Affordable Housing Trust Fund Board of Trustees - Regular Meeting

So, welcome to the Affordable Housing Trust meeting for the month of April. This is Tuesday, April 15th, 6:30 p.m. And so, we do have um a quorum um established with U Bartlett, Matthew, Maryanne, and myself. And Matthew, I'm sorry. I just texted you. That's fine. I'm here. I meant to text Mark. So anyway, here we are. We have a quorum. So tonight we have uh several action plans to several action plan items to update on. And so the first one is going to be on the um LRAP program. Well, actually, you know, on the mini grant program, as I understand, Amy, we do not have any applications this time around. Not yet. I have um multiple applications that are in the process, but um not ready to present yet. Okay. And no questions or anything for us. Um I do have a scenario I would like to um explore with the um affordable housing trust. Um I know we have the income limits at the 80% um AMI. Um I have an a household where I'm wonder I I feel like there is the wiggle room to possibly I wanted to explore the possibility of um whether we could uh I don't know the best way to say this um work around the income guidelines because of the circumstances. Um, this household has um, one person that is in long-term care um, will not be returning home. Um, they're currently paying um, upfront for the long-term care stay in this assisted living facility. Um, which is, if you're familiar with that

type of expense, um, it's typically in the upwards of around between like 13 and and $18,000 a month. Um, so they have to pay that out of pocket up front and then they get reimbursed from their long-term care insurance. Um, so it's kind of like a revolving door of finances there. Um, come August of 2026, they will no longer have that possibility. The long-term care insurance will have run out. So, this grant will no longer be a possibility um, at that time or as of right now. Um, so I'm wondering if it's worth explore the possibility of presenting their case if if we would make exceptions because of their their circumstances. I guess I'm not clear what what the exception would be to the income guidelines. So they're they're they're they're above the income guidelines for the household size. Um, but one of the person's income that's being included is not currently in the home and they're paying a large amount out of pocket towards their care in a long-term care setting because it was no longer safe for them to be at home. So, the person in long-term care has an income. Yes. in ter as as defined by our housing policy but is not living there and is not going to live there. Right. And the so the the other piece of this um is that there a family member had to move in um previously for care for the the one that's now currently in long-term care but because of medical circumstances is now also needing to reside there for that person. So, there's the need for like that live-in oversight. Um, so because it's a household income, I had to consider their income as well, which

is what that's the part that kind of puts them over the the 80% AMI for the household size. Thank you for that information. I'm sorry. Go ahead. I was just going to ask a question. If would you be able to isolate that additional income and if you took the other resident's income without those additional members would it come in at 80%. Yes. if we didn't count the fact that um the live-in person um whose income I'm I'm considering because we're looking at the household size um if we took that out they would qualify any other comments or questions [Music] I I don't mind. I mean, I don't know. I don't know that we need to be a slave to the formula to compute income. Um, if if it's if it's the case that they're getting reimbursed and that's just a cash flow problem, that's diff that's different than if there's someone who's being counted who truly isn't bringing any income into the house. So, which one is it? So, the the household size I'm currently calculating is based on a fourperson household. One of those members is technically not in the home. Um, but they haven't lost that source of income. It's still coming into them, but essentially that income is going out towards the the long-term care facility. Um, and the live-in person that's that's there, a family member that's staying there, they have a child. So, it's it's a family, it's a daughter of of the couple um who's residing there. Um, so cons when when I consider had to

consider her income, that's what's putting them over. So, hi, I have a question. It's Angus here. Now the living person should really be considered as their own household and they should be separated from this uh entire family and they can live there as their own household and their income and everything separated from the rest of the household. And that way you're able to qualify that that family. And uh also technically speaking, the person in the long-term care facility really shouldn't be counted anymore as part of that household even though their income is coming through there because now in the assisted living facility or nursing home or wherever they are and they were supposed to have spent down to qualify to get into that facility. So these things have to be straightened out. So spend down and and all of that only comes into play when medic Medicaid is paying for your stay in a nursing facility. This is assisted living which is not covered by insurance typically. And the only reason that they're having this revolving door is because of the fact that they have a long-term care insurance that is willing is able to cover it. Um so they have to pay it up front and then they receive the money back as like a reimbursement. they have to submit all the receipts and everything and then they get it back as a reimbursement. And then what will happen is at the end of the the duration of that long-term care policy when it's been spent fully down, which will be in August of 2026. Um they will no longer be able to do that and they will be paying all of this money out of pocket. Um so hopefully that kind of clarifies that part. Yeah, that helps. But first of all, you have to isolate this living family member with a with an income of

