Canton, Massachusetts · Saved source text
October 14, 2021, Finance Committee Meeting - Virtual Meeting. Minutes
Saved text from 10 source pages. Transcription and OCR may contain errors; verify figures and wording against the original. Retrieved 2026-10-15.
Source page 1
Canton Finance Committee Executive Minutes Voted on: 1/26/22
801 Washington Street Vote: 8-0-0
Canton, MA 02021
Meeting Minutes – Executive Session
October 14, 2021
Finance Committee Members Present: Dan Cole, Dave Clough, Tom Emery, Karen Foley, Emilio Mauro, Tim
McKenna, Reuki Schutt and Cindy Thomas.
Finance Committee Members Absent: All members were present.
Guests Present:
Ellen Jones, Finance Committee Recording Secretary
Lisa Lopez, Vice Chair, Select Board
Mike Loughran, Chair, Select Board
Randy Scollins, Finance Director
The purpose for going into Executive Session was so the Select Board members could discuss with the Finance
Committee members the strategy with respect to considering the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real estate,
(1860 Washington Street) if the Chair declares that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating
position of the public body.
Motion to Move into Executive Session
At 8:07 p.m. a motion made by Ms. Schutt to enter into executive session to discuss strategy with respect to
consider the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real estate, (1860 Washington Street) if the Chair declares
that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the public body was
seconded by Ms. Thomas.
Roll Call Vote:
Mr. Clough Aye Mr. Cole Aye
Mr. Emery Aye Ms. Foley Aye
Mr. Mauro Aye Ms. Thomas Aye
Ms. Schutt Aye Mr. McKenna Aye
The motion to enter into executive session at 8:07 passed 8-0-0. The recording was stopped at 8:07 p.m.
Special Town Meeting (STM) – Article 2 – Real Estate Acquisition – St. Gerard’s
Ms. Lopez and Mr. Loughran presented to the Finance Committee a slide presentation entitled “St. Gerard’s Church
Property – A Possible Community Asset”.
Ms. Lopez reminded the Committee that it was not their intention to keep information from the public, but that
because of the confidentiality of the on-going negotiating process it was necessary to discuss this in executive
session.
The following are some of the highlights from the presentation by Ms. Lopez:
• The Archdiocese announced the collaboration between St. John’s and St. Gerard’s Catholic Churches into
one called the Oscar Romero Parish.
• The profit and loss for St. Gerard’s Church indicated that it was not sustainable to continue operating. The
church was evaluated by numerous independent parties – engineers, architects etc.
• The Town will not negotiate with the Archdiocese until they have a full understanding of the property The
Church has hired its own appraiser.
• The Town is not required to acquire the property by eminent domain but that it would be in the Town’s best
interested to proceed in this manner. If the decision to acquire the property moves forward it will require a
2/3 vote at the Special Town Meeting.
• Ms. Lopez envisions more public meetings and focus groups to gather information from the community.
• She also stated that there is no rush to decide on the use of the property prior to STM on December 1 but
that the focus now is to realize that it is an asset to the community.
Ms. Lopez opened up the meeting for questions:
• Mr. Clough brought up an article from last year’s Annual Town Meeting which the Town had not discussed
with the property owner about the Town’s decision to take some of their property by eminent domain. The
FINCOM 20211014 Minutes - Executive Session.docx Page 1 of 5 10/24/21Source page 2
article failed at ATM. He further stated that he personally reached out to Deborah Dillon, Director of
Property Management for the Archdiocese of Boston and that she had indicated to Mr. Clough that the Town
was being “disingenuous” with regard to the consideration of the eminent domain taking of the St. Gerard’s
property.
Ms. Lopez explained that it is not unusual for a Town to take a property through the process of eminent domain and
that it helps to deliver a clean title to the Town.
• Municipalities have eminent domain rights
• Eminent Domain does not necessarily mean “hostile” or “adversarial”.
• Ms. Lopez gave an example of a Church in Wellesley that was acquired by the Town of Wellesley through
the eminent domain process and that it helped to secure a clean title for Wellesley.
• If the Archdiocese decides not to put the property up for sale then it presents a completely different situation.
• Mr. Loughran views the purchase of St. Gerard’s as being similar to the purchase of the Paul
Revere/Plymouth Rubber site. If the zoning is changed then it takes every developer out of the equation.
Ms. Thomas commented that the St. Gerard’s property is zoned as single family residential and would not have to be
rezoned for a developer to build single family homes. Condos could not be built.
