Canton, Massachusetts · Saved source text
January 23, 2020, Finance Committee Meeting. Minutes
Saved text from 7 source pages. Transcription and OCR may contain errors; verify figures and wording against the original. Retrieved 2026-10-15.
Source page 1
Meeting of the Canton Finance Committee Minutes voted on: 2/26/20
Meeting Minutes vote: 7-0-0
January 23, 2020
Finance Committee Members Present: Wai Wong
Christos Arsoniadis, Rob Barker, David Clough, Dan Cole, Emilio Mauro, Tim McKenna, Barbara Saint Andre, Cindy
Thomas and Wai Wong.
Finance Committee Members Absent: All members were present.
G uests Present:
Stacey Gorman, Chair, Canton Community Preservation Committee (CCPC)
Lisa Lopez, Vice Chair, Canton Community Preservation Committee
Kristen Phelps, Administrator, Canton Community Preservation Committee
Mark Porter, Board of Selectmen &Traffic Committee Member
Randy Scollins, Finance Director
Ellen Jones, Finance Committee Secretary
Opening: Mr. McKenna called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
A. Approval of Agenda
M r. McKenna reviewed the agenda.
B. Announcements
The Revenue Forecasting Committee meeting will take place on January 30, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. in the Salah Meeting
Room.
C. New Business
Chairman McKenna introduced Stacey Gorman, the Chair of the Canton Community Preservation Committee
(CCPC) and Lisa Lopez, the Vice Chair. Prior to the meeting the CCPC provided a 4-page document that contained
detailed information regarding the projects being recommended to Annual Town Meeting (ATM). At the time of
the meeting the CCPC also provided a 6-slide presentation. Ms. Gorman reviewed the CCPC's recommendations
for ATM as well as the CCPC financials.
Ms. Gorman gave a brief overview of the CCPC for the newer members of the Finance Committee
• The CCPC receives applications which are vetted at public hearings and holds a general hearing in
December and January and makes recommendations to ATM as to how the Community Preservation Act
(CPA)funds should be distributed.
• Currently the Town of Canton has a 1%CPA surcharge on the tax bills as well as receiving funding from
the state. The funding from the state is an unknown number which is distributed to the Town later in the
fiscal year. Typically the state funding has ranged from 10-20% of what the Town has collected on the
surcharge.
• Because the Town's tax base has grown so too has the annual allocation of $600,000.
• Funds that are collected go into four difference "buckets" —administrative(5% of CPA revenue is
allocated to this), open space/recreation (10%), historic(10%) and housing (10%). Applicants must meet
certain criteria to meet funding requests.
Ms. Lopez stated that the role of the CCPC is to recommend projects to ATM but that it is ultimately the exclusive
decision of ATM to approve projects before they are funded.
FINCOM 201200123 Minutes —revised versio~i BSA Page I of 7 2/2/2020Source page 2
After meeting with the new Finance Director, Randy Scollins, in early January, the CCPC discussed increasing the
annual allocation to $700,000 for FY21. Last year the CCPC recommended that the annual allocation increase from
$600,000 to $650,000 for FY20.
M r. Cole asked Ms. Gorman about the current balance of the CPA revenue. She stated that the unused revenue
carry over revenue was $485,975. The carryover is usually a rolling balance because as funds are carried over,
funds are spent and then more funds are collected.
Ms. Gorman and Mr. Scollins are predicting that the surcharge revenue alone could be $650,000 for Fiscal 2020
and $700,000 Fiscal 2021. Ms. Gorman further stated that because the CCPC's projections are conservative in their
revenue estimate, funds are accumulating over time. The total revenue grows over time in three various ways: 1)
from revenue/funds collected that exceeded projections 2) interest earned and 3) if a project finishes under
budget the funds area returned and reallocated to that "bucket" of funds from which the allocation originated.