their own. They have to be isolated as a separate uh family. Uh even though they share the same address, you have to separate them. And once you've done that, you possibly might be able to qualify the the rest of the family. I don't agree with that. I think I think that's something that's I mean by that definition my son that lives with me should be counted as that he'd be eligible for affordable housing living with us right that doesn't seem like it would make that doesn't seem like it makes sense to me um I do have a question on the the person that moved in to be the caregiver who are they I might have missed it or misunderstood there seems to be a lot of moving parts here who are they caring yes it is it's a it's a tough one to kind of explain Um, so the the family member is a child of the couple, the older couple um that was that came in to help with care for the the spouse of the person that's applying. Um, a medical event occurred which resulted in in the spouse going into long-term care. It was no longer safe for him to remain at home. and the one that's that's still in the home requires oversight for the family me for that next of the child to stay because of her their own medical conditions. Okay. So basically just to summarize there there it's an older couple one of the um persons is in an assisted living facility the other one is at home. The one at home requires some um oversight by one of their adult children. Yes. And you had said that this is a fourperson household who would be the fourth person. So I was technically considering the person that's in long-term care as the fourth member because they're that income is still coming into the house even though it's kind of simultaneously going out towards their long-term care stay. So So there's the person in

assisted living, the person who's at home needing oversight, and the adult child. So that's only three. So and there's a child. Oh, there's the child of the child. The grandchild. Okay, got it. Thank you. I I got to respond to Mark here. Uh this is Angus. Um by state rules um state rules, I'm talking Medicaid. Uh the uh other family members have to be separated for Medicare for Medicaid to cover. So, we're operating under state rules and should apply. If if indeed uh you have an adult child living with you and they need help through Medicaid, then they have to be uh separated um as their own household in order to qualify and be covered. So, that's that's that's the principle I'm working on. And so, Angus, just to um reiterate, I I think what Amy has said though is that this couple is not using Medicaid for the assisted living. Is that correct, Amy? Yes. Uh their Medicaid will not cover assisted living. That they only cover um PACE type programs, group adult foster care, and long-term care, which is not the the same model as an assisted living. I I just I think I'm looking at clarification as to whether the trust would be willing to separate the household between the two. Are you looking at particularly the two that are listed the the the members that are listed on the deed or are you looking at the entire household? I would look to Mark and Marin for any guidance given the the nature of the grant. Um did it provide any further guidance on that? I think we got to set the terms. The grant didn't really say

correct. So, it just said 80% AMI of h of members of the household. Um, yeah, we were rather generic in in the terms that we used. Um, so what I am hearing is there, um, the trust members, um, have some leeway and it sounds to me like it's worth pursuing. Um, I would recommend um, putting an application, having them put an application together. Um it'll take some more um explanation than others and um we'll if possible it would be nice to get the information to the trust members before the meeting um on this one um so we can consider and have some questions for you and maybe some suggestions on um what could help. A and a Amy, it might be nice to write it up in all the different scenarios where you count, you know, two of how to say if we count it this way, it it's definitely applies. If we count it this way, it does or does not, right? Cuz it's kind of confusing sitting here going through in my head what all the different ways are. And I I mean, I'm not opposed to any of this. I'd like to just understand right what what we're talking about in a little more um is is it's just hard dealing in the abstracts on this and trying trying to go is like is it a threeperson household or a four person household and right and just the different scenarios um right and then with with Angus' information about how one particular program um asks the households to or ask the state to look at it. Maybe um we can come up with a

recommendation based on um some another example. Yeah. Okay. I can do that. I would I would say that they if if we were to look at them as separate um not considering the child that the adult child's income, they would qualify. Okay. So, you're saying the elderly couple would qualify just by themselves they would qualify. The only reason that they're they're falling over that is because of the adult is there has an income and that's what I was suggesting. Yeah. Right. In particular if that's the a caretaker the trust could members could consider if that makes play plays into theation if that makes a difference. Amy, if you take out the the person in assisted living's income, do they still qualify with the caretaker as a three person? Um, I would have to look at their I would have to get back to you on that. I would have to do some more math on that because I calculated it based on the tax return. So, so I would have to I think as Marin said, this one does require a little bit more explanation. And then I I guess my final input on this is related to the the situation. If one family member is out of the household for the next 16 17 months and the other household member requires caretaking, um I I guess I I would just ask whether or not whatever it is that they're asking to be done for the home is actually going to help that particular individual who's still in the home. um and and how that helps that particular individual who's still in the

home. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. All right. Um so, anything else on this particular topic, folks? All right. So, I did have one related question to this um that I believe was brought up at the last meeting and that is whether or not it is time um for an application to be submitted again for these mini grants in the next round of funding. And Maren, I don't know if you have any information on that. Um so any housing choice grant would have to the town should do one housing choice grant. Um, and I haven't heard if we're to have others that are are already ready to go. Um, so where this one is an 18-month program, [Music] um, I think the town would have to consider if it's right, if it's right to to reapply right now. Okay. All right. Well, um, what should we do then as a next step to to determine if if if and when the application comes up? Will you let us know when that application is out again? No, the applications for community onetop are due June 4th. the applications open um beginning of May, but um I would suggest that the select board and town administrator's office get to um prioritize what applications the town submits. Okay. All right. So Mark and Matthew, if if you two would I'll continue having the conversations with the town administrator's office and based on um the good news is that um Littleton's um

