Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-11-10 aI II r4I Community Preservation Committee 14 Easy Street Nantucket, MA 02554 COMMUNITY PRESERVA liON COMMITTEE MINUTES - Wednesday- November 10, 2004 A meeting of the Community Preservation Committee, CPC, was held on Wednesday, November'lb, 2004, at 3:15 PM at the Washington Street Annex Building, at 37 Washington Street. Present were: Barry Rector, Chair, Ken Beaugrand, Vice Chair, Mark Voigt, Rich Brannigan, Polly Miller, Neville Richen, Virginia Andrews, and Stephanie Henke, Administrative Secretary. Linda Williams arrived at 4 PM, and Doug Bennett was absent., Barry Rector established a quorum and called the meeting to order at 3:15 PM. Upon a motion made by Ken and 2nd by Ginger, it was unanimously VOTED to approve the agenda. FY '06 Funding Decision Discussion Barry read a letter (on file in the CPC office) from the Conservation Commission regarding its support of the Land Council's application (since Ginger is unable to speak on this, due to a conflict of interest), and the Nantucket Conservation Foundation's application. Ginger asked, given the letter that was read, would there be any support from the committee to eliminate recreation altogether. Polly replied no, she would like to see the Nantucket community step up and take care of some of the recreation projects. Polly continued that she is entertaining a warrant at town meeting to address some of these projects, like the playgrounds, especially the Skateboard Park. It's important for the kids to have something creative to do, and this project greatly benefits the kids. It's well underway and there is a lot of public support for it. Polly stated that she would like to see the committee take a portion of the whole to fund some of the open space and do a good job with that, but at the sarne tirne she would like to see the CPC give the Skateboard Park a leg up. Neville asked why the project was listed under recreation rather than open space and Ginger answered that it is because it is land that has been worked over, landscaped, has no natural component left. Mark added that according to the request, most of it was going to physical things as opposed to acquiring land in its natural state. Rich reminded the committee that this was only an internal document that we were using to make decisions, and that the warrant itself does not label projects as either open space or recreation, but lists them as open space/recreation. Ken added that part of the reason for distinguishing between the two is that the Act requires that 10% of funds be used or reserved for Open Space before any can be used for recreation. Barry noted that maybe the Youth Fields project could be open space, and clarified that he distinguishes between the two by determining whether it is to conserve land or is some activity associated with the land. Ginger noted that in the past, in the absence of good open space projects to fund, the committee funded a lot of recreation projects, but that this year the competition is higher and the mix of projects is different. Polly reiterated that she supports all the playgrounds, and doesn't feel that the CPC necessarily has to do it all. The Skateboard Park should be totally or partially funded before the others, she stated. Mark countered that he had come to the opposite decision. That the Skateboard Park goes toward creating something new, whereas the playgrounds are liabilities, and we need to take care of those first. Neville agreed with Ginger that there are more open space projects this time. And that as far as the Skateboard Park goes, the Park and Rec. Department has a great interest in that. It is something the community wanted to do and will really be used by kids and adults alike. He added that if they don't use the land for a Skateboard Park they will lose the land. Ginger added that if the committee decided to fund any of the recreation projects, it should be the Skateboard Park, as playgrounds would have better support elsewhere. epe Minutes, November 10, 2004-Page 1 Barry noted that with approximately $2.6 million to allocate, $260,000 would need to go to Open Space to ensure that it got at least 10%, and that there is an additional $295,265 in Open Space reserves, making a total of $555,000 that can be spent on Open Space projects. Rich added that he believed the committee was clear on open space