Finance Committee Meeting

Minutes – August 16, 2004

Town Hall – 7:30 p.m.

 

Members Present:  Brian Fitzgerald, Kenneth Goldberg, Charles Goodman, David

       Hearne, Jonathan Hitter, Paul Pietal, Gloria Rose (Hamilton)

               Absent:   Michael Feldman, David Fixler, Ira Miller, Gregory Sydney

 

1.      Conservation Commission presentation for Fall Town Meeting on Article 7 on the status of Rattlesnake Hill by Peg Arguimbau.

 

2.      Not a priority by the State to spend money on this land.  The Conservation Commission then needed to broaden the Article for other groups to come up with money.  Some discussion because of wording if money didn’t go to the Park.  Land not tied to go to Borderland Park and does not need to annex to Park.  Town can keep land—trying to protect property.

 

3.      It was approved that 6 million would be borrowed, 1 ½ million by Water Department, equaling 7 ½ million and the State would come up with the other money.  The present administration will not spend half of that money.  The Commission met with Sen. Joyce, et al.  Not a positive meeting.  Contacted the owners and they are still interested in selling to Town.

 

4.      In 1983-85 the Con. Comm. first started to contact owners to buy property for the Town for 3 million dollars.  Town couldn’t afford it.  The Commission has been trying for a long time to acquire this land.

 

5.      Arguimbau:  Option to buy part of the property.  If someone can help with purchase.  May have to buy some parcels.  80% for Town, but not 20%.  Rewording of this Article allows 20% to be parceled and nothing from State.  Annex to our own existing conservation land, not Borderland Park.  Money would be going for the same purpose—preserve land.  Trying to get whole parcel.

 

6.      Rose:  Other investors will buy part and develop for houses or will they keep  as conservation land?

 

7.      Arguimbau:  Other alternatives for purchase of the land might provide 10 acre lots, ¾ acre for house, 9 acres restricted for conservation.  Other areas such as Dover and Needham do this commonly.  Other opportunity to get outside funding to accomplish this.

 

8.      Rose:  Is anyone interested?

 

9.      Arguimbau:  Trustees of Reservations are showing most interest.

 

10.  Rose:  Are the owners of this land receptive?

 

11.  Arguimbau:  Stephen Striar has been contacted that the Town is still interested.  He hasn’t said don’t do it.

 

12.  Fitzgerald:  Are owners holding price at 15 million?

 

13.  Arguimbau:  They may go up, but are holding right now at 15 million.

 

14.  Goldberg:  The Article states a portion of the property.  The way it is worded, if the Town wanted to buy 30% and spend 7 ½ million for that, instead of having the whole property for 7 ½ million.  Should state no less than 80%.  Worth 7 ½ million for whole property.

 

15.  Arguimbau:  In order to do the sale, the Town needs to come up with 15 million.  We won’t buy 30% to preserve entire property.

 

16.  Hitter:  Striar won’t split property?

 

17.  Arguimbau:  They haven’t indicated they will break up the property.  We may only end up controlling a portion of it.

 

18.  Goldberg:  Substantially negative easements for preserving property.

 

19.  Arguimbau:  Wording is open to interpretation.

 

20.  Goldberg:  Have you talked to Nature Conservation?

 

21.  Arguimbau:  In February or March.  Haven’t talked to them recently.  They are concentrating on this much open contiguous space this close to Boston.  Not best area to focus money on.  Hard to make argument to these groups for large area.

 

22.  Hitter:  When may the sellers not accept?

 

23.  Arguimbau:  They may want an answer in October or November.

 

24.  Goodman:  Is Striar doing anything with that property?

 

25.  Arguimbau:  Septic testing.  Not much activity.

 

 

26.  Agimbau:  We hope Reservation may be available to help us.  Under the Conservation Act, 10% of money goes to conservation.  We may be able to get 80% of that money.  We may be able to borrow more money.  We have to wait until November for an answer.  The owners may take money over time—7 ½ million, then the rest over small period of time.  Funds would accrue to access at a later date.  A complicated closure.

 

27.  Hitter:  Can this be sold without a guarantee again?  Come back here, it’s again here’s 7 ½ million, need another 7 ½ million.

 

28.  Arguimbau:  Every effort is being made to do what they want.  State didn’t come through with money.  Commission is trying to pursue outside sources for money.