MBTA communities, we got the letter of compliance with MBTA communities. So that opens one more um grant uh opportunity for us in the community one, one more grant type. Um, so if we have, for example, if we have four applications, we might be able to tailor each one to the four different big uh grant programs. So there's still the there there's the potential. I don't know how to put it any differently than that at the moment. So Lauren, are you tracking this or should I be tracking this or um I I just don't want to be putting the grant together on June 1st. Yeah, exactly. Um so I haven't heard of other grants. Um I don't know if you have or I don't know who's tracking that. So yeah. Um I I'll continue to work with the town administrator's office on it. Okay. uh keep me in the loop and we'll try and copy the last one if we need to. If it's helpful at all to have an exact number of how many active replications I'm I'm waiting to receive back, it's it's at least eight that um that that have like been in communication with me um that appear to meet the the financial eligibility. Some of them I've seen there the initial application process, some of them not yet, but they express their income situation. So, they definitely fall within the requirements and that's including this one. Um, so that that if that number helps at all. There's eight that I'm currently working with and and in communication with about the program. So, know if that's helpful or not. Yeah, it's it's great that it

is becoming well has started off with a bang. That's great. the fastest startup I've ever seen with a a new program. Marin, you said the grant applications are due June. June five. June five. Okay. So, we probably should decide like by May 5th or something whether we're doing this or not. Cuz it if I recall last time it just took a a few go rounds to get all the right information and fill everything up. Mhm. So maybe that's the thing to do right after town meeting. Okay, I'll I'll try and keep tracking that on that one, too. All right, great. Thank you. So, moving on to um next item on the agenda, which is the new applications for the LRAP program. Amy, so this is these I have two new applicants um to present today. Um, on a side note with the reertifications, did you want me to save those and do them all at once at like the typical affordable housing trust meeting or as I have received them and um I have the cover sheets ready to present. Did you want me to break them up? I know we have a couple other I don't know if we have a couple other meetings or one other meeting before the next typical time frame for the affordable housing trust meeting. I just didn't know how you wanted to go about that. if I have them in hand and I can do it um at the next meeting, I can do that. I think we had said that the only ones to to do at the interim meetings that are specific to Derky um just if there was any of the mini grant because we know that they're more timesensitive. Okay. Yep. So, okay. So, presenting the new LREP cases is okay, not the ones that are going to be reertified. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. All right. So, um LREP 39,

this is a um single 70-year-old um who resides alone works she works with our office to explore and apply for all public benefits. Um they are on the wait list for state subsidized housing over at Pineree Park. They're currently over at the um mobile home park um which the the rent the lot fee is $440 a month. um their annual household income is $23,244. Um per month that breaks down to $1,937 a month. And um part of that income, $800 a month of that is actually being pulled from a savings account to cover her living expenses. um which are are also utilities but also because there's a lot of repairs needed for up upkeep for the um unit that she is in. Um the there's a lot of repairs that have been required in order to maintain the pro the mobile home and um the biggest thing she's facing now is um that the entire subfloor needs to be replaced throughout the mobile home. So, um, her yeah, gave you all of it. Single individual. This is one of those where it's kind of a double. I mean, if her subfloor needs to be replaced, wouldn't she be applying for a mini grant as well? Just one of them. Well, um there's a there is the I believe at this point there is um she has started the application for that program, but depending on the expected costs, we might be exploring the critical home repair through Habitat for Humanity. Um if she was able to get some

because those because those are loans, they have to be paid back. If there was a way for her to get some financial assistance towards that expense, it would be great. So, if there was a way that we could work around that with the mini grant program, that would be wonderful and it would help her stay there for longer with her without her being at imminent risk for um homelessness, meaning evicted or um like in the court process. It would she's looking at that 10 to 15 year time frame at on the state subsidized housing wait list. replacing the subfloor sounds like a new trailer to me, a new unit, I think. And that's where it kind of she's kind of weighing out a lot of different variables at this point and doing what she can to maintain the place where she is and where she's hoping to stay for as long as possible. with with her being on the wait list for those other types of housings, it's she's she's obviously not able to afford a market rate rental, so this is kind of her alternative. So, we're we're doing what we can to keep her in her home for as long as possible. Yeah. So, sorry, Amy, she she owns the the trailer but pays lot fees for the the mobile park. Okay. So, that's why she would qualify for both because she owns the trailer yet rents the the lot. Audit. Thank you. All right, members. And any other questions for Amy on on this application? And this is LRAP number what? I'm sorry, Amy. 39. 39. Okay. Thank you. So th this is a kind of a a tricky situation though. So I'm I'm just asking if someone was in a condo, would we pay their condo fees? Right.