and that we should fund that first. Pollv reminded the committee members that none of this was set in stone, that we could start funding how we wante'd and then go back and slash if we needed to. Ginger agreed, adding that since she might not be able to attend Tuesday's meeting, she would like to get Open Space dealt with first. Ken asked that if we spend the $555,000 for Open Space then the $300,000 that will be remaining in the fund is not aliocated to any particular project? Barry said yes. Then Ken asked if we don't want to spend the $595,000 on Open Space the fact that we take the $300,000 doesn't mean it all has to come into Open Space this year; we could take a portion of that and leave a portion in reserves for future years. Barry answered that this was correct. Nantucket Conservation Foundation. Upon a motion made by Polly and 2nd by Ginger, it was unanimously VOTED to fund, at this first round, the Nantucket Conservation Foundation's application at $250,000, after the following discussion: Ken supported the project, stating that it was a creative approach to make it a matching grant. Ginger supported it as well, stating that the CPC request was dearly palt of a whole fundraising plan. Mark added that it was a good model, and liked that it was going to be matched, that the CPC is a small contributor, and that the CPC had been "invited" to help support the project. Nantucket Land Council. Ginger recused herself from this part of the meeting. Polly motioned, and Neville 2nd, to fund Vi of this request. Ken stated that he was more comfortable in the $100,000 range. Relative to all the other requests, it was a lot, and he would not support $250,000. Mark agreed. Barry added that it is important to be able to stipulate certain demands to help fine tune a project. He stated that he is not comfortable with how open this land is going to be and he liked the Nantucket Conservation Foundation's model and would like to ask that they do that too, along with asking for parameters about public accessibility. Neville added that they wanted the money to get the restriction, but beyond that they will have no control of the project, and therefore no real freedom of public usage. The Land Council will have no say in the availability of the land; Linda Loring will be in control. Polly reminded the committee that if the Land Council is not able to raise the funds for this project, it is likely a developer will use it to build a golf course. Upon a VOTE on Polly's motion, 1 IN FAVOR (Polly), 5 OPPOSED (Barry, Rich, Ken, Mark, Neville), and Ginger was recused. THE MOll ON FAILED TO CARRY. Upon a motion made by Rich and 2nd by Ken, it was VOTED 5 (Barry, Rich, Ken, Mark, Neville) to 1 (Polly) (with Ginger recused) to fund, at this first round, the Nantucket Land Council's application in the amount of $125,000. Linda Williams arrived at 4:00 Prospect Hill Cemetery. Polly stated that this project shouldn't be in Open Space. Rich countered that it still falls under Open Space, because it is the acquisition, preservation and conservation of open space. Ken stated that it makes a difference in how we designate it because the amount we allocate out of reserves is very important, to the extent that we allocate money for this that can go to reduce the restriction we have with respect to the reserve. The committee then agreed that it should stay in the Open Space category. Rich motioned to fund the Prospect Hill Cemetery at $150,000 and have it restricted to irrigation. Ken 21ld that motion. The following discussion ensued: Linda asked why not go with the full $192,000, which is what they asked for to complete the irrigation system. Rich answered that it was relative to the amount of money requested vs, the amount of money we have available to allocate and that $150,000 was in fact about 75% of what they asked for for irrigation. Linda then said you can't do partial irrigation, but Ken countered that they can raise the rest. Neville mentioned that this was the 2nd year we were funding and that the first year we didn't give them money for landscaping and they were able to find other sources for that. Neville stated he felt that the committee should fund the full irrigation cost because then they will be done with that piece. Mark said that it was good to not fund it totally, that in fact you could do partial irrigation and add on later. Barry stated