Affordable Housing Trust Fund Board of Trustees - Regular Meeting

So I'm happy to start the affordable housing trust meeting this evening. We'll start with roll call. We do have a quorum. So this, we have, I see Mark, Susan Bartlett. We have Myron, our town planner. We don't have Angus and we are, sorry, Matthew is not able to join. He let me know he would not be able to join and Angus did not respond. So I expect him to join, but yeah, Regardless, we have a quorum to want to start the meeting. So just before you joined, Mark, we talked about shuffling the agenda a bit. We're going to move LRAP to the end. I told Amy that we would text her and let her know when that's beginning. So she's staying on her computer, but she'll rejoin when we text her. So we'll move her after D, so she'll be item E, which is currently other. The You also probably noticed that we have an additional person who's on the call. Mike Slursberg joined us. He is the person who applied to join the Affordable Housing Trust. And maybe this time is a good time, Mike, for you to introduce yourself to us. And we'll take it from there.

Okay. Mike Slursberg. Been in Littleton maybe 25 years. Former engineer of many years standing. So I've worked as an acoustical consultant on a lot of building projects, commercial, residential projects. issues. And the last 15 years or so I've been a photographer, a little bit of a career change, but hopefully I can, you know, contribute something useful to the, to the process.

Excellent. Well, thank you very much for joining. We all joined the trust, I would say, with varying backgrounds, not dissimilar to yours. We're all a little bit different. And the good news is we have a wealth of knowledge with Mara and others in the town, as well as what some folks in the trust have learned. So this is a really good opportunity to learn a lot and make a positive contribution. So thank you for, thanks for your interest. And Mara, maybe I can circle back with you after about formalizing the next steps for Mike.

Yep. I've asked the question and I haven't heard the answer. Okay.

Got it. So we should generally the folks in town are very responsive. So we should know in a few days, I would say. Maybe earliest next week with the holiday on Friday.

Okay. Okay.

So, Maren, has Laura joined yet?

Carolyn is here. I don't see. Oh, I see Shelly. Shelly Gehring from MHP. I don't yet see Laura.

Mark, how long do you anticipate the habitat update will take?

I don't know. That's all Carolyn.

Yeah, okay.

I'm just wondering.

Now, I'm wondering if we should try to squeeze that in first if Laura hasn't joined yet. Myron, what are your thoughts?

Sounds good to me. We'll promote Carolyn to panelist. Hello. Hello.

Hi, Carolyn.

Thanks for joining. Hi. Happy to be here. And also, I can always start and come back if you need me to. Whatever works.

So our other guest hasn't arrived yet, so we were hoping that you wouldn't mind going first on our agenda today. And, yeah, thank you very much for offering to provide the update on 87 to Harawan.

Yeah.

Yeah, we're so excited about it.

Okay, so the first part of our update is this is our building permit. Very exciting. So we did change the design a little bit for the building permit, but not the site plan at all. So the site plan is the same. The only change we made is we're in the same footprint. But we changed the dimensions of each house a little bit just to meet the requirements of the ADU law. So one unit will now be right over 1,800 square feet. The other will be right over 900 square feet. The 1,800 square feet will be a four bedroom with multiple bathrooms. And then the other will remain a two bedroom that can be accessible if needed. So right now we have, well, we've had the Lip LAU with EOHLC for a long time, probably 10 months. And so I did reach out to her to see if we needed it re-signed with the changes we've made, or if it's just a modification that can be approved with our current signatures. And I'm waiting to hear back from her. She thought it would take about a week to hear back from her. If we need to re-sign it, it's not that big a deal. I think, Maren, you signed it before, and Marianne, maybe you were the other signer. So I can bring it to town hall and we can get that done. And again, as a reminder, the LIP LEU application has our marketing plan for this. And so until it's approved, we can't open the marketing for this. So we can't start accepting applications for the homes until it's approved. But we can start working on the site. So right now we're out for bid for the site work itself, the site development. We do plan to take some crews over this summer to do clearing of the brush. Probably within the next four weeks, we'll start clearing the brush out so we can get started and make it easier for when the site development person comes in. And the site development person will be digging the foundation hole. And the septic system. So getting us all ready for that. We have a verbal agreement so far with Neshoba Valley Tech to be our partner in building. And I'm working on the final contract. So we'll get that signed this summer as well. And they will also be working on our property in Acton. So the plan is to go back and forth because they have the license trades. So when we're doing plumbing and electrical, the carpentry will move over to Havilland and we'll go back and forth. Right now, the schedule shows us starting with them in September and closing in June. That all depends on how site work goes and everything else goes. We also do want to make sure that we get the application out and have the family selected with about six months for them to be able to put in their sweat equity hours. So we're trying to time that as well. And just so you know, right now our application for the Acton property is open. That's two one bedrooms and a two bedroom, which is a really nice compliment to what we're doing on Tehadawan. So it's serving all different types of potential homeowners, smaller families, larger families. And I'm really excited about that and about the mix of that.

So quick question, Carolyn, when you said September to June, What would June be?

Is that the move-in date? Yes. But it's also, I have to say, that the school will need to work really quickly for that to be the move-in date. But that's what we did get the Federal Home Loan Bank grant to help us with this one for $70,000, and that's the date we put in there. So that's the date we'll be pushing for. Okay.

Okay. But that would be construction complete and ready for families to move in.

Certificate of occupancy.

Okay. Yep.

Yep. And to hedge my bets, you know, things could happen. Winter could happen. And EOHLC, we need an answer. And it's been a long time.

Mm-hmm.

But the Habitat affiliates are all going to Beacon Hill on Wednesday to ask for additional, that they fund EOHLC with additional people, because I think it's just, they have lack of resources to be able to get it done. Okay.

Good news also is with June, at least there's a couple of months before the start of the school year, if it does delay slightly. If, you know, with the four-room bedroom especially, I'd expect that to be a family.

Yeah, our big thing is that I would expect it to be a family too. The big thing is that we would need all of the sign-offs done on the electric and plumbing before they leave. And so we need to push for the June date just so they get that, even if we do need to finish it a little bit in July. Makes sense. Yeah.

Yeah. Do you have any questions or any asks of us, of the Affordable Housing Trust?

Well, the big ask is timing of the funding, timing of the grant funding for this. And when you want to do that, we still are working on the rest of the grant funding. It was a spectacularly tough year for larger grants. But we do have the regular grants that we're going for for this, and we are happy that we were awarded Federal Home Loan Bank. So we're still working on that. We do have the line of credit that we can use for this one so we can get working, but initial funding would be wonderful.