The condo fees um would be part of the overall housing cost. Um running it with a condo. You're you own it. You're not renting it. I think that's the difference. Yeah. But she owns it. She owns the trailer the the mobile home and she's she owns the mobile home but not the lot. So she has to rent the lot. So, she's basically paying an HOA fee. It's very similar to a condo, right? Where she owns the condo and is paying a fee, except it's it's almost upside down because of the amount of the rent is much more significant than the condo fee and the Littleton condos. Anyway, well, not if you look at Hagger, but yeah, I'm I'm I'm not opposed to this. It just seems like that I'm just trying to figure out like the double dipping in the things that just this is just a weird one, right? Well, that's the way that the model from for um homes mobile homes work. Um manufactured homes that sit on lots they are owned by by the family, but then they they all have to rent the lot that they sit on. So, it's just the the way that that particular model works. So, I don't see any concern about providing assistance on on the rental of it, especially that different than a condo fee, right? Because the condo, you don't own the land that the building sits on. You own what's inside the walls and you're paying a fee for the rest. So, it's the same model or very, very similar models, right? Um I I would suggest the difference might be that you also in a condo situation you also have part ownership of all of the rest of the facilities um the land the etc.

Well, you have well, do you have ownership or responsibility, right? I mean, yeah. The the way I've seen it I I understand your question. The way I've seen it set up is it's you have partial ownership in in the rest of the property outside of everybody's individual units. Um, right. You get to use the condo swimming pool and driveways and and driveways and all that stuff. Yeah. Well, she gets to use the driveways there, too. So, I mean, it's all the same, right? But doesn't own part of that. That's just Yeah. Yeah. It's not I I don't think it's an entirely wrong analogy, right? And that's kind of why I asked the question as well, Mark. you know, because it does seem that I I didn't expect someone to be able to apply for both. But um but I'm not opposed to it given the um given the situation. I I'm not sure we haven't um assisted someone in a uh in such a situation before, Marin. Am I wrong? Or did we have um No, I think we might have had a member who was in a a trailer park and not necessarily that we assisted them. Is that correct or am I wrong? There are L LREP participants that are at the mobile home park. Exactly. Yes, we have. So, I I'm not entirely sure why we should have this problem. Is the conflict because of the small grant program part? I I it just seems like I'm not sure. Yeah, that's part of the issue um for me is the just the double dipping part. But

um um I have another general question. And so um I when we assist people do we actually ex so if we gave her the LRAP the full money that's basically paying all of her expenses um her her entire rent amount right do we expect people you know the typical rule is whatever 30% or something that you're supposed to be able to apply do we cover the entire thing or are we still expecting some contribution on her end. I thought the rent was 1300 a month. Is that 440? I thought So the the lot fees are 440 a month. And yeah, that's not including utilities and and the So what's 1300 then? I don't I don't know what number you're I don't know what where that's coming from. Okay, that's what I wrote. I'm sorry. 1937. I think that was her that was her income. Yeah. So, she gets um 1,937 a month, but 800 of that is pulling from her savings. So, she's more around like the 1,37 137 a month. So again, and my question is, do we ex, you know, if we're giving the LRAP, the full LRAP, she would get the full $440, right? Which basically means that we're covering the entire amount, right?

and she's not covering the 30% or whatever they I think it's 30% is the number that they say is the how much you should be spending on housing. That's what the housing authority does. But we've paid the we've paid um the full rent for other people at the trailer park. That's what I'm asking. Is that what our plan is and that's what we are expecting to do or Yes. I would say that this isn't precedent setting. We we paid others who are living in the mobile home park and I would say that if an application comes through on the mini grant then we can continue to have that conversation but for now I I think given the income level for for this household it's very appropriate to fund this. I do too. So do I. Amy, just for clarification on the other people at in that location, um we don't we don't pay them the full 500. We pay the the whatever the their rent is. Correct. Right. We do not exceed the rental amount. Um, this was the the reason that we had the wording in the agreement to be up to 500 was specifically put in there because we didn't want people thinking they would get a surplus. Um, okay. Thank you. I'll make a motion that we the board vote to approve LRAP 39. Second by Angus. Right. Moved and moved by Bartlett, seconded by Angus. Any further discussion?