Ms. Gorman referred to her slide presentation as to how the FY21 estimate of $700,000 revenue might be
allocated: 1) 10% or $70,000 to the Housing category, 2) 10% or $70,000 to the Historic category, 3) 10% or
$70,000 to the Open Space/Recreation category and 4)5% or $35,000 for Administration such as (part-time salary
for Ms. Phelps as well as legal fees related to projects, third party conservation restriction negotiations and
a ppraisals) leaving $455,000 as undesignated. If a portion of administration is not used it is returned to the
u ndesignated fund.
Ms. Gorman explained how the $485,975 of carryover funds (from the end of Fiscal 2020) would be allocated:
$67,838 to Historic, $62,121 to Housing, $0 to Open Space/Recreation, $0 to Administration leaving $356,016 to
the undesignated fund.
Ms. Phelps explained that there was a little over $1 million of total funds available to non-administrative
"buckets". This figure did not include a $261,790 bond payment for the Paul Revere Heritage Site. The Tomb
project came in under budget with approximately $3,100 being returned to the Historic "bucket". An open space
project was recently closed out with approximately $3,600 being returned to the Open Space/Recreation "bucket".
Ms. Gorman reviewed the final slide for the Finance Committee which included the projects that the CCPC is
recommending to ATM.
Historic -CPC Recommendations for ATM 2020
• The CPC received three project requests and will be recommending two of the projects for approval at
ATM.
• Memorial Hall Rehabilitation - $1,184,000 was requested by the applicant. $15,000 recommended by
the CPC. The granite steps in front of Town Hall are not included in the study for the Memorial Hall
exterior renovations.
• Tilden House Phase II - $480,000 was requested by the applicant. $450,000 recommended by the CPC.
The CPC received 30-40 letters and emails of support for this project. Ms. Gorman indicated that the
a pplicants were confident that the remaining $30,000 could be raised through fund raising.
• Renovate Granite Steps in front of Memorial Hall -This project was not recommended by the CPC for
funding.
• There is $140,975 in the historic bucket. The CPC is recommending $450,000 for Phase II of the Tilden
House restoration and $15,000 for a study of the Memorial Hall exterior renovations. This leaves a
balance of $342,025 to come out of the undesignated fund.
Housing —CPC recommendations for ATM 2020
• The Canton Housing Authority applied for $120,000 for fire alarm upgrades to the Hemenway School.
The CCPC will be recommending $80,000 at ATM for this project.
FINCOM 201200123 Minutes —revised version BSA Page 2 of 7 2/2/2020Source page 3
• Canton Housing Authority will be making up the $40,000 difference through their own capital plan
through the state.
Open Space/Recreation
• Earl Newhouse Waterfront Project -The Town Planner submitted this application with the support of the
Board of Selectmen. The applicant applied for $478,259. CCPC approved 50% or $239,129 for Phase 1 of
this project contingent upon the approval of the remaining funds through a BOS-sponsored warrant
article at the upcoming ATM.
• The Town may also be eligible for grants for this project. If the funds for the grants are funded to the
Town, the understanding is that the CCPC would receive the grant money back into their fund.
• Ms. Lopez stated that the boat launch for this project would be for kayaks only and other non-motorized
water items.
• Galvin Middle School Basketball Courts -This project for $35,097 was requested by the School
Committee to resurface the basket basketball courts behind the Galvin Middle School. The School
Department has committee to funding the remaining costs of this project.
• Pequitside Tennis & Pickleball Courts -This is the only town-owned court. The DPW cleared vegetation
around the court and removed the cracked asphalt and fence. The project is for a single tennis court as
well as a pickleball court. The tennis court will be lined for pickleball but there will also be a pickleball
court adjacent to the tennis court. The project cost is $116,600
• Total open space projects being recommended for Town Meeting is $390,827.
Ms. Gorman stated that $732,852 would be taken out of the undesignated available funds of $740,339 which
would leave a balance of only $7,487 in the reserves/undesignated fund which was a concern to some of the CCPC
members. However, the CCPC felt that the requested projects were worthy, shovel ready and would move along
q uickly. The CCPC is also confident that they will have $50,000 to $100,000 because of their conservative
decisions. Ms. Gorman also stated that they usually do not use all of the administrative allocation and that even
though the committee has estimated $650,000 of revenues for FY21 they will be above $700,000. CCPC will also
receive additional money from the state in January. There are also a few projects that are at the near-closing stage
and will most likely have funds that will be returned. Ms. Gorman anticipates that carry over next year will be
closer to $200,000 instead of $85,000 based on how the other numbers are going to come in. The CPC is spending
down its carry over funds.