So I think we committed up to 100,000, I think, and you're saying you're likely to need the whole 100, is your guess?

Yes. Yes. Yeah, right now our total development cost is right around $550 for the two homes. And then I think what we've submitted to EOHLC for prices, which it's not until they approve, it's just proposed. I think we had submitted $267 and $207 for the two units, somewhere around there. But again, we can't, that's not an advertised price. That is just a suggested price.

And you need the funding roughly in what time frame?

So we have limited funding right now. So let me tell you about the FHLB funds that we've got in the 70,000. The way it works with FHLB is you have to take it off on a line of credit. So we have to borrow that money and hold it on the line of credit for six months. And then we can't get the money until we close on the house. So we generally don't take that money out until we're six months from completion. So that money would be trying to access around December, January. So for right now, for this work right now, we'll be using other funds. So we'll take some out on the other line of credit and we'll use any discretionary funds that we have. So if you're able to do it sooner, that would be great and help us to fund the site work.

So what I was thinking, Marianne, and you could was what if we like offered half of it now and then half of it, you know, closer to completion or closer to.

At a milestone?

Yeah. And that would help them get started and right. And they'd have more clarity on their whatever that they actually do need.

Sounds like a good proposal. Carolyn, what are your thoughts?

That would be wonderful.

Okay. Susan Bartlett, any thoughts on the funding?

No, I think that's a good idea. I think, you know, setting a milestone of, you know, maybe one of the buildings closed in, the roof is on, but before the trades are there, before the electrician and plumbing and stuff, so that, I mean, this is, It's going to look like a house at that point. I don't know if that's an appropriate place to have a milestone, but something like that, I'd be happy with that.

Does that work for you, Carolyn?

Yeah, that would be good.

So if we're doing that, then I'd make a motion now for the half, and then we'll ask Carolyn to come back basically at that point or to reach out to Marn or something at that point and ask for, you know, give us an update. And actually maybe it makes sense for Carolyn to come back and give us an update. Oh yeah, I'm happy to. And ask for the rest.

And what you described, Barlet, that's completion of the exterior, but before the trades come in.

Right. The roof is on, the windows are in, the building is weather tight, but... Not complete. Okay.

And that's Carolina would be when you'd be reaching out for like town volunteers or more labor.

Yeah.

As well too, right?

Exactly.

Yep.

And you need the funding now or you need the funding in September or?

Well, it'd be great to have for the site development work, which should start in about a month.

Okay. Okay. So I'll make a motion that we release $50,000 grant to Habitat for the initial phase of construction at Tahinawan.

Second.

Okay, let's vote then. Just a point of order before we get too far. I think Angus is an attendee. He's the AM, I think, so.

Thank you, just a moment. Where can I see attendees? I don't, um, I don't have participants.

There's panelists on one tab and attendees on another.

Ah, no, I see it. I wasn't showing that panel. Thank you.

Okay. So Angus has joined us now.

Okay. So, Mark, you made a motion to pay the $50,000 now. So we'll save the motion for the second half until Carolyn comes back. Is that what you're thinking?

We'll save the other $50,000 for a second motion later.

Okay. Angus, were you able to listen and did you hear what was presented in the motion that Mark made and that Susan seconded? Angus, you with us? Can you hear me?

Apologies, I was muted. Yes, I did hear the motion and I do agree with the motion. I approve. My vote is an approval.

Okay, so we have one yes. Bartlett?

Yes.

Mark? Yes. Susan? Yes. And Marianne's a yes. So the motion is approved.

Excellent.

Thanks, Carolyn. We'll get you that check for the first 50K so you can use that for site work.

Wonderful. Thank you so much. Thanks for your support. And we're all really, really excited to get this started. Excellent. Well, thank you for joining. Great.

Thank you. All right. Take care. Have a good night. Bye-bye.

Okay, so Laura and Shelley are both here. Let me promote Laura and we'll ask her if she would like us to promote Shelley as well.

Hey Laura, thanks for joining.

Hey, nice to be here. Do you think I should promote Shelly as well? Probably.

Okay. Is this your last meeting?

It is. I have one, two weeks.

We have the big festival next week and

Yeah, we have the Big Housing Institute Thursday and Friday. And then I come back for a couple of days and then I'm out.

Are they going to have cake for you there?

I don't know.

They better. A couple of us are going to be there, so we expect cake. I thought that would be in the survey review.

There you go. The feedback. There was no cake.

Well, exciting news. Congratulations again. Thanks. And we'd very much like to add this Durkee Farmhouse project to your long legacy of affordable housing in the Commonwealth. So maybe a good project to go out on. A good RFP.

Yes. And sorry it's taking me. longer than I thought to get to this point, um, with the edits. Um, mostly because, you know, as usual, I over-promised and I, I, uh, don't always, usually I have enough time to, to do it, but there was a lot going on. Um, anyway, did, did everyone get the updated, um, RFP, I hope.

No.

I can forward that now, but one of us could share also.

Yeah, sharing is probably a good idea, just so we are all on the same page. I have trouble sharing on Zoom, so... For some reason.

Okay, so let me see what I can do. Okay. Okay. Hopefully people can see the request for proposals.

Yes.

Awesome.

Okay. So I highlighted most, except if they were just wordsmithing, I highlighted the changes that I made. Or I highlighted where dates needed to be inserted or someone's name needed to be inserted that I didn't know who was going to be in charge of doing it. So we'll kind of go through it. The first page is dates. So that will come next after we get this in a final form. So you can keep going down. keep going down the invitation to bid if there's who will be sending the RFPs out so when people want the RFPs then they have to request it and you have to record who's asking and then send it out electronically.

Yeah, Littleton does have an automatic bid process portal that they'll use.

Okay. Find out who's on that email. Okay. We'll find that out. Okay. That's great. Okay. Nothing else changed in there. The proposal submission is, again, dates to be filled in when we get to the final draft. So you can keep scrolling. And we had, I think this was just defaulted to seven copies of the proposal. and an electronic version. I don't know if you need seven copies, but of the paper copies, you probably need two, one and a backup.

Yeah. That would be my suggestion, unless any of the board members would prefer another hard copy over electronic version.

No, I don't think we need additional hard copies.

All right. And then if there's any questions who I'll leave an email for who they are directed to. Let's see. I think you went down too far.

I'm sorry.