All right. With that, let's vote. Um, Bartlett, yes. Matthew, yes. Angus, yes. Mark, yes. Maryanne, yes. And Ann is a yes. All right. So, thank you, Amy, for LREF 39. Thank you. Just for clarification then, LRAP 39 will go through whatever they will go from June of 2025 to June of 2026. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. So, next um we have LRAP 40. Um this is a couple um they are one of them is struggling with um mental health issues currently um had to leave work is receiving FMLA currently but that is scheduled to end um on May 1st. So, when you look at their income together at at this moment, it's 70,863 annually. Um, but come May 1st, they would be dropping down to 68, uh, $37 annually for their household. um the um they fall just outside those income qualifications for a lot of programs like SNAP fuel assistance. Their income is too high to qualify. Um they're not um so they're not able to access benefits such as SNAP or or fuel assistance. Um they are exploring different ways of reducing their their fees and and expenses. Um and their their monthly rent is

2,675 a month. Um so they are seeking assistance through the affordable housing trust to kind of get through this rough patch that they're going through financially. um the the one that's struggling with mental health issues is hoping to be able to return to work eventually, but mental health is something that's especially with the circumstances, it's very difficult for the them to overcome. Um I don't it sounds like they might be exploring um an extended time frame without returning to work. Um, so they are working with an attorney about um, Social Security disability benefits in the meantime, which um, I would like to mention is quite the grueling process. Um, when you apply, you're typically waiting at least 6 months for their determination and a lot of times it gets denied and then you have to get an attorney involved to help you um, ex fight the decision and um, with hopes of it getting overturned. Um, and then you can get back payment, but again, you're going that entire time frame without income. Um, the FMLA will no longer cover you and other benefits will they will continue to be ineligible for other benefits because their income is just over for a twoerson household. Can you say again what their income is now and what it will be? Similar. Yes. So, um the when you're because we're right now they are receiving the FMLA. So, um I they're out their their income calculated to be $70, um $863 annually. Um it will go down to $68,00,37 annually effective May 1. But that's only a drop of like $2,500.

it it that's how much she's receiving through FMLA which is not what she was receiving when she was employed. So the expenses that there is a rears that are owed in rent we're exploring raft we're um looking at ways that they can reduce their expenses in order for them to be able to make it over these next few months. Do you want me to break that down into a monthly income? Is that easier? Hold on. No, I can I can do that in my head. Okay. I can't this social work so not accounting. It went from like just under 6,000 to about 5,800 I think. So um Angus uh has a question. It sounds like their request is just for a temporary period to assist them through the rough patch. Um uh I believe that's something we can do just to get them through and then whatever happens after that we can always um circle back and see if it's something that we need to get involved with. Now that's my position on this. So Amy, you said they're going to be likely applying for disability and that's a six-month process at minimum. So, and if they and if the disability comes through, they no longer need the LRAP assistance. Um, so if they depending on what their disability amount will be, um, it's still going to have them I mean I wouldn't I from my experience what I've seen people receive on disability. It is it's less than what she's they're currently receiving from FMLA. You said the FMLA is coming in the FMLA is coming in weekly and the disability

will come in monthly at about usually I see it range from like 15 the highest I think I've seen is 18 per month I've also seen 1100300 so I think there's a big range there yeah it depends on a lot of different factors Um, the algorithm is calculated through the through social security based on previous employment and paying in in quarters and whatnot. Yeah, I'm just going through the math. You said when the FMA dries up, so you said 6,800 so or 68,000, right? So that's after they're no longer getting FLM F that would be the single person's income. Yes. Okay. So that's not getting the disability that yeah because I don't have any idea what that would be. So at this moment I can only calculate with what I know. So so it's 68,000 plus disability which even at 1100 is or 1,200 is $14,000 a year. Right. So that would put them over the threshold way over the threshold then at 82. Yes. Okay. But again, you're looking at six month minimum. They haven't yet applied. They're working on an application. Six months until it's reviewed and a decision is given, denial, and then another however amount of time before it's re-reviewed with an attorney in hopes that it does get approved. I've seen them take two years. I don't know your experience, Amy. You've seen a lot more than I have. But it can be a long process. Yeah, it's it it is a very long process and it depends on the involvement of the

attorney and so many different things. It's every situation is going to be different. Um sometimes it's because of um you know paperwork not being submitted so it delays things. I mean, there's so many different variables that go into their decision and and maybe it could be even just getting the proper documentation from the hospitals or doctors that are involved to confirm the disability, whether it's going to be long-term or it falls under their statutes of what is eligible for a disability benefit. So my my question is more along the lines that let's just let's just assume you know there's unicorns and in six months you know they get the disability it comes through right and then now they're no longer eligible for the LRAP. Are we still funding the LRAP for them until it expires in a year or do we somehow word the LRAP so that we're funding it until the disability comes through or up to a date? I was going to suggest that maybe we do it for a year and then re-evaluate. I I was thinking the same thing, but I was thinking six months, right? If and and then we can go month to month or quarter to quarter after that right that's but you can tell me you know that I would say it'll go for a year and if if you know the disability comes in in that time Amy will tell us and we'll she can recalculate but Amy's not going to know when the disability comes through unless they're actually working with Amy for the disability, right? I would I would have to be in touch with them and make sure that they're reporting the changes to me, which I can do. That's not that's not a