I n response to a question Ms. Saint Andre had with regard to the over $4 million collected since 2015 (of what the
state has paid and what the Town has collected through the surcharge), how much of that $4 million has been
spent on historic projects, open space/recreation projects and housing projects, Ms. Gorman offered the following
i nformation regarding the recommendations/allocations:
Fiscal Year Historic Open Space/Recreation Housing
2015 $57,705 $200,000 $93,700
2016 $555,165 0 $100,000
2017 $215,815 $50,000 $120,000
2018 $211,975 $744,800 $80,000
2019 0 $712,500 $80,000
2020 $65,120 $485,171 $74,000
Total $1,105,780 $2,192,471 $547,700
Ms. Lopez stated that $1.7 million of open space will be bonded over a 10-year period. The $485,171 allocated in
2020 for open space/recreation included the first bond payment of $271,000. For FY21 the CCPC is recommending
$390,827 for open space/recreation projects plus approximately $261,000 for the bond payment which would
total $651,827 for the FY21 open space/recreation projects recommendation.
Ms. Lopez stated that with regard to housing the CCPC recommended the minimum that the state requires of 10%
of the expected revenue and the rest of the allocations were split almost evenly between open space/recreation
FINCOM 201200123 Minutes -revised version BSA Page 3 of 7 2/2/2020Source page 4
and historic. Ms. Saint Andre questioned as to why the minimum is being recommended for housing when there is
a significant need for housing in Canton. Ms. Gorman responded that the CCPC has approved every housing
a pplication that has come before them.
Ms. Saint Andre stated that some communities set aside funds in a separate fund for future availability so that the
Town might be able to purchase a house that might become available through foreclose. Ms. Gorman stated that
Laura Smead, the Town Planner, presented to the CCPC last year the concept of a housing trust whereby a certain
a mount of funds could be requested each year for the trust which funds would then be available for future housing
purchases. Ms. Gorman is unaware that a housing trust has been set up by the Town and they are only aware of
projects that come before the CCPC from the Canton Housing Authority.
M r. Mauro had the following comments and questions:
• Is there a precedent for creating housing trusts in other towns that have the CPA surcharge? Ms. Gorman
stated yes.
• With regard to the Memorial Hall Exterior Rehabilitation study, are the steps included in the study? Ms.
Gorman stated that she thought the Town was already aware of what needed to be done with the steps,
such as using concrete versus sand for re-installing the granite steps and would not be part of the study.
• With regard to the $30,000 difference between the project request and the project funding for the Tilden
House, was the applicant confident that they could raise the $30,000? Ms. Phelps stated that the
a pplicant already had the remaining funds for the project. Ms. Gorman stated that projects could not be
started until all of the funds were available for the project.
• Is the life expectancy for the rehabilitation of the Galvin Middle School basketball courts in anyway
affected by any major Galvin Middle School rebuild/renovation? Ms. Gorman stated that the applicant
did not see that as being an issue for their project.
M r. Cole inquired if there was any risk with the $935,827 that was going to be spent for the Tilden House. Ms.
Gorman stated that when the CCPC makes a recommendation for Town Meeting for a specific amount, unless the
a pplicant returns for another application cycle in a following year with them, the amount requested is all of the
funding the applicant will receive from the CPA. Many of the projects presented to them contain a line item for
contingency costs. Ms. Lopez stated that the budget provided for the Tilden House was a very detailed line-by-line
b udget with a specific contingency amount.
Finance Committee Meeting Schedule — Mr. Scollins presented a draft listing of the Finance Committee meetings
that would take place up to the May Annual Town Meeting. Mr. Scollins and Mr. McKenna reviewed this listing
prior to the Finance Committee meeting and determined which departments to invite based on their budget
requests for FY21.
