeah. Um that still because I I would have liked to see this this revised and updated.

Uh yeah, if there are any revisions and update, I mean, we we're going to send them another review letter. Yeah.

It'd be a shame that apparently this was in the works behind the scenes in conjunction with the 40B process. Um and we don't have we've got an they provided us an aerial view of the two lots. We know there's a series of roads to the 40Bs, but do those roads go right to the conservation area where public access could be gained through those roads through a trail system? Was any provisions made there to connect

this? It would be a shame uh that the foresight wasn't there for public access through uh cuz I believe the 40B is going to be it's not going to be private. I think the roads are going to be accepted to town. But anyway, when you look at it, the only access um is to the north. Um there's conservation land there. It looks like maybe 100 foot strip, but being familiar with that property, there's no there's a

stream there. It's wet. Um you can't you can't walk it. Um and when you look at the big picture, I'm hoping there is a plan to really open up that area to some nice trails.

Um, I grew up not too far from there and I watched that all the time when we were kids and go down to the river and go rafting and there's a little bridge over there. Um, and there was some old trails back then now. And it would just be a shame when you look at uh the big picture how many parcels we got that the water department that coms that we don't open that. You know, they

talk about in their proposal passive recreation, but that including building a trail network. I'm hoping that if the town is going to come up with a million dollars that they are looking at building a uh a trail network back there.

Mhm.

I'm all for conserving that piece of land. I think that's a good thing. I just want to make sure that we do our due diligence on You know, again, it's another big ticket item.

Yeah. Let me um go over some of these questions that we had in February. Can confirm that they're still relevant.

uh today because this this is our process. We send them invite them to come in September and present um open meeting or public hearing for other people to comment.

Um so we have there are a couple exhibits that need to be completed uh since they haven't done any anything to what we have on file. those still uh completing exhibit G and exhibit H um I believe may still be relevant. So, I'll just confirm that um the town is as co-licant.

They may not be relevant. I can't remember in those sections. Some of those are attesting actually. Take a look here.

It's here. [clears throat]

Yeah, the um Buzzards Bay would need to complete those as co-licricant.

They're a private organization. Um and then we have please note that the town of Dartmouth must be included as a co-licant in order to be awarded CPA funds to purchase the conservation restriction for this property. Please provide a letter so we should get something on letterhead uh from the town indicating that the town is joining the application as a co-sponsor and will accept a CPA award to purchase the

conservation restriction for this property.

Um we have our second question we had then um are there other funding sources for this project? What is the status of securing additional funding? Um, it references private funding.

Yes. So, I think we want to have more uh a little more understanding of that, right?

Yeah. Because they this is um about two let's see about a million million a little more than a million dollars in private funding or other source private funding.

Yeah. I'm guessing they have fundraisers and things like that. So, I'm guessing that's Yeah.

So, buddy, question I have is the um what happens if um the town doesn't want to purchase this? Either the CPC or town meeting turns it down.

Mhm. um through my understanding, this parcel is owned by the same um entity as the 40B.

Mhm.

Um so through the 40B process, was any restrictions put on this property?

Um Mhm. And it's too bad because it seems to me that through the 40B process, it could have been done where this project, you know, it has to remain in open space and you have to allow public access. I know I sat on the planning board for years and and we did that when we approved subdivisions. We had open space parcels and we put deed restrictions on them that they forever

remain open and that they'd be used for passive recreation. Didn't it cost the town a dime?

And you know, it's unfortunate. You know, it's crying over spilled milk now, but Jesus, why didn't the town through the 40b process get this wrapped up without spending a million dollars, $2 million? because you know that's coming from some generous donors that do a lot for this town.

Mhm.

But what happens if we don't Yeah.

do anything? I I suspect I'm hoping it's got to remain open space.

Mhm. So I have what I wrote like what the question for the what if the C what if CPA funds are not approved or [snorts] or less than a million dollars is approved and then well question is were there any restrictions through the 40 process the 40B process place any restrictions on this parcel?

Yeah. Okay.

Are you questioning if it's like if it's buildable John? If it's that that portion of land may is it buildable? Is that right? Exactly.

You know, no.

Uh if it's Yeah.