problem. Yeah. Um but that's that's up to you, guys. Well, they're they're way rent burdened. I think we should support this. I would say that when you're when you're living at the at the they're already in 10,000 arars that we're going to be looking for help from um raft for um which raft only helps I think the cut off is 7,000 right Marian? Yes, that's right. um $7,000. And um so they will have to come up with a a payment plan to repay that amount that they still owe um in a rears that having a rent this high with other living expenses and it just it adds up very quickly. Um, so yeah, I think that I think that's a viable point to weigh into the decision-m process. I'm not a Oh, go ahead, Mary. Sorry. I was just going to say I I agree with supporting this and whether it's uh checkpoint at 6 months or 12 months. I think either of those are reasonable. I I did want to disclose also that I I met with this couple and I Amy and I have talked about this case um through my work with St. Vinc and I'm fully supportive of this but I just wanted to to disclose that as well. I am supportive it of it. I just think we need to have the checkpoints. So agreed and they can be, you know, six months and quarterly thereafter or whatever, you know, but we should just have the checkpoints and report back that, you

know, they're in the process or something, right? Mhm. And but I don't want to make it too much of a burden on you either, Amy. So Oh, that's not a problem. I can make sure that I have it set in my calendar. Um, so were you thinking at the six-month point to check in or I mean I'm probably going to be working with them ongoing for quite some time, but um is that what you were thinking initially is the six-month time frame. Yeah. You said it takes six months to get started and do six months and then quarterly, you know, six months, nine months type thing. And then we're at a year. So we'd be back and doing that review anyway. Yeah. Any other comments on Mark's proposition? Nope. Okay. So, I'll call them or excuse me, Mark. Uh, is that Do you have a motion for that? Sure. Uh, this is LRAP 40. Yeah. So, I'll make a motion that we support LRAP 40 uh uh with contingent on Amy doing uh reports back at 6 months and nine months. I'll say for the year. Okay. So, Mark moved in and Matthew second. Um, any further discussion? I just want to make sure. Sorry, the family came home. Um, did you want me to have the agreement um set up for the six-month time frame to check in and then revisit extending or keep it for the 12 months and just make sure to update the trust on this at the six-month point? You're going to update us at the six-month window and again at the 9month if they still need it. Okay. After the sixth. So don't do the agreement for the full. You can do the agreement for the year, right? But provide the update. But provide the update and we'll if they don't need it after 9 months, right? If the disability comes through, then you know the agreement terminates early effectively.

Right. Okay. So we still have the same motion on the table. Um, all in favor, um, Bartlett, Bartlett, yes. Matthew, yes. Angus, yes. Mark, yes. Maryanne, yes. And Anna is a yes. So, that LRAP number 40 is approved. Thank you. Thank you very much, Amy. Anything else that you would like to share with us this evening? I think that covers it. I I gave you guys enough challenging ones to think about. Amy, sounds like your role is definitely um becoming more challenging because they're all these different nuances. Yeah. When are we doing I wish it was right. All right. Thank you everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So, we're going to move on then to um something related to LRAP, which is the status of the funding request at town meeting. Bartlett, I believe you had um talked with CPC and everything is ready to go for town meeting. Is that correct? I believe so. I believe it is. Okay. And that's for 106,000. I believe so. And so if there's if there are any questions um on May 6 at town meeting, will you be there to represent uh the trust to answer any of those questions? Okay. [Laughter] Yep. Okay. All right. Thank you. If not, I'll volunteer Matthew.

All right. So, moving on to our next item, and that is um the strategy to partner with external housing organizations, which is MHP um for strategy 2.1, Derky Farmhouse. Um, just to let everyone know, we have not received anything from MHP yet, but we do anticipate receiving something for the April 30th meeting. Um, in the meantime though, I I understand that um, Bartlett and Mark and Maren did have a discussion with town council. Um, so Bartlett, would would you provide us with an update on that? Uh yeah, the question basically to town council was um what do we do about um dividing the property and and the that we seem to want to do and the restriction from the CPC money that we can't that it all has to be affordable and the suggestion from town council was that we can resend the vote that we made to purchase the property for $50 with um community preservation funds and then we can reby it with nonCPC funds which would get rid of the um restriction from community preservation that every unit has to be affordable. So the selling it or or rescending the purchase and re redoing the purchase would get us out of that restriction. that was came through in an email today. And so um that would then satisfy both those questions, right? regarding. Yes, it

would give it would give us the power to to um have nonaffordable units on that site or to um um dispose of part of the property and some somebody else worry about it and well, we continue to do affordable on the rest of it. So, it frees us up a lot. All right. So, I think that was the uh followup that we were looking to get from town council after our last meeting when there was a question as to whether or not we could uh dispose of the property and under what type of um uh what type of motion. But given the the nature of of that advice from town council, um it sounds like we have to then have that discussion. Well, I think given the pro the problem with the that house that that rescending the CPC vote would give us a lot of flexibility. I'm not sure that I know what to do with that flexibility at this point, but I think having it would be better than not having it. I was thinking the same thing, Barla, but I think you worded it much better than I was. I agree. We still we still have a lot of issues we have to decide like how we