M r. Scollins stated that while there are no overrides in the next year there are a number of warrant articles with
significant funding requests.
Proposed Sidewalk Betterment Policy -Article —ATM 2020
M r. Porter arrived at the meeting at approximately 8:15 p.m. to discuss his proposed sidewalk betterment article.
Some of the highlights of his presentation and discussion included the following:
• The policy would not have any fiscal impact.
• Mr. Porter stated that he did not think this policy would be controversial and he recommended that it be
i ncluded in the Consent Agenda article.
• Because the amount of funding available under Chapter 90 is limited, the goal of the policy is to give
citizens and residents a choice for a sidewalk with astep-by step approach to "skip to the front of the
line" by paying a substantial, if not all of the, cost of the sidewalk through a betterment.
• The policy was modeled after the Town's public way process that went into effect a few years ago.
• The policy would contain step-by-step instructions as to what the resident would need to do.
FINCOM 201200 L23 Minutes —revised version BSA Page A of7 2/2/2020Source page 5
• If the sidewalk is for a minor road with a limited amount of use by town residents, the homeowner
requesting the sidewalk might have to pay 100% of the cost for the sidewalk.
• If the sidewalk was for an area such as Washington Street where there is no sidewalk on both sides this
might bean instance where it would be presented to Town Meeting to seek 50% of the cost but might not
be guaranteed funding at Town Meeting. If funding fails then the residents have the opportunity to pay
for it themselves.
• Mr. Porter's goal is instead of having to inform residents with a "no" on residents' requests for sidewalks,
this option could be presented as an alternative to the resident.
• The policy was designed with input from Town Planner Laura Smead, DPW Superintendent Mike Trotta,
Police Chief Ken Berkowitz and members of the Traffic Committee.
Comments from members of the Finance Committee included the following:
• Ms. Saint Andre questioned if this policy applied to only a public way. Mr. Porter stated that it was
addressed in Step 2. A suggestion was made that a clarification should be added if it applied to public
roads and not private ways.
• Ms. Saint Andre also inquired about more information regarding the streets included in "Major
Road/Collector" and "Canton's Complete Streets Prioritization Plan." Mr. Porter would obtain the
i nformation from Laura Smead and provide it to the Finance Committee.
• Ms. Saint Andre questioned that if the sidewalk being requested was for a Major Road/Collector street,
should the resident have to pay for the sidewalk or shouldn't it be paid by the Town. Mr. Porter
responded that the intention of this is if the resident wanted to wait for it to be eventually done by the
Town then they could, but by paying for it themselves they could essentially "go to the head of the line"
with regard to the sidewalk improvement. He further explained that this policy was not to prevent
sidewalks form going in, but that if neighbors were passionate enough for a sidewalk installation they
would be willing to pay for it.
M r. Porter indicated that there would be two items that residents would be voting on at Town Meeting: 1) the by-
lawinstead of a new section under the Town's Administrative Code and 2) a Home Rule Petition asking the state to
allow the Town to charge more than the current 50%betterment cost.
Ms. Thomas spoke against including this article in the Consent Agenda and that it should be properly
vetted at Town Meeting. Ms. Thomas also commented about the possible detrimental effect on a
neighborhoods causing some dissention among neighbors if 75%agreed to a betterment and 25% did not
agree to a betterment. The financial effects on the 25% of the neighbors not agreeing to the betterment
could be financially crippling. While she is not opposed to creative ways to accomplishing improvements
i n a community, the general sense she has been receiving from various residents are that people are not
of equal means.
M r. Barker stated that there could be differences in the use pattern of the sidewalks that could impact
whether or not a betterment would be considered by residents. He used as an example that only a few
neighbors would benefit from a less traveled sidewalk such as Elliot Street versus a resident paying a
betterment for aheavily-traveled sidewalk such as Washington Street. The incentive would not be there
for a resident on aheavily-traveled sidewalk to pay for a sidewalk betterment when they might be of the
opinion that it should be the financial responsibility of the Town.