Was through the 40B process, was that, you know, phase two, phase three, uh possible or was it labeled unbuildable or was there a restriction on it that it had to remain open?

[clears throat] Okay, I will add those questions to this letter. Um, we also have please provide a letter from the Dartmouth Conservation Commission indicating the commission has agreed to hold the conservation restriction on this property. Um, please then please provide a copy of the appraisal of the conservation restriction for this property. Um and just reminding them it's our practice

that CPA funds are capped not to exceed the appraised value of the restriction.

Um Mr. Rasmus had contacted me and asked about the timing of that and I said um we would pro you know we probably send them a review letter and it probably will be in there since it was in the February letter.

um that we would be asking the come to September meeting if we followed our process that those steps um but if that you know was still an appraiser couldn't get the work done I said the committee has in the past made um putting a warrant article in front of town meeting contingent upon on certain things and I advised them that this would likely be one of those things if we could not be assured that you know

the appraisal um that there was an appraisal um we you know I said it's easy to withdraw an article from town meeting um you know we would uh we wouldn't be able to go forward but we could keep the process going um but just he he was aware of that he understood that. I said, "But that would be one thing that we might cause to pull the plug at the end of the process." Yeah.

Are there any uh easements on the property?

Mhm.

So, my recollection of and I didn't look at any great details, but through that 40B process they were developing this site, um you know, it all drains down to the valley. Um they were proposed some drainage ponds.

um on the west end of the parcel. Is that in this parcel those drainage barns?

And do they have easements to that? Um and if those are there, what does it do for future lo? You look at the aerials that was the golf course. That's not labeled wetlands. That's not treed. Um you know, could it be used for a soccer field?

Mhm.

Um Mhm. So I'll ask about the easements.

Yeah.

I suspect there may be some some drainage easements on that and there were some quite large facilities from what I recall uh to handle that uh that project.

Mhm.

Um, we also had from February, um, please provide a copy of the purchase and sales agreement for the proposed conservation area.

Yeah.

And that we and I think this is what you had also mentioned, John, a little bit earlier. Um, please provide more details on the types of passive and active recreation envisioned for the property.

And then we had the question of how will the public access the proposed conservation area? Will parking be provided and if so, where will it be located?

And then we had how will the property be maintained and managed uh to return to the reference natural forest condition.

I think that's somewhere in this in this proposal.

That was a question or that was an answer.

Yeah. Um that is something that is mentioned.

They said they're going to let it go before. Yeah.

To forest. How are they going to what does that mean? How are they going to maintain or manage it to re return to natural forest condition?

Is it possible to require them to address those issues in writing prior to our next meeting instead of coming with a presentation? Yeah, I can ask and see if they can get it to us like you know say you know five days before you know certain few days before our meeting. Yes. And and we'll get it digitally so that it can go out to everybody. Okay.

Yeah.

So I think last time they just did a presentation.

Yeah. Nice to be able to read it ahead of time.

[snorts]

to those questions and they have the asking about the easements and then asking about the if what would be the impact of not having the CPA funds approved or or approved for a lesser amount. Um did the 4DB process place any restriction on this parcel?

Um if and then when we ask about the funding the question is what happens to the 42 project. Um we would like any updates revisions to the proposal.

Um and then when we ask about public access, we will also specifically um you know will there be um a is there a plan? Will there be uh a trail network um on this parcel connects to the other the other adjacent parcel? I think that was your point, John. Well, none of them have a u a trail network that is maintained by anybody. Certainly, it's been decades since I've been back there, but there

was one main trail that went over an old bridge.

Oh, yeah. Yeah, that one um two I beams over, but yeah, that one used to be an old road and that was always m not maintained, but you could walk through it. I'm sure that still exists to some degree, you know.

Yeah. Yeah. And I think um you're talking about like the ancient I mean like a really like one of the really really early projects of the CPC.

No, that's way down in the Gly woods.

Yes. Okay.

Stone bridge. This is was concrete.

Oh, really? Okay.

There was a couple I beams that went across. It was a It was a bridge that somebody farmer or somebody put up.

Yeah. Yeah.

Um you know, you got to walk. It's not safe. I mean, it's it's an I-beam this wide. As kids, we used to cross it all the time, but but it's further down.