would you know eventually subdivide if we want to go with one RFP you know with the historic and all of this um the yeah but it allows us to actually uh discuss that rather than not being able to discuss it right I mean my my my thought at the moment is that we don't maybe we resend the vote. Um but in terms of the RFP we don't say anything about it. We just allow say that that um you know some some market rates are allowed and and we'll consider the possibility of of a subdivision if of a division of the property if a developer wants to propose that to us. So that we let you know we don't determine we we we allow the the people who respond the most flexibility. Yeah, I I agree with that. But um you raised a question a long time ago whether a single property can have multiple septics. Do we have to get something for that? Who would we have to go to to get? We'd have to go to the board of health and the um permit and maybe the ZBA. I don't know. I don't know. But I mean that's a I think that's a variance. I think that that the the the title five rules can be bent. I mean, Sho Lane crossed the street, which is completely illegal with their septic system. So, if we're going to be doing I I if we

think we can do things like that, then I'm fine with doing them. We should just do them outside of the RFP process so that when we issue the RFP, we say can say that we have variances, right? we can clear those hurdles for whoever is going to be not trying to do the permitting before you have a project design. All right. I mean, it might make sense to talk to the governing bodies and see what their answer would be to a to a suggestion that a variance is needed. But I wouldn't go any further than that. Okay. Any other comments about this topic about rescending the prior vote? So, uh this is Angus. I I do have a fundamental question. Um this trust was uh created out of the fact that the uh funding and um policies and procedures are going to be flowing through the CPC CPA and so if we resend it, what other monies are we going to use to pay the $50 or however much it is uh that's not accountable to the CPA. There there is there are funds I think it's um I don't know maybe 400 or something like that dollars that that have been contributed by churches in town towards the for the benefit of the housing trust and we could use that money that was contributed directly to

us from churches And does that free us from uh being uh tied to the CPA as it were for that money? There's no ties to CPA. Yes. Okay. So then I think that raises an additional question that isn't clear and that is if we acquire the money or acquire the house with non CPC dollars, we then cannot use CPC dollars for this property for the renovation of that house. Right. And do we know for sure that we can use CPC dollars for the rest of the property? We can't, right? Because it's not affordable anymore. Or would it have to be 100% affordable if there's some affordable housing? Maryanne, can you repeat that? So, I had the same question, Anna, but I was wondering, can we use the funds if there is a certain percentage affordable even if it's not 100% affordable? I think that would be a question to to go back to town council and ask. Right. So, I I would I'm happy to ask the question. I would suggest it's would be more of um like a buy down um in any other um type of development that you can use CPC funds to deepen the affordability or assure that more units are affordable. We can certainly run that um that question by town council. Yeah. Yeah. It seems like we wouldn't I mean if we would be able to develop existing town property through the affordable housing trust with CPC funds

then we should be able to do it with this right whether we purchase it with CPC funds or not cuz no no other town property was purchased with the CPC funds. Yeah. So, uh, I think ultimately what I'd like to see from town council is something identifying what we can and cannot do with or without this being a CPC acquired property just so that it's really clear. Um, and Maren, would you want to ask them about that or would you like me to? I can certainly ask them about that if you'd be like to be part of the conversation that we could do it that way. like them to put it in writing because I think there's way too much equivocation about what we can and can't do. And it seems like every time we have a conversation about it, another question comes up that that isn't able to be answered offhand by us because we then have another question. So, so to the degree that we could ask them, you know, what what are the the ramifications of taking this property and um rescending the previous vote so that it's only non CPC dollars, what what does that really mean for any future funding of the property? And then and I would suggest that we first start with the CPC website. um the state um co um community preservation coalition website um for general information and then for specifics turn to town council on on this site. I have a procedural question on this. If we do this who get does like does Maryann get to vote on resending an article that she didn't get to vote on in the first place? I she didn't she wasn't part of the

original vote, right? I don't know if other members weren't part of the original vote. I don't remember when it happened, right? I don't even know if I was on that vote, so I don't know who gets to vote to rescend it. We can certainly go back to the minutes and see if we have a a quorum of members who are were then and are now on. It's a simple majority. So, Why wouldn't members who've come on since then not be allowed to vote to resend a vote that happened in the past that they didn't vote for? Yeah, I understand the question, but I we'll find some guidance on it. Yeah. Okay. So, we're not going to make this decision this evening because we still have too many questions. So let's just identify what those questions are so that um Marin can try to get some some answers very specifically. So we have the question about uh if um this were to be rescended, what other monies could we use for an affordable housing project coming from from us? Is that correct? Coming from the affordable housing trust. Is that what your question was, Angus? Yes. Okay. And you questioned whether we could use CPC funds to help develop it if we didn't spend CPC funds on the original. Correct. Because that's the way that town council represented it back in December of 2023 when we were acquiring the house was, do you want to acquire it with CPC dollars because that's the only way you're going to be able to get CPC dollars for this affordable project. If you don't use CPC dollars, then you know