That's okay. Oh, that was all it was that. And then again, dates, um, Usually the questions are taken until like two weeks before because you have to answer them to everyone who has requested an RFP.

I have one question on the RFP on the submissions. I know when we do, we've done some public construction projects. We ask for like the proposal separate from the, any cost proposals. Is that if they're asking, are we, are we expecting something similar here or we're expecting that there's no cost to the town or there's, you know, they're not going to ask us for something.

Yeah, so it has, until quite recently, it's been that way where the price proposal has been separate from and opened after the scoring. The current inspector general changed it for disposition of land since then. You're already looking at proformas, which have the acquisition costs. So you know it. It's no secret. So what he's changed it to is having it an attachment, the price proposal, an attachment to the project. response and to have it in the scoring criteria so that it's scored. So that was in response to some public land that went out and one non-profit had their price proposal was zero and a for-profit was 1.2 million and they didn't have any scoring. And so it was, it didn't work out well and ended up in litigation. So they fixed it this way.

Okay. And that's clearly addressed somewhere in the RFP.

It is. We'll get to it. It's towards the end.

Okay. Thank you.

You're welcome.

OK, you can keep going. That's dates. Site visit is dates. The site visit is usually voluntary, which I put here, which has been kind of my default unless someone wants it mandatory. And it's best if you don't. take questions during it, if you do, to record them and make sure everyone gets the questions and the answers. It's kind of hard when it's very informal, and so it's hard sometimes to keep up with people's questions. Okay, at the bottom of the page, this says that... You can read it, but it's a desire to trust that all efforts should be made to retain and rehabilitate both the house and barn. I'll have to edit that. However, should that be financially infeasible, the trust will prioritize the rehabilitation of the barn and will accept the demolition of the house. The trust will also entertain proposals with other options for the house and the barn. For example, since the house is connected to a three-bedroom septic system, an option may be subdividing the house from the remainder of the property, rehabbing it, and selling the house at market rate. An option for the barn could be rehabbing it to accommodate for affordable apartments or possibly a resident gathering space. The trust welcomes creative uses for both structures.

So I think that sounds good. Okay. What we discussed last time. Does everyone agree?

Yes. Okay, good. Took a little bit of wordsmithing. The next under the development options. It had just said the trust is seeking a developer to construct, and usually we put the whole gamut of design construct. I put and or rehabilitate and operate, just so it's clear that they got everything. They have all the tasks. Okay. Let's just edit. You can keep going. Affordability. I thought we talked about this last time, but I didn't have it in my notes. So all the units shall be affordable to households at or below 100% AMI with a minimum of 75% affordable to households at or below 80% of AMI. Welcome your comments. The 100% is the CPA. maximum. And I think that we talked about allowing some room for over 80, but if we didn't, happy to change it.

What do you think of those numbers, Maureen?

I think the broader that you can leave it, the more likely you are to get good responses?

I agree with the 100% AMI number. I'm questioning the 75%.

As too low or too high?

As too high. If we made that more like 50%, we're opening us up to more potential, right? We're still making them, it's almost becomes more of like fits in more with a 40Y. Is 40Y 100% or 110%? I think it's 120. I think so. I think it's 120.

Mm-hmm.

So then that'll make it more attractive if they can have 50% of the units at 100% of AMI? 50%.

Well, I was saying, I think all of the units are at 100%, or if we want to say 120%, I'm okay with that. And then with a minimum of, I was saying 50% at or below 80% of AMI. that the 50% means that they don't have to have as many, we'll call them more deeply affordable, but we still get all little a affordable, right? With a hundred percent of AMI or 120% of AMI. I don't know. I've read too much about 40 Y that I kind of seems like this property fits really nicely for a 40 Y type or close to a 40 Y. So.

What would be the downside of lowering it from 75 to 50?

Developers are going to do what is best for them. So you might have this at 100% and below and 50% with a minimum of 50% at 50%. 80 or below and you'll get 180 and below because that's where the subsidies are. There's some subsidies for the 100%, up to 100%. But the majority of the subsidies are at 80% or below. So it depends on how you score it.

So what I was questioning is if we want to say, so if we said with a minimum of 50% at 80% of AMI, and then we give higher scoring for those that go to 75 or 100%. Okay. Does that make sense?

That makes sense. Are we more likely to get this thing built if it's all 80% or lower?

Well, that's what I think. Laura was just saying that they're more likely to get subsidies. All right.

It could be. That's what we've been seeing. But with the changes in HUD, there won't be any vouchers, any Section 8 vouchers. I think you'll have more folks targeting 50 or 60%, 60% probably, and 80%. Then you will have anything lower than that.

Is a subsidized housing inventory not important for you for this development? Inclusion on the subsidized housing inventory?

It is for the 80% and lower, but the exact number doesn't matter that much. We're at 11.5% on our SHI.

Yeah, and they'll all count as long as 25% are below 80, 80 or below, they'll all count. Rentals, okay. Yeah. Okay. Well, I can make that change. So a minimum of 50%, and then we'll change the numbers in the scoring when we get there. Does that sound like a plan?

Yes. Thank you.

You're welcome. Okay. We can keep moving down. This was all approved. Formatting. Yeah, there wasn't too much in here except some grammar that I cleaned up. Oh, stop. I didn't highlight the price proposal. So at the top of the page is the top of page 10, the bottom of page 10, sorry, but okay. The price proposal form should be completed and submitted with the proposal. The trust expects the lease payment to be a nominal fee or the price will be scored as indicated in the evaluation criteria. I think when we get to the scoring, I think somewhere in the narrative, it says that you were looking for $50,000 for the first lease payment and then nominal fee going forward. But I don't know if I was mixed. No, that's what I had in my notes. Do you remember talking about that last time?

I do, but I don't. Yeah, I remember you suggesting something like that last time.

Yeah, that's typical in that so that the trust gets paid back for their time and efforts and anything that you've expended. And then going forward, yeah. I'll have to find it in the body. It's in the body of the narrative somewhere, I believe. And then it's in the scoring. Yeah.

And I just checked the minutes and that is what we said last time. Okay. That usually Laura said she typically puts in a first year payment to the trust, which based on the size of the development is 50 to a hundred thousand, which then proceeds to a nominal fee for the lease.

Okay.

OK.