Mr. Mauro inquired about the following:
• If Article 2 were to pass at the Special Town Meeting how long is the article valid for or is it in perpetuity?
This would be a question for Town Counsel
• If the property is acquired through debt (current assessed tax value is $4 million but the appraisal would
determine a value), would it impact the Town’s “pipeline” of debt capacity? Mr. Scollins stated that the
Town’s debt is in excellent shape and that its current debt capacity is four to five times the amount of debt
that the Town currently has outstanding. In his opinion the Town would not be restricted.
• Depending upon the appraisal and the value of the property, if the Town were to acquire this property, what
would be the costs for maintaining the property? Under whose control would this property be under? Would
this affect a department’s operating budget for this fiscal year? Ms. Lopez expects that at the time of the
STM that it will include minimal operating costs and that the building is currently closed.
Chair McKenna had questions about the general process of Article 2. The negotiations most likely will not have been
completed or even begun by the STM and that he would like any information regarding the property shared with the
Committee. With regard to the STM Finance Committee Recommendations to the Voters the Committee would be
limited as to what the Finance Committee can present in its narrative. Because of the timing of not receiving the
appraisal prior to the Finance Committee Recommendations going to print, Ms. Lopez stated that no purchase price
would be discussed in their narrative for the article and that the Finance Committee would eventually be making a
recommendation as to the amount authorized (purchase price, appraisal fees, legal fees) and that it would be a
bundled number at the STM. For now Ms. Lopez stated that it is premature to determine an amount until the Town
receives the appraisal. The Committee must complete the warrant by November 1 in order to have it forwarded to
Town Counsel for review, forwarded to the printers and mailed to residents 14 days prior to December 1. Ms. Lopez
further stated that the Recommendations would not have the amount but that the Select Board would keep the
Finance Committee apprised of the numbers as they receive them. The Town would have to have a purchase price
number on December 1, the date of the Special Town Meeting.
Mr. Scollins commented that he was advised by Town Counsel that the Finance Committee’s motion in the warrant
would be “that the Finance Committee will make a recommendation regarding Article 2 at the Special Town Meeting”,
Mr. McKenna inquired about the following:
• Is the Town aware of other cities or towns that have acquired properties through eminent domain that have
not been contentious? Ms. Lopez stated that Wellesley’s acquisition of a church in their Town was not at all
contentious and that Town Counsel has stated that eminent domain is a routine manner for Town’s acquiring
property with clean title.
Ms. Thomas asked if it was problematic for a Town if it did not acquire a property through eminent domain.
• Ms. Lopez stated that she is an attorney but not a real estate attorney.
• In New England property ownership goes back many years and acreage could be a composite by many
property owners and that the Town could run into issues for obtaining a clean title if not acquired through
eminent domain.
• The Town would still negotiate with regard to the purchase price.
• Mr. Clough commented that without the monetary value of the property it could lead to many more
questions.
• Mr. Mauro commented that not including a price for the property in the Recommendations (because
negotiations had not been completed prior to the printing of the Recommendations) might raise more
concern for the voters as compared to including a price. Presenting a “blank check” could create more
FINCOM 20211014 Minutes - Executive Session.docx Page 2 of 5 10/24/21Source page 3
uncertainty or skepticism for the voters. Ms. Lopez stated that the Select Board would never ask for a “blank
check” and that the Select Board would ask at STM for the authority to negotiate and spend.
Mr. Cole inquired as to how the Town intends to pay for this acquisition.
• Article 2 will provide a “laundry list” of various financing options. More conversation needs to take place
among the Finance Committee, the Finance Director and the Select Board as to what might be the most
desirable method for financing. Some direction as to the impact on the taxpayer would be helpful.
Chair McKenna asked if Community Preservation Funds would be applicable for this acquisition.
• This acquisition does not appear to fall within the CPA categories because no decision on the intended use
of the property has been stated or decided.
• The Town of Wellesley used CPA funds for acquiring a church because the intended purpose/use was
stated from the beginning for use as a recreation facility.
• The “best use” conversation for the St. Gerard’s property has not taken place yet. Ms. Lopez stated that it
was unlikely that CPA funds would be used for the acquisition.
Chair McKenna inquired if the Select Board has received positive or negative feedback from the community regarding
this acquisition.
• Mr. Loughran stated that it has been almost 100% positive feedback.
• There are no concerns that affordable housing would be built on the property.
• The Select Board has spoken with neighbors about the property and the reaction has been overwhelmingly
positive.