 

29.  Hitter:  Between now and Town Meeting, no funds available?  No money before.

 

30.  Arguimbau:  If tied to State, not going to happen.  Twice before at Town Meeting to preserve property and once at vote.  Every effort to preserve.  Poor excuse not having right wording not to try on this Article again.  Must have support from Finance Committee.  Crucial to how far we’ve gotten so far.  Will change wording again if needed for clarification.

 

31.  Grasfield:  A time less than two years ago when new State Senator was in for 12 million.  Administration opted not to release money.  Try to get it moving again.  If Town put up half, we will see what can be done.  The flawed Article was being too specific or we can’t proceed.  This one too loose, pursue more flexibility with different parties.

 

32.  Alice Cheyer:  State provided half and Town half.  Portions of property doesn’t need to be in there.

 

33.  Goldberg:  In that approach, the Town wouldn’t end up with 100%.

 

34.  Pietal:  It was unanimous for this Article in 2003.  We saw an impact of purchasing the entire lot.  Portion piece would not be good.  Spend 7 ½ million could buy half and have 200 homes on other half.

 

35.  Arguimbau:  Will try to get Article written as clearly as possible about the portion issue.

 

36.  Pietal:  Can we have 80%?

 

37.  Arguimbau:  Why make a change now?  Indicates to owners and Town that we are interested to do as much as possible.  Under the Article, go to State.  Need to keep options in Article.  We want other financing.  7 ½ million only there if going to the Park.  People would question, “How come it’s not going to Borderland Park?”

 

38.  Pietal:  Overwhelming support in October.  Even if money available, wouldn’t the Striars wait until May?

 

39.  Goldberg:  Too narrow and too restrictive to proceed, and Town doesn’t take property with pertinent negative easements.  Wording was changed to and/or.

 

40.  Arguimbau:  Whole thing or part of it.  Deleted whole.  Kept open for whole just removing Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

 

41.  Grasfield:  If you wait until Spring Meeting, ZBA could have rendered decision in court.  It could be too late in Spring if owners get their decision.

 

42.  Arguimbau:  They could be free to start developing land.

 

43.  Pietal:  Would they not develop if they get purchase price of 15 million?

 

44.  Arguimbau:  Willing to wait until a certain point in time.

 

45.  Goodman:  Will they take 15 million if you come up with it?  Town could have gotten it for 3 million?

 

46.  Arguimbau:  Town said it was too expensive.

 

47.  Goodman:  Any support for it?

 

48.  Arguimbau:  Conservation Commission.

 

49.  Hearne:  Regarding estates of Borderland Park and 40B?  Considered at one point golf course and very large estate-like homes.  Is Striar interested in developing as part of golf course?  Is there a reason to buy by Town?

 

50.  Arguimbau:  Water and Fire Departments, wetlands.  Could not build on part.  It is targeted for open space.

 

51.  Hearne:  Is there reason enough to buy a portion?  If there was, even with 15 million, plan wouldn’t purchase whole of everything?

 

52.  Arguimbau:  Two acres.

 

53.  Hearne:  No value in buying less than 100% of land?

 

54.  Arguimbau:  Would like to buy Hill.  It is beautiful.  There isn’t a purpose for that.

 

55.  Framed by Article for intent.  No splitting by Striar?

 

56.  Fitzgerald:  What if you can’t raise 15 million?  What plan could you have for downsizing?

 

57.  Arguimbau:  Owners know how they’re going to use property.  They will go ahead with their plans if not purchased from Striars for 15 million.

 

58.  Rose:  Either whole or nothing?

 

59.  Arguimbau:  They will not sell for 7 ½ million for half of the land.  If purchase is done for 15 million, there may be estate planning or matching grant since State reneged.

 

60.  Pietal:  Same intent as 2003 financial analysis passed on 7 ½ million.  What the impact would be without wording tied up, the financial information will fall apart.  Another 7 ½ million being looked for.  Nothing would change what we recommended in December meeting.  Key is size of purchase.  To purchase no less than substantially all of the property.

 

61.  Goldberg:  Provided that no less than 90% of the parcel purchased of restricted covenanted land, no less than 90% would be 9 acres restricted.