Thank you for that. In the minimum threshold, the proposer must have a minimum of five years experience in affordable housing development. That's typical. this part of it that we're going through now is all kind of the legal part municipal attorneys have suggested that language over the years that I've been doing this. And so I put it, I put it in and usually the RF sometimes the RFP is, is reviewed by municipal attorneys. And if I don't put it in, they put it in. So, um, it's all about covering, um, their position, I'll say. Land development agreement and ground lease, we have the samples. I believe you've seen them, but if you haven't, they're just, they're standards. They have basic language, which are then negotiated when you actually get to LDA and a ground lease. So, So we do have to have those as attachments. Okay, I think we are at the end of the narrative. I don't know why that's highlighted.

So Laura, one comment we also had in the minutes from last time, and this might be covered in the scoring, but we said, Bartlett said they should encourage passive house standards. Okay. That sounds like Bartlett.

It does.

Yeah, I know I read that in there somewhere.

Okay. I think it's up under the building design.

It's on page 1819 of the proposal, infrastructure and green design says, meet screen design standards for LEED, Passive House, or other comparable programs.

Okay, so we must have it in the narrative as well. This is the scoring. So if you go... Yeah, it's above that. It's on 18, I think. Building design... Oh, there, it's at the top of the page there. Meets green design standards of LEED, Passive House, or other comparable programs.

There you go.

There you go. Thank you. All right. Then if we go back to the top of the scoring criteria. Oh, there you go.

Oh, dear, I got the wrong address in there.

Sorry, I thought I caught everything. Okay, developer experience. This has not changed from what we said before. Basically that they have the experience in all aspects of the design, the construction, the management, or they have a member of their team that is And that energy efficiency design is a standard approach that they use. It's not something new coming into it. And also that private septic is something that they have experience with, the two things that I kind of draw out.

All right.

Okay, we can change the affordability. This says proposal meets a range of incomes. 100% of the units must be restricted to households out of tort. So we can change that to at least 50% of the units affordable to households out of below 80. Unacceptable was less than 100% are affordable to 100% AMI and or 75% of the units are not affordable at 80. So we can changed that. And the next one is 100% are affordable. And it should be at least 75% are affordable to 80%. And the change was in the highly advantageous. All of the units are affordable to households added below 100 with at least 75% affordable with a range of incomes between 30 and 80. So we can change that.

So to change that, do we, we can just change in the second column, we can change that to and or 50% of the units or not. And then in the middle column, you can just change it to 50%, but the third column is probably okay, right? Because that's highly desirable saying you're going up above.

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Site design, this was in the previous versions. Underground utilities are desired. And I had a note, but it didn't tell me which way you wanted to go with it. I think we looked and there were power lines there last time. Is that something you care about?

I think there are power lines to the site, but all the new houses back there have underground utilities, I believe. Right.

Okay. So do you want to leave it in there then?

Yeah.

Be consistent. Cool. All right. All right. I'll get that formatted better. OK, keep going. OK, so existing buildings plan. Rehabilitation of both the house and barn desired. Demolition acceptable if financially infeasible to rehab or sell. I just say it, which I will change that to make sure that says the house. So unacceptable demolition of both structures. Advantageous demolition, demolish or sell the house and rehabilitate the exterior of the barn with no plan for its use. I figured if no current plan maybe for its use. And then highly advantageous rehabilitation and sell the house or demolish the house and rehabilitate the barn for housing, management office, or resident use. And I'm open for suggestions on how that can be better described.

Would it be helpful to divide the discussion of the two structures, have one discussion of the barn, what you'd prefer to happen to that, and one discussion of the house, and what you'd prefer for that? Because...

Okay.

That makes sense.

That would be less confusing.

Okay.

I think so. It allows us to get a little bit more granular with each.

Yeah.

Okay. I'll do that.

Does that make sense to folks?

What are the three conditions? So for the barn, it's demolish it, rehab it,

With no use.

With no use or rehab it with use. What are the conditions for the house? Demolish it, sell it, or rehab it?

Rehab it and use it. Yeah. I think that was the piece that is missing here is it doesn't have the house being included in the development.

The house should be included, and I think that one alternative would be to demolish it and put in a modular three-bedroom house or something.

Which column would that be in, Bartlett?

It might be in the middle one. I mean, I really do think that that house isn't going to survive So I think, you know, putting, replacing it with another house would be acceptable.

So could you repeat what you, what you mean by that? Say that again, what you want is the middle column.

Well, I mean, that's, um, that's acceptable. It's not ideal, but it's acceptable. And, you know, that would mean demolishing the house and putting a replacement building there for three bedrooms.

Okay. So it's demolish it. The left is just demolish it. The middle one is demolish it and replace it with a three bedroom unit meeting the other specs of the RFP. And then highly desirable is to rehab it and sell it at Martin. Rehab it and sell it. Is that what we're saying?

Well, rehab it and I think selling it's going to be difficult just because of the property line issue. I think rehabbing it and using it as an affordable house would be the best. But I think that's also not going to happen.

Or we could open it, just rehabbing it and selling it or... Yeah.

I think the more open we leave it, the better.

Okay. Yeah, I think once we separate the house and the barn, we can...

So it's demolish it, replace it, or rehab it. Those are the three.

Yeah.

Okay.

And do we really, is there really a big difference in our mind between the second and the third options?

Well, the rehabbing it will be preferred by the historical commission. From the affordable housing, I don't know that we necessarily have to care so much because it's a house in either case.

Okay. I guess I wouldn't want to see a huge differential in the scoring for those two options, right, from the affordable housing trust perspective. I think for us, the difference is really minimal.

Well, that was one of the questions I was going to ask is, do we have to publish how we score these different criteria against each other, which are weighted higher, which are worse?

Yes.

So like they, how do you, so, so there's a scoring somewhere. I mean, there's all these criteria, this experience and, And we're saying what the weights of each of these are?

Yes. Although otherwise they're all weighted the same.

Okay.

It's it gets confusing when they're weighted differently.

confusing in that if you prioritize experience, you sometimes, and this has happened in a couple of my projects that weighted things. They weighted experience over the design, and then they ended up with an experience contractor or developer. with an unattractive design. So the weighting part is you have to take into a lot of consideration. So usually they're weighted the same and then And then with the scoring, it differentiates between each of the criteria.

I guess just looking at it practically, we don't need to spend more time on this because I doubt that many will come back with a proposal that rehabs that house. So I think we can move on. Okay.

Yeah, let's move on. We're almost at the end.

All right.