There is a there was an old road that went through there, but I got it right.

There's a lot of land back there between the uh Concom and the wells back there.

Mhm.

Be beautiful to walk through.

Mhm. Okay.

Anything else we want to add to this letter?

Okay. Um and so we would have so our September meeting would include a public hearing. So we need to um Yeah.

And then you got the holiday before our meeting. So you can the little complications like that. And I'm going to add that I'm not going to be here.

Oh yeah.

I'm gone from August 31st and I get back on the 8th.

That's the meeting.

Meaning the eth. Oh yeah. Yeah. First of the 8th. Okay. Well, we we'll we will we will do our best to keep track of this. Is is there um someone who could be asked to do this in your place?

Maybe you could check around on that just to stand in because it will be um we'll want somebody who can take the minutes and I mean it's all recorded.

Mhm.

Details, but um you wouldn't want to change the meeting, would you? Another week.

What's the warrant deadline?

What's I'm sorry.

What's the warrant deadline? like when do we have to um we'll be past that but they'll they'll accept this I'm sure. Um so they you know I said to to Cody you know we we would do our regular process which would mean that we'd be making recommendations on for the warrant in September. Um so um which is usually we make those in August. So be running a little a month behind. Um but yes. Well,

so I think that will be okay. So the question would be whether or not we it's just it's the prep work. It's getting the um legal ad out.

Yeah. Yeah.

So, possibly the 15th instead of the That's where That's where we're Well, I looked at that earlier because then October the next meeting wouldn't be until October 13th, so it would be almost a month.

Yeah.

Okay. Let's see.

I mean, I can certainly get the legal ad to somebody to post it, get that done.

I would have Do you want to talk about this now?

I could have you um submit the um agenda to someone probably be Melanie.

Mhm.

And then she can post it, too.

Yeah. Yeah.

So, you and I can go over those details.

Okay.

But what do we um what do folks think about um doing our meeting in September on the 15th?

Um and then we'll have full backup support present which is um probably would be certainly make our life ultimately I think easier if folks could do that. Um I could do that.

When is Tom meeting?

Uh I think the 20th of October is that third Tuesday.

So, does that leave us enough time?

Um, we have to have Yeah.

public hearing, all our questions answered and and take a vote.

Take a vote to approve or disapprove.

Yeah.

And then getting the warrant article in their hand is easy after that. But let's just And right now, this is the only applicant.

Yes.

doesn't leave us much room if there's this is um I think there's going to be a lot of questions, a lot of interest I assume from the public and is there going to be potential that something comes up that delays our decision because of still fact that's the that's what I'm afraid certainly that's the risk of it. Yes.

Yes. uh there's a lot of facts to this that you know will have it all for that meeting.

The other is we we go ahead on the eth um see if we can um if if u somebody else can step in.

I would love to have that legal ad in like the 20th or the 27th anyway.

Right.

So that's before I leave.

Okay. So that's the one of the important pieces.

Other thoughts on this? So you know, one of the the sticking with our regular meeting date gives us a little bit of cushion if if there are some issues that come up that need followup or need us to come back together again. Um so certainly the deadline to reserve a article we can meet you know we can put a hold because we know it's coming but it's decision whether we approve or disapprove so

I feel more comfortable if we meet on the 8th that if we don't have all the facts and we've got further questions we can meet again on the 15th. Yeah.

To Yeah. True.

To wrap it up and take the vote to approve or disapprove.

Yeah. Yeah.

That's my opinion. I I Yeah. Okay.

Something this big. I'd hate to be under the gun. Oh, you know, we got to approve it and we don't have all the information.

Yeah.

How How do you feel about doing the minutes from watching the DCTV thing?

Yeah, that won't be a problem.

I mean, I feel I can I can keep track of the the things that we're deciding in the immediate follow-ups. I feel like I feel okay about that, but I certainly couldn't keep track of I would suggest keep it a light agenda.

Yeah. Yeah.

To make it easy on Michelle that it's, you know, just a lighted agenda that Okay.

So, so with the eighth I that's my sounds like we should stick stick to our regular meeting. Okay.

Okay.

So, I will get this letter out.

Um, we'll have the public hearing notice go out.

Um, we'll work on that like tomorrow to get it done.