M r. Porter is open to suggestions on this by-law but is of the opinion that it should be considered for the Consent
Agenda because many people within the Town will have already vetted it. Mr. Porter stated that he was open to
using another percentage instead of 75%.
PINCOM 201200123 Minutes —revised version BSA Page 5 of 7 2/2/2020Source page 6
Mr. Mauro had some questions and comments as follows:
• With regard to the statement in Determination of Funding "residents have the option to continue with
the project funding 100% themselves", does that imply the resident would give the money to the Town
for the Town to do the work or would the resident do the project themselves? Mr. Porter stated that if
Town Meeting does not fund the sidewalk repair due to lack of funds then it is implied that the Town
would do the sidewalk (higher the contractors) but at the cost of the resident through a betterment.
• How would government contracts to build the sidewalk be affected if the sidewalk is funded by the
resident? This would still fall under prevailing wage. The betterment is an agreement between the
resident and the Town to pay a betterment through a higher property tax or an additional amount on
their property taxes over the course of generally 10 years.
• With regard to how the betterment cost would be split among neighbors, Mr. Porter stated that this
caused a considerable amount of debate when drafting the policy. He further explained that any property
owner that owned property on the stretch of street being considered, regardless of which side of the
street or the total frontal footage, residents would pay equal shares of the total betterment cost.
• Mr. Mauro asked a question with regard to easements, if a resident did not sign off on the betterment
would they be forced to have a sidewalk in their area or opt out not to have a sidewalk in their area
thereby creating a discontinuous section of sidewalk? Mr. Porter responded that he would not be in favor
of moving forward with a discontinuous sidewalk. Mr. Porter stated that he was informed by DPW
Superintendent Mike Trotta, who worked for Newton, that the policy in Newton was written in a manner
so that a homeowner could have a sidewalk installed in front of their residence only.
D. Old Business
M r. Mauro brought to the Finance Committee's attention a capital request that had been discussed at a recent
Capital Planning Meeting. The $75,000 capital request is from the School Department for on-going districtwide
HVAC special maintenance projects. The Finance Committee may be asked by the School Committee if this item
should be in the regular School Department operating budget or as a regular capital request in the capital budget.
M r. Barker cautioned about what items would be added to the operating budget. Mr. Scollins would research this
further and would get the technical answer for the Finance Committee.
There were no public comments.
Approval of Minutes
A motion made by Mr. Barker to approve the minutes for October 17, 2019 as written was seconded by
M r. Wong. Vote: 8-0-1.
F. Next Meeting Date: The next Finance Committee meeting will take place on February 10, 2020 at 7:00
p.m. with the School Department.
Adjournment: A motion made by Ms. Saint Andre to adjourn the meeting at 8:42 p.m. was seconded by
M r. Barker. Vote: 9-0-0.
Minutes reviewed by: Wai Wong
Resp tfully sub fi tted,
i m McKenna ~~
Chairman, Canton Finance Committee
FINCOM 201200123 Minutes —revised version BSA Page 6 of 7 2/2/2020Source page 7
Canton Finance Committee Meeting
January 23, 2020
Please note: Some meeting documents may be found on the Town's website under the Posted Minutes section
(Laser Fiche).
Agenda for January 23, 2020. (1 page).
Community Preservation Committee —Information Regarding Surcharge Revenues, State Grants, FY21 Allocation
estimates, Carryover Funds,(6 pages).
Community Preservation Committee —Recommendations to ATM 2020(4 pages).
Finance Committee Meeting Schedule —Draft, dated 1/23/20(1 page).
Draft Policy for New Installation of Sidewalks, Requests by Owners, Provided by BOS member Mark Porter
(2 pages).
Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2019 (7 pages).
Process Used to Establish Operating Budget Targets (discussed at the Finance Committee meeting on 1/23/20)
provided by former Finance Director,lim Murgia (3 pages).
FINCOM 201200123 Minutes —revised version BSA Page 7 of 7 2/2/2020