We are at the end. The price proposal is the last thing that I forgot to highlight. First lease payment is below $50,000 is not acceptable. First annual lease payment is $50,000 and subsequent payments are proposed to be nominal and highly advantageous and you can reject this if you want, but first annual lease payment is $50,000 and subsequent lease payments exceed $5,000 annually. Or whatever you want to put in there.

Is this typical of what you see?

Yes, and it usually gets negotiated at the lease signing. The $50,000 is normal. If you want to attract nonprofit developers, the first payment at $50,000 is fine. Anything above that, really eliminates anything above $100,000 would eliminate any of the nonprofits. This is a smaller project, so $50,000 is appropriate. A lot of times the for-profit developers will put a high first lease and then they'll ask for that much in CPA funds. So... And usually the ongoing lease payments are negotiated. And sometimes they are $5,000. Or we could put at least $1,000 or at least $5,000, whatever you want to do. That's the only questionable one, I think.

I was just going to say I'm fine with it. I think we can rely on your experience here.

Right. I will make those changes. I'll get all the attachments together. I will respond with the narrative in Word with the blanks highlighted. The attachments will be in a separate document that will all be together in one PDF. When the dates get put in, then the narrative will be in a PDF and just combine the two documents. OK. I will send a, I know, Maren, you've done this before, but I'll send a memo that has basically what you have to do to release it, what you have to notify and all that. I know you've done it, but...

It's been a while.

Yeah. And then, you know, what to expect at a site visit. Opening, when you're opening the price proposal will be an attachment to the proposal. So you'll have it there. And then just a couple things about reviewing the proposals is that all the meetings have to be open meetings, including deliberations and scoring. So that's something that people don't always agree with, but that's the rules. Any other questions?

Maureen, do we need to run this by Tom or Jenny?

Yes. Probably, yeah.

Good point. And are you taking the lead on that, Maureen, or is one of us?

I'm happy to.

And are we waiting for Laura's changes, or are we ready to do that now?

I'd wait for the changes if it's town council.

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

Yeah. I did block time tomorrow, so hopefully you'll get it back tomorrow.

Okay.

Okay. Excellent.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you. Have a good night. Thank you so much, Laura. Thank you for everything. Appreciate it. Pleasure.

Thank you.

Thanks, Shelley. Okay. I texted Amy a little late that it would be five minutes or so. I'll let her know we're ready. I'm here. Excellent. Thanks, Amy. We really appreciate your patience.

Not a problem. There was no sports tonight, so I was free.

Very good. Just World Cup if you're a fan. So but no, no kids sports, I guess you meant.

No kids sports.

Very good.

All right. So we're doing LRAP recertifications. I did receive an email from Mark, which I responded and shared it with Marianne and with Marin. But I just wanted to, I was planning on recapping it anyway. So when we previously had started doing the annual recertifications at the fiscal year turnover, we had made the decision to not review cases that had come in, participants that had come in and been approved within three months of the fiscal year turnover, just because they had just submitted an application and all the supporting documents, which was agreeable to the rest of the trustees at the time. So I operated under those same parameters for this review. So LRAP 45, 46, and 47 were recently approved and they have already been, their agreements were signed going through to June of 2027. MAKES SENSE. THE APPLICANTS THAT WERE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR RENEWAL WERE LREP 2, LREP 7, LREP 10, LREP 14, LREP 17, LREP 20, LREP 27 AND LREP 29. SO THEY HAVE ALL been notified by a letter, their landlords have been notified by a letter that they were not eligible to renew for this year. So their final payment was received for the June rent payment. The following LREPs had closed this year. So we had LREP 36, they closed, they moved. Their final payment was made towards their February rent. LREP 38 closed and moved. Their final payment was made towards January rent, LREP 40. was closed, they moved final payment towards January and LREP 42 closed move last payment issued for May and LREP 43 was the conditional approval for three months and they never resubmitted for consideration of extending. So their payments were issued for December, January and February. So I think that covers the whole fiscal year of all applicants. So the only ones that we're looking to renew for this year are LREPs 35, 39, 41, and 44, which are in your packets.

Thanks for that summary, Amy. That's really helpful. I know that there are a lot of moving parts and a lot to keep track of, so thank you for that.

No problem. Any questions on that?

So Angus here. What's the total vacancy we have right now?

So with currently there's only three that are in the program that are active. The ones that I'm presenting tonight, I'm hoping to be recertified. So that would put us at seven.

Okay. Thank you.

You're welcome. So for first, we have LREP 35. This is a recertification. So they originally started receiving payments from the program in December of 24. It's a household size of one with an annual income of $25,476 annually with a rent amount of $700, which includes their utilities and mobile home insurance with a preference point of nine. They are looking to re-certify, and I believe this, yeah, so December of 24. So they are eligible for one more year.

Any questions or comments? Would anyone like to make a motion?

I'll make a motion to approve.

I second.

Okay. Let's vote. Susan? Okay. You're muted, but I think you said yes. Okay. Bartlett?

Yes.

Mark?

Yes.

Angus? Yes. Marianse, yes. So LRAP 35 is approved. Okay, it's moving. Oh, sorry. I was going to say the same thing. Moving on to 39. Okay, sorry.

LREP 39, they're entering their second year. They originally came into the program receiving their first payment in June of 2025. They have an annual income of $14,928. They are a single-person household. They have a current rent of $700, which includes their mobile home, insurance, rent, and utilities. They are also still working on paying down a loan that they had to get through Habitat to make repairs to their home. So they are hoping to remain in the program so they can pay off that loan. Questions or comments?

You said 14,000 income?

Yes, 14,928 annually. All right.

I'll make a motion to approve LRAP 39 for another year.

I second.

OK. Let's vote. Susan?

Yes.

Mark? Yes. Bartlett?

Yes.

Angus? Yes. And Marianne's a yes. So LRAP 39 extension is approved. Moving on to 41.

Great. So also entering year two, LRAP 41, they began receiving payments in July of 25. Their Current rent is $1,850. It's a household size of two. They receive $40,897 annually. This couple, one of the spouse was previously still working, and they are well into their 70s. He has stopped. So this is a couple that their income has reduced, just no longer able to maintain employment. They have been on the waitlist and they've recently entered into the screening pool for the subsidized housing waitlist, which is the next level to getting into subsidized housing through the state's subsidized housing waitlist, which is a whole process. You enter into it, but you have to be screened for the protocols. And so they've been into the screening pool through a couple of different housing authorities, which is very promising. It just means that they're like at the top of their lists for a couple of different housing authorities. So they are hoping to extend in the hopes of getting into housing very soon.