• There are some concerns as to how the Town is going to pay for the property and with what funds.
Chair McKenna reminded the members that they were in executive session and that no discussions were to take
place outside the meeting.
Ms. Lopez stated that she respected Mr. Clough reaching out to the Archdiocese but that from this point going
forward the Town would be represented by one party only and that would be the Town Counsel. Mr. Clough
suggested bringing in the Archdiocese to an executive session. Ms. Lopez responded that this would not be at a
Finance Committee meeting.
Mr. Loughran stated that perhaps the individual that Mr. Clough reached out to, Ms. Dillon, had not been in the “loop”
of the Archdiocese negotiations regarding the property. He further stated that the Archdiocese is intent on selling the
property.
Ms. Lopez stated that there would be no decision until the community decides. If the Town is successful at acquiring
the property it could take years for the community to decide the use for the property.
Mr. Scollins stated that the Committee should bring their questions to the next executive session meeting for
discussion with Town Counsel and the Select Board. Any sharing of information or questions through email could be
considered as deliberative and in violation of open meeting law.
November 1 is the last date for the Committee to forward motions and narratives/write ups to Town Counsel for his
review. Mr. Scollins would inquire of the Select Board’s plans for the public informational meetings.
Adjournment - A motion made by Ms. Schutt to adjourn the executive session meeting at 9:14 p.m. was
seconded by Ms. Thomas.
Roll Call Vote:
Ms. Foley Aye Ms. Schutt Aye
Ms. Thomas Aye Mr. Emery Aye
Mr. Mauro Aye Mr. Clough Aye
Mr. Cole Aye Mr. McKenna Aye
The motion passed 8-0-0.
Minutes reviewed by: Karen Foley
Respectfully submitted,
Timothy McKenna
FINCOM 20211014 Minutes - Executive Session.docx Page 3 of 5 10/24/21Source page 4
Chair, Canton Finance Committee FINCOM 20211014 Minutes - Executive Session.docx Page 4 of 5 10/24/21
Source page 5
Canton Finance Committee Meeting
Executive session – Meeting Documents
October 14, 2021
Please note: Some meeting documents may be found on the Town’s website under the Posted Minutes
section (Laser Fiche).
Agenda for October 14, 2021 (1 page).
PowerPoint Presentation entitled “St. Gerard’s Church Property – A Possible Community Asset”, presented by
Ms. Lisa Lopez, Chair, Canton Select Board (8 pages).
FINCOM 20211014 Minutes - Executive Session.docx Page 5 of 5 10/24/21Source page 6
Canton Finance Committee Executive Minutes Voted on: 1/26/22 801 Washington Street Vote: 8-0-0 Canton, MA 02021 Released on: 5/9/22 , Vote: 6-0-0 Meeting Minutes — Executive Session October 14, 2021 Finance Committee Members Present: Dan Cole, Dave Clough, Tom Emery, Karen Foley, Emilio Mauro, Tim McKenna, Reuki Schutt and Cindy Thomas. Finance Committee Members Absent: All members were present. Guests Present: Ellen Jones, Finance Committee Recording Secretary Lisa Lopez, Vice Chair, Select Board Mike Loughran, Chair, Select Board Randy Scollins, Finance Director The purpose for going into Executive Session was so the Select Board members could discuss with the Finance Committee members the strategy with respect to considering the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real estate, (1860 Washington Street) if the Chair declares that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the public body. Motion to Move into Executive Session At 8:07 p.m. a motion made by Ms. Schutt to enter into executive session to discuss strategy with respect to consider the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real estate, (1860 Washington Street) if the Chair declares that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the public body was seconded by Ms. Thomas. Roll Call Vote: Mr. Clough Aye Mr. Cole Aye Mr. Emery Aye Ms. Foley Aye Mr. Mauro Aye Ms. Thomas Aye Ms. Schutt Aye Mr.McKenna Aye The motion to enter into executive session at 8:07 passed 8-0-0. The recording was stopped at 8:07 p.m. Special Town Meeting (STM) — Article 2 — Real Estate Acquisition — St. Gerard’s Ms. Lopez and Mr. Loughran presented to the Finance Committee a slide presentation entitled “St. Gerard’s Church Property — A Possible Community Asset’. Ms. Lopez reminded the Committee that it was not their intention to keep information from the public, but that because of the confidentiality of the on-going negotiating process it was necessary to discuss this in executive session. The following are some of the highlights from the presentation by Ms. Lopez: e The Archdiocese announced the collaboration between St. John’s and St. Gerard’s Catholic Churches into one called the Oscar Romero Parish. e The profit and loss for St. Gerard's Church indicated that it was not sustainable to continue operating. The church was evaluated by numerous independent parties — engineers, architects etc. e The Town will not negotiate with the Archdiocese until they have a full understanding of the property The Church has hired its own appraiser. e The Town is