Great. That would be terrific.

Okay.

Okay.

and you'll post the um you'll put this application up.

Okay.

And then I'm going to follow up with Jessica.

Yeah. She Yeah. and about um put in notice of this.

[snorts]

Okay, great. Thank you.

Okay.

Um, sorry for taking us out of order here.

Okay.

Um, so this puts us back on item five in our agenda, the grant agreements. Uh so our next um step with the projects that have been approved at Junetown meeting is to send folks [snorts] um the grant agreement uh ask them to um enter in um the dispersement schedule that they anticipate just to give us an idea about um how the funds will flow um and then get those executed.

So there is a section of the of our standard MLU and grant agreements where we can put in conditions affecting the release of funds. Um and basically the idea is try not to we we've avoided this uh having money go out prematurely when not everything is in place and that can be pretty messy situation which we have avoided um uh all these years. Um [snorts] so, um I sent out to folks, um

my draft and recommendations and we can just run through these. Um the DCTV phase three the renovations um the conditions for release of funds would be um first they have an executedou um and then um that we would get copies of the um contract uh um the construction contracts. So that's clear that they're awarded the amount of the of the construction has been um kind of established

um and then they can go forward with um invoicing for um uh CPA funds and that there is a 10% hold back on the uh project the total cost of the project.

So I think that would be about 40 46,000 or something like that.

um that we get the close out report before that final 10% of the [snorts] grant is released.

Any questions on um on the DCTV?

If I could have a motion to add the include these conditions in the umou.

[snorts] So moved.

Okay. A second.

Second. Okay. Any other discussion? All in favor?

I opposed. That's unanimous.

The Crapo field lighting uh executed grant agreement. When we do projects with the town, again, this goes way back to when these documents were first standardized. When we do documents with the town, they are memorandums of understanding. the attorney at the time who had worked on these documents kind of was making the point that [snorts] the town doesn't grant money to itself.

At least that that was my recollection of why the town that the terms are similar um but we call them something [snorts] different. Um so here this is an outside entity TYAA.

Um so it's a grant agreement. Um the one thing I put in here is uh a town letter certifying procurement process for the contractor selection.

um thought that would probably be helpful in a project like this because the DYA is going to be the um entity responsible for um the bid process and contracting for it. So it seemed to me that it's still town funds, town property. we probably want to make sure that that process has been correctly done. Um and then um executed contract for the work before money is expended um and a 10% hold back um for a closeout

report that gets accepted.

I'll go over the others. We'll wait for um John to come back before we vote. Um the V field conservation restriction executed because this is with the town that's purchasing the restriction.

Um here it's just the transaction.

Um so what we would need is a copy of the recorded conservation restriction.

Um, I think I think that's I think that would be fine. Um the um we'll see the parties I think are um I think well attuned to each other. I think that will be fine. But if there's anything that they might come back about is literally you have to um I think the way the transaction works is um you buy the restriction and then the restriction gets recorded.

So I think it goes that way. So if you think technically um money would change hands before the restriction is recorded.

So I could you know we we get around the table that happens then it's recorded.

So um if that be the case then what I would suggest is we would then do the 10% thing which is okay if money has to happen at I moved on to the uh we didn't take any vote on crapo I wanted to wait for you to come back John but I just talking about the vault field and that one um the the only thing that has to happen there is the restriction is

purchased. Um so what I'm putting forward as a the release of funds is the restriction is recorded in the registry.

Um, but I was just explaining that could be because you have to buy the restriction and then record it that the parties um, uh, the co the Buzzards Bay coalition in the town, the parties may require that there's actual the purchase happens first. And if that was the case, then we would allow for 90% of the funds to be released and then 10% held back for um the recording, which is what we

do with other land deals. Um but in other land deals that that the actual purchase of the property is happening at the same time. This property has already changed hands. It's now just uh it's now just the selling of the restriction. So it could be that Buzzard's Bay is, you know, doesn't need the you know there's they're just going to sell the property rights, the development rights. So there they could

wait for all of that to happen with the recording, but we'll we'll see. Anyway, I I probably overthinking this, but is uh 10% on a land deal reasonable or is that unreasonable?

This is typically what we've done.

I know, but 10% is typically Yeah.