that he would like to see the irrigation finished and noted that this organization is struggling epe Minutes, November 10, 2004-Page 2 financially. Polly said she was originally going to suggest funding at $85,000, but she would go as high as $150,000 and then do some cutting later if necessary. Ginger stated that from her perspective and from the perspective of the Conservation Commission, she would rather fund open space, and she won't vote for this at all. Upon the above motion, VOTE: 3 IN FAVOR (Ken, Rich, Mark) and 5 OPPOSED (Neville, Ginger, Linda, Barry, Polly). MOTION FAilED TO CARRY. Linda moved and Neville 2nd to approve $192,500 for the irrigation system with the proviso that we revisit the amount again. YOTE: 4 IN FAVOR (Barry, Rich, Linda, Neville), 4 OPPOSED (Ginger, Polly, Ken, Mark). MOTION FAilED TO CARRY. Linda moved and Rich 2nd to approve $175,000 for the irrigation system. YOTE: 4 IN FAVOR (Linda, Rich, Neville Barry) 4 OPPOSED (Ken, Ginger, Mark, Polly) MOTION FAilED TO CARRY. Ken motioned and PoIiy 2nd to approve $125,000 for irrigation. VOTE: 3 IN FAVOR (Ken, Mark, Polly) and 5 OPPOSED (Linda, Rich, Barry, Ginger, Neville). MOTION FAilED TO CARRY. Linda motioned and Neville 2nd to approve $192,500 for irrigation. VOTE: 4 IN FAVOR (Barty, Rich, Neville Linda) 4 OPPOSED (Mark, Polly, Ginger, Ken). MOTION FAilED TO CARRY Upon a motion made by Ken and 2nd by Rich, it was VOTED 5 in favor (Rich, Ken, Neville, Linda, Mark, Barry) 2 opposed (Ginger, Polly) to fund, at this first round, $150,000 to the Prospect Hill Cemetery Association for irrigation. Park and Recreation Projects. Linda stated that she approves of the Skateboard Park project, but has a problem with the Youth Fields. She mentioned that Children's Beach is used more than any other and that it is currently dangerous and outdated. Rich stated that we should LIse the priorities given by P&R. Rich moved and Polly 2nd to fund Skateboard Park at $150,000 and Youth Fields at $75,000 but not support the others. There was some discussion as to the amorphousness of the Youth Fields project and the desire by some committee members to get Skateboard Park finished. Neville concurred that Skateboard Park is really the priority of P&R and that playgrounds are number 2. At this point, Polly made an amendment to the move to vote on Skateboard Park first, separately, at $150,000, Ken 2nd that motion. It was VOTED 7 in favor and 1 opposed (Mark) to fund the Skateboard Park project, at this first round at $150,000. Upon a motion made by Linda and 2nd by Neville, it was VOTED 5 (Linda, Mark, Neville, Barry, Ken, Rich) to 2 (Ginger, Polfy) to fund the Children's Beach Playground, at this first round, at $35,000. Upon a motion made by Linda and 2nd by Neville, it was VOTED 5 (Linda, Mark, Neville, Barry, Ken, Rich) to 2 (Ginger, Polly) to fund the Jetties Beach Playground, at this first round, at $65,000. Linda moved, and Neville 2nd to fund the Tom Nevers Playground at $15,000. VOTE: 3 IN FAVOR (Linda, Neville, Mark) and 5 OPPOSED (Barry, Ken, Rich, Polly, Ginger). MOTION FAILED TO CARRY. Linda moved and Polly 2nd to approved the Youth Field at $75,000. VOTE: Unanimously OPPOSED. MOTION FAILED TO CARRY. Ken stated that the record should reflect that the intent of the Committee was to NOT support $75,000 for the Youth Fields and not support $15,000 for Tom Nevers Playground. Small Friends. Linda moved and Polly 2nd to fund the project at $59, 730, at this first round, after which some discussion ensued about how public this project would actually be and how much access there would be to it other than the children who attend the school. After the discussion, Neville motioned to move the question, and Mark 2nd this. It was unanimously VOTED to move the question. VOTE on original motion: 21N FAVOR (Barry; Linda) and 5 OPPOSED (Rich; Ken; Polly, Mark; Ginger). MOTION FAilED TO CARRY. epe Minutes, November 10, 2004-Page 3 Rich reminded the committee members that because we are still in the drafting process of making funding decisions, committee members should not be discussing the decisions with the public at this time. There being no other business of the committee, and upon a motion made by Ginger and 2nd by Ken, it was unanimously VOTED to adjourn the meeting at 5:00 PM. Respectfully submitted by, Stephanie Henke Administrative Secretary ere Minutes, November 10, 2004-Page 4