Great Barrington — The Community Preservation Committee finds itself in a pretty pickle. Twenty-one applicants are seeking a total of $2.7 million of Community Preservation Act (CPA) funding.
But the Committee only has $1.2 million to give out.
Still, the Committee found all 21 projects (click here for CPA application guidelines) it reviewed eligible for consideration, and invited the applicants to enter the final “Step 2” process. Those final applications are due December 1.Below is a list of the 21 applicants.
Step 2 will be competitive for applicants, and rigorous for the Committee. Sloppy applications, or those raising the even tiniest red flags will be dumped immediately; the rest will be deeply analyzed. Committee Chair Karen Smith noted that most approved projects will be partially funded. Smith stressed how important it is that applicants — especially those seeking larger amounts — have other sources of funding in place to make sure they can complete a project.
Great Barrington voted in 2012 to adopt the CPA, and is one 155 communities in the state to do so. CPA funds were not disbursed last year since the Committee had not yet been formed, said Town Planner Christopher Rembold.
The Great Barrington Fairground LLC is seeking $440,000 for various projects that would restore the 57-acre facility to its role as a center for community activities. Photo: David Scribner
The CPA helps fuel public projects in three categories: open space and recreation, community housing and historic preservation. CPA revenue comes from a 3 percent surcharge added to local property taxes over the first $100,000 of assessed value. Low-income residents, and low to moderate-income seniors can apply for abatements. The state kicks money into the town’s CPA fund every year through the Community Preservation Trust Fund.
“There has to be a public benefit whenever you use CPA funds,” said Rembold at the “Step 1” eligibility review. A minimum of 10 percent of annual CPA funds must be spent or reserved for each of the three categories.
The majority of this year’s applications are for historic preservation, open space and recreation. There are four community housing applications, including $450,000 sought by Community Development Corporation of South Berkshire for housing on the former New England Log Homes site — part of the CDC’s larger redevelopment there that will likely include a newly expanded Berkshire Co-Op Market. The CDC also applied for $300,000 for open space at the same site. The CDC’s request for a total of $750,000 — a number that could swallow up most the funds — illustrates the challenges facing the Committee.
“We have a snapshot of what’s been laid out before us,” said Smith of all the applications. “We’re not going to break the bank and give everything out.”
Great Barrington Fairground LLC wants $440,000 for five historic preservation, open space and recreation projects. And St. James Place Inc. in the former St. James Church has applied for $150,000 to complete the $6 million historic preservation project, specifically to fix a structural issue involving rotting beams. St. James will also use some of the funds to create a small public park on the land surrounding the large oak tree at the southern corner of Route 7 and Taconic Avenue (now St. James Place).
Fred and Sally Harris inside the St. James church building where repair of fire-damaged framework is ongoing. Photo: David Scribner
Projects consistent with the Master Plan, and those involving town-owned properties, will be given priority, according to the Committee. Many residents and town officials supported the CPA for just this reason — to take the burden off the town budget. The Library Trustees, for instance, have asked for $345,000 to restore Ramsdell Library in Housatonic; and the Department of Public Works has applied for $65,000 to fix the rotting widow’s walk atop the Mason Library. Town Hall itself needs $20,000 in structural repairs to the southwest corner of the building, said the DPW, which also asked for $27,500 to repair the deteriorating Weatherbee Vault at the Mahaiwe Cemetery.
The Step 2 review will determine whether the Committee approves a project, and for how much money, said Smith, but that final approval lies with the voters at the May 2015 Town Meeting.
Smith said the Committee’s final process would be “brutal.” Indeed, Committee members agonized as they tried to agree on dates for a grueling schedule of winter meetings. Each application must be thoroughly vetted before meetings, and might include site visits.
Committee member Kathleen Jackson said that in preparation for the final decision-making meetings, she wanted to make sure the process was “not personal.”
“I’m not here to give out money because people applied,” she said. “I’m here to give out money because it’s best for the town.”
The CPA Committee meeting at the Fire Station last week. Photo: Heather Bellow
Both Rembold and Smith noted the risk involved in funding applicants without a track record, for instance, or those seeking initial funds for feasibility studies — funds that may have “nothing to show for it,” added Jackson.
But sometimes “small money” can lead to “big money,” said Smith. “We want to create a spirit of engaging our community to do better things in these spaces and places.”
The Committee has an option to bond projects or to give from the current fiscal year budget. Length of bonds can be up to “30 years or the expected life of the asset,” said Rembold. And every year at Town Meeting, he added, the allocation must be approved to pay such a project’s debt. And if, perchance, the town decides to do away with CPA altogether, “there has to be enough of a surcharge on the tax bill to take care of that debt service.”
At this, there was a collective intake of breath.
“You have to be really careful about what you bond and how much,” said Committee member Martha Fick.
Projects requiring permits are another concern. Permits do not have to be in place for an application, said Rembold, but the applicant must be aware of what permits are needed and tell the Committee when they will be sought.
“Projects that are complete and clean, with a clear sequence are ones we should consider…and projects with matching money…[and] those with permits and work [already] in progress,” said committee member Jessica Dezieck.
Given the hard road ahead, the Committee hashed out its process at the Fire Station Tuesday night (Oct. 7), weighing and shifting around the criteria it would use, and creating a scorecard method. It was generally agreed that favored projects were those determined to be most beneficial to the public, but that also showed a high chance of completion.
“A quantitative and qualitative [process],” said Smith.
“We want to fund projects we think are best for the town and future generations,” said Jackson.
The post Preservation dilemma: Worthy projects, not enough money appeared first on The Berkshire Edge.