You know, when when you're doing construction and it's to hold something over the contractor at the end, that's not the case here.

Yeah. So that's why it is it reasonable to do 10% on a project like this?

Um I'm just posing the question. What's what was the award? I can't remember.

It's it was 575,000.

The way the way I have it here is the no money would change. No funds would be released until after the restriction was signed and recorded at the registry, which I think is is the best kind of way. So once it's all done, then point can it can it be done that way?

Well, that's that's that's the one thing I'm thinking like, well, you know, the parties tie in somebody's hand. Well, they can't do anything, you know. Yeah, maybe in this case because there's no there's no uh there's no property there's there's no changing of ownership. This is the owner is selling their development rights. So yeah, that's true.

Yeah. So it may be okay. And the coalition has no intention to develop the property. So they're not on any kind of like gee, I I need this to know it's going to happen. So it might be okay in this case, but in in some other transaction where there's actually a change in ownership of the property.

Yeah. That people need to see money exchange and theou can obviously be revised if it's Yeah.

if there's an issue.

Yeah.

With it. So I don't have a problem with the way you're proposing it then.

All right.

Um let's drop back to Crapo. Um and so as I explained as you had to leave John, it's because DIAA is handling the funds and the procurement, but it's town funds and it's a town property. We should just make sure that the town ha has reviewed and signed off on the procurement process. It was done properly basically in because there are public procurement laws and stuff that uh that DYA doesn't usually work with.

Um so folks are um if I have a motion to include [snorts] this uh the executed for the Crapo lighting project uh the conditions of an executed grant agreement a town letter certifying procurement process for the contractor selection the executed construction contract and then there would be a 10% hold back on the close for the close out report.

So moved.

Second.

Okay. Any other discussion?

Okay. All in favor?

I oppose. That's unanimous.

Um and then Deval Field. Is it Daval or Dval?

Dval.

Deval. Thank you. Dval field. Uh conservation restriction. Uh an executed. The conditions we would u include would be an executedou.

Um this is for release of funds and the copy of the recorded conservation restriction.

If I get motion for that.

So moved.

Second.

Second. And another discussion. Okay. All in favor?

I opposed. No.

uh the cultural center. Um I kind of this is structured uh exactly the same way as crepo fuel lighting.

It's kind of the same scenario. We have a um public funds, public prop uh town owned property, but um um the cultural center is the entity responsible for um selecting a contractor and overseeing a project. Um so again in this for the same rationale it would be very helpful that have that town review the procurement process and award process that was used just to make sure everything was fine with the awarding of

the u contracts or contract.

Um so uh could I have a motion to include in the grant agreement the conditions for release of funds um being executed grant agreement a town letter certifying procurement process for the contractor selection an executed contract construction contract and there would be a 10% hold back for the closeout report.

So moved.

Okay. A second.

Second.

Any other discussion on that? Okay. Uh all in favor?

I opposed. All right. That's unanimous.

And then the agricultural preservation fund. Um this is a com this is a very different document because of its um it's a fund rather than a specific project. Um the coalition has done a lot of work around similar um kinds of agreements where trust funds uh housing trust funds are created or capitalized with CPA funds.

So they had a sample of um um to use for housing trust funds and I talked to uh Stuart Sagenor the coalition um about uh you know was there any examples for an A uh fund and they didn't have one but he agreed that the the same approach um it would make sense to take the same approach u to the A fund has is been taken with housing trusts. So I took the

housing trust kind of document that they have on their website and did some revisions to try to um make it fit for what the A fund would be here in Dartmouth. Um and he's going to get back to me on kind of what that looks like.

um I tried to keep certain features that are pretty standard to our own terms in our own agreements. So um one of the so there are some conditions there's a section on you know the conditions for release of funds would be um here it's an executedou um the executed on the fund administration this is something that folks have already kind of drafted out have been working on which is just that

all the parties involved in the administration of the fund are clear about their roles and responsibilities.