not required to acquire the property by eminent domain but that it would be in the Town’s best interested to proceed in this manner. If the decision to acquire the property moves forward it will require a 2/3 vote at the Special Town Meeting. Ms. Lopez envisions more public meetings and focus groups to gather information from the community. She also stated that there is no rush to decide on the use of the property prior to STM on December 1 but that the focus now is to realize that it is an asset to the community. Ms. Lopez opened up the meeting for questions: e Mr. Clough brought up an article from last year’s Annual Town Meeting which the Town had not discussed with the property owner about the Town’s decision to take some of their property by eminent domain. The FINCOM 20211014 Minutes - Executive Session.docx Page 1 of 4 10/24/21
Source page 7
article failed at ATM. He further stated that he personally reached out to Deborah Dillon, Director of Property Management for the Archdiocese of Boston and that she had indicated to Mr. Clough that the Town was being “disingenuous” with regard to the consideration of the eminent domain taking of the St. Gerard’s property. Ms. Lopez explained that it is not unusual for a Town to take a property through the process of eminent domain and that it helps to deliver a clean title to the Town. « Municipalities have eminent domain rights ¢ Eminent Domain does not necessarily mean “hostile” or “adversarial”. e Ms. Lopez gave an example of a Church in Wellesley that was acquired by the Town of Wellesley through the eminent domain process and that it helped to secure a clean title for Wellesley. If the Archdiocese decides not to put the property up for sale then it presents a completely different situation. Mr. Loughran views the purchase of St. Gerard’s as being similar to the purchase of the Paul Revere/Plymouth Rubber site. If the zoning is changed then it takes every developer out of the equation. Ms. Thomas commented that the St. Gerard's property is zoned as single family residential and would not have to be rezoned for a developer to build single family homes. Condos could not be built. Mr. Mauro inquired about the following: * — If Article 2 were to pass at the Special Town Meeting how long is the article valid for or is it in perpetuity? This would be a question for Town Counsel * — If the property is acquired through debt (current assessed tax value is $4 million but the appraisal would determine a value), would it impact the Town’s “pipeline” of debt capacity? Mr. Scollins stated that the Town’s debt is in excellent shape and that its current debt capacity is four to five times the amount of debt that the Town currently has outstanding. In his opinion the Town would not be restricted. e Depending upon the appraisal and the value of the property, if the Town were to acquire this property, what would be the costs for maintaining the property? Under whose control would this property be under? Would this affect a department's operating budget for this fiscal year? Ms. Lopez expects that at the time of the STM that it will include minimal operating costs and that the building is currently closed. Chair McKenna had questions about the general process of Article 2. The negotiations most likely will not have been completed or even begun by the STM and that he would like any information regarding the property shared with the Committee. With regard to the STM Finance Committee Recommendations to the Voters the Committee would be limited as to what the Finance Committee can present in its narrative. Because of the timing of not receiving the appraisal prior to the Finance Committee Recommendations going to print, Ms. Lopez stated that no purchase price would be discussed in their narrative for the article and that the Finance Committee would eventually be making a recommendation as to the amount authorized (purchase price, appraisal fees, legal fees) and that it would be a bundled number at the STM. For now Ms. Lopez stated that it is premature to determine an amount until the Town receives the appraisal. The Committee must complete the warrant by November 1 in order to have it forwarded to Town Counsel for review, forwarded to the printers and mailed to residents 14 days prior to December 1. Ms. Lopez further stated that the Recommendations would not have the amount but that the Select Board would keep the Finance Committee apprised of the numbers as they receive them. The Town would have to have a purchase price number on December 1, the date of the Special Town Meeting. Mr. Scollins commented that he was advised by Town Counsel that the Finance Committee’s motion in the warrant would be “that the Finance Committee will make a recommendation regarding Article 2 at the Special Town Meeting”, Mr. McKenna inquired about the following: e — |s the Town aware of other cities or towns that have acquired properties through eminent domain that have not been contentious? Ms. Lopez stated that Wellesley’s acquisition of a church in their Town was not at all contentious and that Town Counsel has stated that eminent domain is a routine