 

62.  Goodman:  If you say Town has to purchase 80 or 90%, Town would have to come up with 15 million.

 

63.  Arguimbau:  Other groups would come up with money.  Spend 7 ½ million with some other group.  Striar will sell 100% of property for 15 million.  Ten percent to building restricted housing.  Ability to buy many properties.  Gave leeway how much Town will spend and other groups and as long as 100% of property is purchased.

 

64.  Did Town put into so much to be conservation?

 

65.  Arguimbau:  Conservation might.  Who would come in to help with financing?  Need flexibility as to not being tied to State.  Town Counsel to word so that majority of property protected.

 

66.  Pietal:  It is tough selling hypotheses to Town Meeting.  Does not need another election.

 

67.  Arguimbau:  Same purpose.

 

68.  Hearne:  Change terms of borrowing.  How did this Article come about?

 

69.  Arguimbau:  Came out of Gelerman’s office.  Discussion between myself and Gelerman.  When State wasn’t going to come up with money, then we tried to get other people to come up with money.  If State was written in wording, going to take out State word.

 

70.  Rose:  By the Commonwealth and other third party?

 

71.  Arguimbau:  We will have another meeting with Town Counsel Gelerman.

 

72.  OTHER BUSINESS

 

73.  Discussion regarding the June 21 minutes.

 

74.  MOVED and SECONDED to approve the minutes of June 21, 2004.

 

75.  VOTED:  6-0-1.

 

76.  Pietal:  The Planning Board and the Selectmen have been meeting about the South Walpole Street property.

 

77.  Grasfield:  One of responsibility is Water Commission.  Gobi no longer owned it.  Intoccia owned.  On 100 acre parcel.  Some area for proposed rezoning at last Town Meeting.  Met with Intoccia, et al.  Scheduled open hearing month ago.  Neighborhood notified and other Selectmen.  Raised concerns and questions.  Selected 3 representatives.  Meeting with two developers and owners.  Last meeting developer would have plans within 30 days.  Scheduled for early September.  Default is 40 days.  Indicated that they express willingness to work with Town in manner beneficial to Town.  Flexible on many Town needs.  Affordable senior housing, some commercial development.

 

78.  Pietal:  Next meeting on August 23, Historical Commission and Planning Board.  All Warrant Articles finished.  Recommendations written on 30th.  On potential move to High School Library.  The earliest would be some time mid to late September.  Paul Linehan, Chairman, Capital Outlay, mentioned ideas to share with Capital Outlay.  Open to new ideas, structural changes.

 

79.  Fitzgerald:  Do we have to have a recommendation on all of these Articles?  How can we do this all before September.

 

80.  Much discussion on COA Article regarding Sr. Center.

 

81.  Pietal:  Recap Articles:  ARTICLE 1:  Transfer sum of money up to $550,000.  Where to have it go—Stabilization Fund?  ARTICLE 2:  Monies for remodeling and repair of Community Center.  May be same as amount in Article 1.  ARTICLE 3:  COA.  ARTICLE 4:  Wilber School feasibility design type money.  Waiting for firmer numbers.  Is $65,000 enough to do feasibility study?  Transfer to single account, $52,602.03.  ARTICLE 5:  Regional Dispatch on hold.  Could be January ’06.  Move for indefinite postponement.  ARTICLE 6:  Transfer of money to Recreation Department for use of Teen Center.  ARTICLE 7:  Conservation Commission.  ARTICLE 8:  Historical Commission.  Next week.  ARTICLE 9:  Gordon Gladstone has several items for Finance Committee to prepare before Town Meeting.  Do we have to do By-law change to put action in place?  It was in Warrant, not mandated.  ARTICLE 10:  Discharge Detection & Elimination and ARTICLE 11:  Storm Water Discharges.  Some questions still to be answered by Peter O’Cain.  ARTICLE 12:  Planning Board.  ARTICLE 13:  Planning Board.  ARTICLE 14:  Zoning By-laws.  ARTICLE 15:  Board of Health.  Chapter 7 penalties of septic problems.  Fine without court approval—fines were larger than allowed.  ARTICLE 16:  Transfer of money from Community Septic Management Program to the Septic System Improvement Loan Program Account.  ARTICLE 17:  Bramble Lane acceptance.

 

82.  MOVED and SECONDED to adjourn.

 

83.  VOTED:  7-0-0.

 

84.  Adjourned at 9:10 p.m.