And this is something the agricultural commission folks have been working on with the town. Um and then um a first year budget for the fund. Um and that will be um important because it starts to set aside you can use some of the fund CPA funds for administrative purposes um consistent with the CPA. So there's some questions I have for Stuart about how to define where the limits are on

that. Um, and so it might be if there's um um property that needs um a soil analysis for the fund to make a decision about whether or not this is um an agricultural piece of land that should be should be preserved. Um can the CPA funds be used in the same way that we have an administrative budget? Can they be used for something like that? So, um the details of that, I'm going to come

back to the committee with what this agreement looks like and we'll look at it in total. But um I anticipate since there will be some as some CPA funds that can be used for some administrative purposes um then we'll probably want to see a budget just to see in the first year what's the how will the funds how much of the funds will be set aside for um uh the APRs and acquiring properties and and restrictions.

and how much of the funds are anticipated to be spent on the administrative things that might be consultant or uh that kind of stuff. So more to come on that but the reasons why that's there is I anticipate that there's probably that potential uh the agreement will need to define where those limits are but um that's what this looks like. Um, so buddy, yeah. Will the CPC approve every invoice for

anything in that trust fund or everything in that trust fund that once the money's gone, we don't, you know, what do we vote?

We Well, we we get Yeah, we're still responsible for the oversight, the accounting of it. So, it would be like the house. It's like the housing trust money that the town Dartmouth has. So once a year we get figures from Donna. This is what this is how much CPA funds are there. We spent you know X dollars on a down payment for but that's just reporting that we we won't have any control once the funds

are transferred. Um um no not in the decision making. So in the agreement that we're trying to draft up some of this is is is trying to address what do we need to know when um to understand the activity of the fund. What do we need to know uh annually or where do we need to you know is do we need to know well that's just a report we wouldn't be

taking we they could be correct me if I'm wrong they could be buying a farm CPC or Paso CPC is totally opposed to but we don't have a say at that point the funds the right the egg commission is the one responsible for that scenario will never happen once it's gone it's it's it's theirs to use to as they see as the checks and balances were and that may be

put in the mu I think was wasn't there a subcommittee of the ad commission that was going to review and recommend purchasing the mou that that process is followed before yes they release funds yeah and that's thatou on fund administration cuz that that in that it's they're working on defines who who is that advisory group, what's their what is their role. Um the statute only gives the egg commission the authority

to decide how the funds would be used.

Um but we have that still have that responsibility for understanding the activity because let's say the ad commission went out and you know bought a department store. Um you know we'd want to know that they did that and then we'd say you got to give us that money back because you can't use the CPA funds that way. Um so we need to know their activity.

Good luck at that point.

Yeah. Yeah. We can give you a 10% discount in that store, but that's all you're ever going to see.

Maybe they bought a tractor supply.

Yeah.

Um um but we have provisions in these agreements of how to claw that back and then we would say that one um you know, you shouldn't tractor supply is not what we intended. They use the funds and so we'll now invoke section blah blah blah and um you know, give us some money back. Um so anyway, we just need to so this agreement will willly work through some of the details of how will we stay

in touch with the activity. Um how do we properly kind of set where the limits are of how the A fund can use CPA funds because the A fund can accept donations from anybody. You know, private donor can say you got an egg fund in Dartmouth. I like I like farm preservation. and I'll give you a million dollars which they can accept with no strings or certainly not will have no CPA strings attached to it. So

this, you know, it's important to define kind of what the strings are that go with CPA funds because it wouldn't necessarily be true of other funds the A fund might uh have in it at any point in time. Um, so I don't think we need to do anything with these conditions because we're going to look at the whole agreement before we pass it on um to the ad commission in the town to um go over

um but um Stuart Sagar um was on vacation. He only got back yesterday. So he said he he didn't get to it before he went away, but he will get back to me on it. So, we'll definitely have something for September, which is um something that's I think worked worked out in pretty good detail at that point. And it would behoove us just to go through it section by section to see how it works and stuff.

And our our is in town council.

Okay.

Holding pattern.

All right. good to know where it is. Um so I'll be coming back with that in September.

Okay. Um our financial report um Donna Donna Fernandez is excellent.