It's good to hear.

Yeah. Getting into housing is difficult.

It's very difficult.

Yeah, as we're as we're listening to these, it just reinforces how important and how great it would be to have a Hebrew senior life project here and open up a center like that. That would be amazing. Yes.

Yeah. I'll make a motion to approve L map 41 for another year.

I second.

Hey, let's vote Susan.

Yes.

Mark?

Yes.

Bartlett?

Yes.

Angus? Yes. Marianza, yes. Okay. Do we have one more? Yes.

Okay. LRF44. So this is one of the applicants that was a conditional approval, I came back with it three months later, and we approved it to move forward, but it was on the cusp of where I felt like I should have them reapply. They were just outside that three-month window. So they began receiving benefits from the LREP program in January of 2026. That was their first payment. Current rent is $1,760 a month. It's a five-bedroom rental, $29,328 for an annual income, and it's a four-person household. They're still on the waiting list. Family housing is a lot trickier than senior subsidized housing. And they are exploring various options for affordable housing within Littleton and surrounding communities. So... They're just hoping to maintain the program while exploring those options.

Oh. Amy, can you refresh our memory? I think the reason that they were conditional when we approved them before was because their rent was such a high percentage of their income. Yes.

So this... Sorry. Yes, their income, she is receiving, it's a single adult parent household. They are receiving transitional assistance funds to which supplements their income, which is helping in keeping them afloat. Well, it's putting their income at a little bit higher.

Okay, we have questions, comments, or motion to approve?

I make a motion to approve LRAP 44.

I second.

Thank you. Let's vote then. Susan?

Yes.

Mark? Yes. Bartlett?

Yes.

Angus?

Yes.

Marianse, yes. So we have approval for all four LRAP extensions that were on the table. So thank you, Amy, for the clear, concise presentation. We appreciate that.

Sorry, Susan, go ahead. I have just a quick question, I guess, about the eight that had reached their three-year limit and could not be renewed. None of those eight had any extenuating circumstances today? that we should have been discussing last month before the last payment. I know Amy can't go into detail on each one, but I'm just surprised that eight are dropped.

So when we met in June of 25... The understanding I had was that the folks that were beyond the three-year extension period, this was going to be their final year. I provided them with that information in hopes that we would have come to a decision prior to the application period. WHEN WITHOUT A DECISION, I HAD BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH ALL OF THEM. I KEPT TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY WERE SURE THAT THIS WAS, YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LEAD THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE THEIR FINAL YEAR. AND SO I JUST KEPT IN TOUCH WITH THEM ABOUT THAT, MAKING SURE THAT THEY WERE PLANNING FOR IT AND UNDERSTANDING THAT THEIR FINAL PAYMENT WAS GOING TO BE IN JUNE OF 2026 AS IT STOOD AT THAT POINT. PROVIDED THEM WITH A LETTER OF NOTICE TWO MONTHS OUT, AS WELL AS THEIR LANDLORDS. NOBODY CAME BACK AND REALLY COUNTERED THAT. OKAY. SO IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT DECISION THAT THE BOARD HAS, I'M HAPPY TO REVISIT IT WITH THEM.

Amy, do you know what what their their plans are how they're going to cope with this change?

Thank you.

Um, a lot of one of them never responded to me even after letting them know. So I can't really speak to that. Um, many of them understood and were happy that they had the help from the program. And just were happy that they had it for as long as they did. I kept trying to reach out and connect about changes and all that. And all of them are on the wait list for these other programs. And we've talked about different budgeting options. We've talked about different options for housing. I mean, all of this has been reviewed with them. And at that point, getting them on all those lists, that's really kind of where it ends. outside of somehow trying to increase their income or getting different housing. So, I mean, I set them up with all of the different resources that are available.

Yeah. Thank you for doing that, Amy. I'm sure that wasn't easy, but I appreciate it. And you do everything with such compassion and care. So thank you for doing that.

You took the words from my mouth, Marianne. I was going to thank Amy for going above and beyond. Thank you, Amy.

You're welcome. Part of the job.

Any other questions or comments before we let Amy go?

Well, yeah, I just don't want to, I mean, yeah, I appreciate the work that Amy does. I really don't want to see you know, clients that we've helped become homeless because we've stopped helping them. So, I mean, that's really my question is, are any of these people going to end up in the street?

I haven't been informed of any immediate risk by any of them of that.

Okay.

There's a lot of steps that go into... And I know that the housing courts are backed up, but there is processes in place. But a lot of the resources to help the tenants that don't have access to get a fee-for-service attorney, the ones that are looking into legal aid, there's just not a lot available to them.

Right.

There's RAFT that can help, but... you have to be in that eviction process before RAFT will help.

And RAFT can provide up to $7,000 per year.

Yes. And it goes by date of receipt for that RAFT assistance. So, or applied. So if you applied in June of 2026 and received it, I think in June of 2026, you would have to wait until after that date to receive it again or apply for it again.

Right. So it's a rolling year. Yes. The good news is we've seen some of those applications turn around pretty quickly within a few weeks because it's prompted by an eviction notice, right? And they have to act quickly.

Yeah. Yeah. It's a two-week turnaround on those usually. They can last a little bit longer if there's follow-up documentation needed supporting the The hardship, which can be difficult for some families to provide. Marianne, as you know, with your work for St. Vincent de Paul, it can be tough to come up with.

Yes. It can be a couple cycles. If it first gets rejected and has to be resubmitted, but in general, for a government agency, it's a pretty quick turnaround. Yes.

I would have to agree.

Well, and these families have this information.

All of the people that were ineligible for renewal?

Yes.

Yes.

Okay, great. Thanks, Amy.

No problem. All right. Thanks, Amy. Appreciate your time and everything that you do. And we'll talk next month.

All right. Sounds good.

Thank you. Have a good night. You too. Bye-bye. Okay. Next up on the agenda is board business. First item, discuss funding options for small grants program. I don't have anything to update on that. Mark, I'm not sure if you do. I haven't taken any action since we met with Sophia that day.

No, I haven't either. I was thinking I need to follow up on that.