manner for Town's acquiring property with clean title. Ms. Thomas asked if it was problematic for a Town if it did not acquire a property through eminent domain. e Ms. Lopez stated that she is an attorney but not a real estate attorney. ¢ In New England property ownership goes back many years and acreage could be a composite by many property owners and that the Town could run into issues for obtaining a clean title if not acquired through eminent domain. The Town would still negotiate with regard to the purchase price. Mr. Clough commented that without the monetary value of the property it could lead to many more questions. e Mr. Mauro commented that not including a price for the property in the Recommendations (because negotiations had not been completed prior to the printing of the Recommendations) might raise more concern for the voters as compared to including a price. Presenting a “blank check” could create more FINCOM 20211014 Minutes - Executive Session.docx Page 2 of 5 10/24/21
Source page 8
uncertainty or skepticism for the voters. Ms. Lopez stated that the Select Board would never ask for a “blank check” and that the Select Board would ask at STM for the authority to negotiate and spend. Mr. Cole inquired as to how the Town intends to pay for this acquisition. e = Article 2 will provide a “laundry list” of various financing options. More conversation needs to take place among the Finance Committee, the Finance Director and the Select Board as to what might be the most desirable method for financing. Some direction as to the impact on the taxpayer would be helpful. Chair McKenna asked if Community Preservation Funds would be applicable for this acquisition. e This acquisition does not appear to fall within the CPA categories because no decision on the intended use of the property has been stated or decided. e The Town of Wellesley used CPA funds for acquiring a church because the intended purpose/use was stated from the beginning for use as a recreation facility. e The “best use” conversation for the St. Gerard’s property has not taken place yet. Ms. Lopez stated that it was unlikely that CPA funds would be used for the acquisition. Chair McKenna inquired if the Select Board has received positive or negative feedback from the community regarding this acquisition. e Mr. Loughran stated that it has been almost 100% positive feedback. e There are no concerns that affordable housing would be built on the property. e The Select Board has spoken with neighbors about the property and the reaction has been overwhelmingly positive. e There are some concerns as to how the Town is going to pay for the property and with what funds. Chair McKenna reminded the members that they were in executive session and that no discussions were to take place outside the meeting. Ms. Lopez stated that she respected Mr. Clough reaching out to the Archdiocese but that from this point going forward the Town would be represented by one party only and that would be the Town Counsel. Mr. Clough suggested bringing in the Archdiocese to an executive session. Ms. Lopez responded that this would not be at a Finance Committee meeting. Mr. Loughran stated that perhaps the individual that Mr. Clough reached out to, Ms. Dillon, had not been in the “loop” of the Archdiocese negotiations regarding the property. He further stated that the Archdiocese is intent on selling the property. Ms. Lopez stated that there would be no decision until the community decides. If the Town is successful at acquiring the property it could take years for the community to decide the use for the property. Mr. Scollins stated that the Committee should bring their questions to the next executive session meeting for discussion with Town Counsel and the Select Board. Any sharing of information or questions through email could be considered as deliberative and in violation of open meeting law. November 1 is the last date for the Committee to forward motions and narratives/write ups to Town Counsel for his review. Mr. Scollins would inquire of the Select Board's plans for the public informational meetings. Adjournment - A motion made by Ms. Schutt to adjourn the executive session meeting at 9:14 p.m. was seconded by Ms. Thomas. Roll Call Vote: Ms. Foley Aye Ms. Schutt Aye Ms. Thomas Aye Mr. Emery Aye Mr. Mauro Aye Mr. Clough Aye Mr. Cole Aye Mr.McKenna Aye The motion passed 8-0-0. Minutes reviewed by: Karen Foley Respectfully submitted, AA ALIA Timothy McKenna FINCOM 20211014 Minutes - Executive Session.docx Page 3 of 5 10/24/21
Source page 9
Chair, Canton Finance Committee FINCOM 20211014 Minutes - Executive Session.docx Page 4 of 5 10/24/21
Source page 10
Canton Finance Committee Meeting Executive session —~ Meeting Documents October 14, 2021 Please note: Some meeting documents may be found on the Town’s website under the Posted Minutes section (Laser Fiche). Agenda for October 14, 2021 (1 page). PowerPoint Presentation entitled “St. Gerard’s Church Property - A Possible Community Asset”, presented by Ms. Lisa Lopez, Chair, Canton Select Board (8 pages). FINCOM 20211014 Minutes - Executive Session.docx Page 5 of 5 10/24/21