Um and so she has sent us um and I forwarded to you all our report on our finances ending as of June 30th. Um and uh what I do is update the project balances. So I think I'm kind of up to date with that. in her report. Um the things I always look at is kind of what's what does our search charge revenue look like? um based you know we have estimates but now this is this

number of u $981,29162 um is um going to be pretty accurate um over you know sometimes there are late collections that come in sometimes there are abatements that get processed that number can change a little bit, but it doesn't change much at all. By the time you get to June 30th, the collections in town are are um um quite good in terms I think the percentage that they collect on time. So um so

that's a much more real figure than than um estimated. So I always look at that um and sometimes and actually I al in my spreadsheet I'll go back and make adjustments to previous year receipts uh when there have been some of those kind of adjustments like you can see in 2025 there's an additional uh for fiscal year 25 there was an additional 5,000 that was collected in fiscal year 26. Um so our fund balance um

in the housing as of June 30th 367,08360 in um historic preservation 636,18485 open space $219,15054.3 and in unrestricted as of June 30th 3,649,24.14.

The town June town meeting is the commitments for fiscal year [snorts] 27.

So those commitments are made as of July 1st. Um, so the other thing I had um passed out was just what our FY27 budget looks like. Um, and um, so I take the number for estimated uh, for the I take the actual searchcharge revenue for fiscal 26. So, I took that number off of Donna's report and we usually are estimating we just add 2% to that number to estimate the upcoming uh receipt. So,

we projecting about a million in searchcharge revenue for fiscal 27.

Um 15% match. We assume we got 16.9% last fiscal year, but at 15% that would be about $147.

1914 147 and1 $195.

Um, [clears throat] our admin budget is 35,000.

So the net revenue we project for fiscal 27 is 1,113,111.

Um [clears throat] so going into fiscal um uh this fiscal year so as of June 30th I went through those fund balances. Our fund balances totaled $4,871,000 uh $627.

So, um, we effectively had available for projects 5,984,738 going into the fiscal year.

Um we made um commitments of uh 3.5 million three three,589,694 at June town meeting which would um projected um balances since um what happens is once we we've did our reserves those accounts don't change. So the historic preservation reserve other than making any commitments out of o for October town meeting they are then locked in for the rest of the year because there's no only town meeting can

move money in and out of these reserves.

So assuming um let's assume there were no October projects, we would be looking at a projected balance of $2,395,44 uh if there were no October projects. Um and that's basically the [cough] balance [clears throat] of the reserves and then how much more net how much more searchcharge revenue would come in over the course of the year which affects the unrestricted account.

Um I took it upon myself.

We we're now looking at a proposal for a million dollars.

um it would um most of it if not most of it would come from the unrestricted reserve. So, what I did is just um if we were to um make the recommendation to commit a million dollars um at the October meeting um that would reduce our projected balance for fiscal uh for June 30th um by a million dollars. Um, so we'd be one $1,395,44.

Um, so just to get a sense of where that if we did that where that might leave us, I did the [snorts] the um um projection of available balances [clears throat] but showed you but in the context of the history of available balances.

So every year I look at Donna's report which tells us how much money are in the are in our balances, our reserves as of June 30th. That is the blue part of these columns.

The red part is the searchcharge revenue. So that's how much money um comes in. And so any any of the historical is is actual numbers that have come in through the accountants report.

Green part is the state match and any previous fiscal year. Um so from 26 on back those are actual numbers.

Um, and when you add all those three things together, our what we have in the bank, what we collect in revenue, what the state gives us, that is basically what we go into each year with projecting for available money available for projects.

So, with the million, if we were to do the million dollar uh commitment for October town meeting, this is what fiscal 28 would look like.

[clears throat] So, I just want to give folks a historic p perspective on where where we would land. Um, and if we didn't do the October, if we did no commitments in October, just kind of bump that up by a million dollars. that little bar, that blue part would grow by a million and we would be up somewhere in the uh three and a half as opposed to two and a half or um

so anyway, just to give you some perspective on where we might land and what is how's that looked in the course of um history of the CPA fund at least going back to um what's that 2010 or fiscal year 2010? 10.

Any questions on that? You know, I'll make sure we have this for um September meeting as well, but I thought I'd just kind of throw that out now for any reflection.

Okay.

Um, if there's no other business, I think we can entertain a motion to adjurnn.

So moved.

Second.

Second. Shall we discuss this for a few more minutes?

Let's take a vote. All in favor? I I Okay. Any oppose? No one wants to stay any longer than this.