Okay. Let's meet before the next meeting and we'll have an update at that time. Item 3B is King Street common affordable units. I think if we look more broadly at the affordable units, that would include 410 and maybe a quick update on the Hebrew Senior Life proposed project as part of the overall Lepoli plan, but now proposed at 410. We talked about this in our last meeting, so I don't think we need to go through the details of what it was. The only update that I would share is that Lepoli and King the COO of Hebrew Senior Life, presented at the planning board meeting a few weeks ago, two weeks ago. I think it went well. I think they did a very nice job presenting, and I think there was a lot of support. And from the Littleton side, the comments were basically to, you know, what can we do to help accelerate this? You know, that they need to tell us what to do to support this, to accelerate it. A few really good comments about... working with the seniors to get them on board and different things. But overall, I think it was very well received. Maren, Bartlett, Mark, you guys were there. Anything to add?

I thought, yeah, they said there's 70 to 90 units, all one-bedroom units. we left it in kind of in their court asked for them to come back and ask us what they needed when they did say that you know there's expected to be a contribution from the affordable housing trust to the project which we kind of knew about like basically to get any of the the state or federal funding, the town has to have a buy-in to this. We have asked them to get with us sooner rather than later to give us what they're expecting and what we need to do to help them move the project forward. It sounded, correct me if I'm wrong, Martin or Bartlett, that they're hoping to apply for the state grant funding next September. So they basically needed our stuff in place well before that deadline, right? What our commitment would be potentially even for this false town meeting. So that pretty much sum it up?

I think so.

And I just got an update that Morgan Pearson from the polling team will be at the planning board meeting next Thursday night on the 25th, just for a very brief update to the planning board, to the town on the plans for 410 and plus the next phase of commercial development at 550. And then they're trying to position themselves so they'll be ready with a full set of plans in front of the planning board by the July 9th planning board meeting.

That's fast. Yeah.

Yeah, because they need the site plan. Well, not the architectural plans, but the engineering plans for the site plan and the stormwater review. Yeah.

So I guess the bottom line is that the housing trust needs to be prepared to part with a substantial amount of money, but that number has not been defined yet. But we will get a large number of affordable units out of it. Yeah.

Lauren, have you heard any indication of what that number could be?

I have not.

What I heard from Kim when we met in Bartlett, we heard this from her. The number is important not only to help subsidize the building, but also to send a signal to the state that Littleton is fully behind this. And that's tough to quantify, right? What amount is large enough to give a strong signal that we support this? But I think we asked for them to tell us. So we'll have that number soon.

So I, at the last planning board meeting, Carolyn from the CPC was there, and she heard some of this conversation, knowing that we're going to, affordable housing is going to potentially need more money. I'm reaching out to Steve Venuti and FinCom to kind of get them on board with... with more money coming to the affordable housing trust from the CPC. With talking to Carolyn today, there's about $140,000 in the housing bucket at CPC that is not currently under our control. I will also try to find out more like whether this is a project that we should pay for in cash or finance. Cause some of the CPC projects have been, we borrow the money rather than pay at all. I don't know what the preferred approach would be on this. And I don't know if the affordable housing trust can borrow money or if we have to do it through a different approach through town meeting. So I'm going to start researching some of that. So when we do have a number, we have a strategy for approaching that number.

The housing trust does have the legal ability to borrow money, but I think it would involve a town meeting vote. So, I mean, that's a town administrator or somebody like that questioned.

Yeah. I will be following up with that.

Thank you.

Thanks, Mark.

Any other comments, questions there? Okay. Okay. next item is minutes to approve from the may 19th meeting that everyone get a chance to take a look at sophia's excellent minutes she did a nice job and it was nice to have those to refer back to when looking at the rfp just to get some um you know point of reference so that was good we have motion to accept the minutes so moved Mark? I second. Angus seconds. Okay. We'll do approval. Susan, do you approve? Yes. Mark?

Yes.

Bartlett?

Yes.

Angus? Yes. And Marianne's a yes. Okay. The only remaining topic is to schedule our next meeting.

Can I ask, did anyone go to the Asset Housing Forum, how that was last week?

Yes. Yes, Morin did, and I did. Morin and I did.

Did you enjoy it? Was it informative? I usually like going to those, but I was away.

Go ahead, Morin.

Yes, it was very well done. They had two groups of two speakers, Carolyn from Habitat, No, I'm not going to remember. Oh, the prefab housing from Andover, one of the engineers from that group. And it was also interesting to see that that was one of the first times that North Central Habitat and this Andover company had connected and traded business cards. Definitely very much alignment on their ideals and their goals. The prefab company does everything from single families to extensive multifamilies up to five stories. So that was exciting to see. It was great to hear from Carolyn and everything that they're doing in the region. And then the earlier group, there was a gentleman from, I'm not going to remember the exact name of it, but there's a petition initiative to amend zoning statewide, well, at zoning statewide to allow additional development on larger lots with significant frontage, just to allow for some of the missing middle housing, single family homes. And Sue, I'm not going to remember the compliment to that one.

That was about the starter homes, the zoning for starter homes.

Yeah. The 40Y?

Yes.

Yeah. Yes. Yeah, actually, it was Bill Realt from agency. Yeah. Okay. Right. So it was a fantastic group of speakers with depth of knowledge and experience that was amazing to see.

That sounds great. I wish I could have gone. Thank you for sharing that. And yeah, maybe we can continue with board updates before we go on to approving the minutes. Bartlett, do you have anything to share?

No, not really.

Okay. Sue, anything to share beyond that update? Yeah. Angus?

Well, I have a question. I mean, I'm sure you guys must have seen all the ads on television about rent mandates and what the thoughts of the technocrats on that. There's a rash of ads going on now about voting or not voting for rent mandates.

I haven't seen the ads. Can you share a little more about that? I'm not familiar.

Well, I think it's something in the upcoming elections later in the fall.

There's a ballot question on whether they can do rent control and whether that's going to help or hurt projects going forward, so.

And I have heard from a couple of different multifamily developers that if they're considering developing nationwide, they're not funneling any funds towards Massachusetts building at the moment with this initiative on the horizon. They'd rather spend their funding funds elsewhere to get construction underway. So that was a little scary to hear.

Hmm.

Okay. Angus, if there's something, if there's any information that maybe you could gather before our next meeting to help educate us on that, if you wouldn't mind, that would be great. I'd like to learn more about it.

Yeah, sure. It's just the thrust of it is that it's going to raise rents for virtually all towns and cities, and it's going to crowd out... affordable housing and so that's uh the thrust of the ads it's a negative ad but i'll uh it's it's a it's a visual but i'll try to see if i can find uh written stuff that i can bring along yeah maybe an unbiased uh view of the um the proposed question that'd be great thank you mark any updates

Uh, sure. So, um, I, um, have my final JAPA meeting next Tuesday. I have to do a presentation on a housing initiative and I'm going to talk about, uh, how did, uh, the steps for doing, um, uh, building housing on municipal land based on our experience with Turkey. I think, you know, what we've gone, what we've been going through, uh, and how, you know, the process, basically, I have to present something to try and get it through like a town meeting. So that should be a lot of fun to put together. I always love presentations. I also wanted to tell people, I got a mail from Chapa that the Yes and God's Backyard is still alive and being reviewed by the Legislation Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies. So That bill, that amendment is still moving through, and there's two more that Chapa wanted us to weigh in on that affect the planning board more than affordable housing. One is reducing parking minimums, especially around commuter transit stations, and the other is codifying state plan reviews. So those are both in the works. At the planning board meeting when they were talking about goal setting for the year 40Y came up as a discussion, which is the starter poems. I attended a meeting through the CHAPA recently about that and sent information off to the planning board on some of the things they could do. Basically, it's Uh, the requirement is you have to allow four houses per acre and the maximum is 1850 square foot houses, but we can lower that at the planning board meeting. It was suggested that the affordable housing trust take more of the lead and kind of, um, take the lead or work with the planning board to come up with what we would like to see in the zoning requirements to get some of this going for our 40-wide districts. So stay tuned for more information as that develops. I think I'm very interested in this. I'm willing to keep pursuing it. And I think there's at least one or two people on the planning board that would be interested too. So if we want to form like a small working, not a, not a subcommittee, but a working group so we don't have to hold open meetings to work through this, I think it would be useful going forward. Do you agree with that, Maren? Is it worth something we can?

Yeah, we do.

And the Durkee project would be a perfect 40 Y type area. I think we're just out in front of a 40-wide zone for that. So that's all I have. Oh, and the housing, the MHP meetings are next Thursday and Friday. So I know I'm going. I think Marianne's going at least one day. I don't know if anyone else is going.

I'll be there Thursday.

Sophia will be attending.

Excellent. Just one other update, really your update, Mark. I know that you attended the last MAGIC meeting. I wasn't able to go. And while I was away, you sent a letter of support to continue MAGIC, which I think is positive. I think we've seen some value from that. I think we've also shared with other affordable housing trusts, especially the small grant program. So I think it'd be good to have that continue.

Oh yeah. So I'll, I'll add a little bit more. I forget if I added it at the last affordable housing meeting. One of the things that I came away from the last magic meeting is a lot of the affordable housing trust have meetings, like some of them meet quarterly, but I don't think, I think that's a way, too much for us, but like probably semi-annually with various stakeholders, like the CPC and the finance committee and the select board and the planning board to say, these are the projects we see coming up, right. To help line up the financing and line up the support well in advance. So like, we know that Hebrew senior living's coming up and we know that it's going to cost a lot from the affordable housing. So we can like before town meeting or even, um, So these groups will line up the support for these projects so that when you go to town meeting, you're just asking the money to go to the affordable housing trust. And then the housing trust, these groups already know how the money is going to be spent. And it makes life simpler that way. So I think we should start thinking about doing that, probably aiming towards you know, the September timeframe saying, you know, we know the Hebrew senior living projects coming up as one and, you know, and Durkee's coming up and these other projects that we have envisioned that we could potentially be working on and why we need a continued source of funding so that we don't have to go begging to CPC and FinCom on all of the things as they come up, we can basically say, this is our pipeline. So.

It's a good idea, Mark. So the groups you mentioned, you said planning board, CPC.

Select board.

Income.

Yeah.

What was the other one?

Select board.

Select board. Okay. And that would be not full board, but representatives from each?

It could be either way. I know like Concord, make sure that they have the entire select board there so that that they know they have the full support of the select board for any project they're doing. But it doesn't necessarily have to be that way. We can determine what would be best. But we should probably consider setting something like that up for September when we hopefully know more about Hebrew Senior Living, what they're asking for, and what other projects we could potentially view coming down the pike.

Yeah, and I think that time it would also work for if in the event that we do have to get a town vote, right, take it to town meeting.

Yeah.

So that would give us time to prepare for that. Okay, thank you for that. The only update I have is actually circling back to an agenda item that I inadvertently skipped, and that's 2C, strategy 3.2, RFP for property. Mark and I had worked on that with Kim in procurement. She went to legal, got some sign off for that. And Mark and I spoke with the other projects that are happening right now. We're gonna table that for the time being. The only action that we're going to take is to go back to one of the properties that we had considered earlier, just follow up with the person that bought the 13 Shattuck Street property, just to see if there's any opportunity for us to partner with them on affordable housing. I'm not overly optimistic that there'll be a path forward, but I think just to kind of close down that path that we had taken, we were looking for potential properties that we may not know about. Any thoughts?

Okay.

I think that finishes board update. Maren, do you have any updates you'd like to share?

I think we covered everything.

Good. Yeah, it's a long meeting. Thanks, everyone, for sticking with us. With that, let's go back to approve the minutes. So do we have a motion to approve the May 19th minutes?

Did we approve them already?

You did those already. We did them? Oh, okay.

Then we started. I wasn't sure if we finished. Okay.

You had started talking about scheduling the next meeting.

Ah, okay. Thank you for being my memory. All right. That's right. We're opening calendars. Our default is 3rd Tuesday. Okay. Which would take us to the 20th? The 21st.

I have a conflict on the Tuesday, but I could do the Wednesday or the Thursday. But planning board, probably it's the Thursday.

I'm going to be traveling that week.

I could do the 14th.

I can do the 14th.

I could do the 14th as well. Sue and I guess this is the 14th work Marin. Yeah, 14th works for me.

All right. I have a clash. I have a seven, a 7pm meeting. So it might I may have to jump off. But since it's it's it's okay for majority of people, so I'll, I'll stick with it. But I'll jump off.

What about the 15th?

15th is fine.

Not for me.

Okay. I think I could make the 14th work, but I don't think I could make the 15th work. Yes.

So let's keep the 14th. Okay.

Sue, that's good for you? Yes. Okay. And Maren, you said yes? Okay. The 14th it is. Okay. I think we can adjourn. Thanks, everyone, for a great meeting, and we'll talk to you next month.

Okay. All right. Is there a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Second.

Okay. Susan, do you approve? Yes. Mark?

Yes.

Angus?

Yes.

Bartlett?

Yes.

Marianne? Yes.

Thanks, everyone.