then then you can't. So, so it was very cut and dry, if you will, as to what the advantage was to being able to purchase it with CPC dollars. So then, um, Mark, your question is, who gets to resend the vote? Yeah. Does it have to be members who were here at the time that voted for the purchase? Yeah. Of turkey. Okay. So, I have another question. Um, and that is should we be telling MHP that we're talking about doing this and see if it changes anything they're doing, right? so that we don't if we expect this to actually go forward, which I think it's reasonable that it does, should we let give them notice rather than waiting two weeks and telling them then that, you know, we effectively could be changing the playing field out from under them? Well, I think that they were waiting to hear back the thoughts of town council. So, Bartlett, could you do me a favor and please forward that email that you got from town council to um to Laura and myself and Maren? Sure. And so then that will inform them as to uh where we are and we can let them know that we're still asking additional questions. I think one of the things and I just mentioned it like five minutes ago that I really want to be clear about is nothing that we have written that says if you go CPC use CPC dollars here are the pros and cons. If you don't use CPC dollars here are the pros and cons. That's what I want. And I heard Marin say oh well we get to start off

with the guidelines. Well that doesn't help because we need somebody to actually go through and do it. So, if you're willing to go through and do it, that's great. Otherwise, town council, we need to go through it and do it. But that's what I want. I want to be able to see what are the pros and cons of going to using CPC dollars versus nonCPC dollars because we need to be aware of what what the ramifications are. [Music] any other comments or questions that we need to be asking town council. All right. So, Bartlet, thank you very much for sending that for forwarding that email off. We'll do. Okay. All right. The one other thing about Derky was regarding the property insurance. So Diane Dickerson is looking at renewing that property insurance and that can be done at the end of this month once it's about 60 days from the 73 renewal date. So the insurance insurers asked two questions that I wanted to uh get your input on. So, um, they asked if we want a six-month policy or do we want to look at a one-year policy? What are your thoughts on that? Because I let them know that we are currently working with Mass Housing Partnership to be able to create an RFP that will go out and that the time frame

for that process should be about 6 months. So the six months would be from the end of July through January. I think it I think it's going to be a year. Um if even if the MHP process takes 6 months just to get a PNS signed is going to take I mean a months after that. So, Mhm. I think we're going to be in at least a 9month time frame before we sign anything. So, okay. Any other comments or thoughts? Certainly safer to go for a year than 6 months. Yeah, I agree. Okay. I agree as well. All right. Okay. Thanks everyone. And Mark, to your point about the timeline, the second question was um do we have a specific timeline for the property? And so I had mentioned the six-month uh process to them. And as you said, it will probably take a little bit longer than that as well, assuming that all things were to go smoothly. So I will go ahead and share that with the insurance company and that way they can plan accordingly to give us the uh renewal quote via Diane. Any other questions on turkey? No. [Music] Well, moving on to the next one. Uh Mark um I know that we heard um that Carolyn had come in Carolyn from Habitat for Humanity had come in to sign the documents and um I had forwarded those

to everybody all of the uh trustee members. So congratulations for getting that work done. I know that it was a lot of effort. So what are the next steps on that? Um, I don't know what the next steps are on that. We probably I haven't reached out to Habitat to see what's um going. We probably need to talk to them to see what what their schedule is and plans are. Um I don't Yeah, I haven't followed up any more on that. Um I can I'm not sure what we need to do next. Okay. Well, there might be more than this, but from signing off on the grant agreement, it says the prior to the commencement of any work, the recipient must submit a complete project budget that accounts for the expenditure of all funds awarded. And then they're supposed to provide us with project status reports on a quarterly basis beginning the first month of every quarter. So the first report I guess would be July 1. So I guess maybe that would be a good place to start with Caroline. Okay. Budget and project report. The other thing we need to do is start um a big fundraising effort in Littleton to get people to sign up to participate and to fund it. I don't know how that happens. I'll reach out to Caroline and see what help and support she needs from us and how we can make sure this is rolling forward and get updates. Terrific. Thank you.

So, if we go back to Derky for a minute, Anna, I'm just searching this community preservation database, and I can see that Harvard um basically they're providing payment to a developer of a housing project to guarantee 12 of 46 units are being affordable through their CPC housing dollar. So, that's basically what we would be doing is giving a payment to guarantee affordability of some of the units. So, it seems to fall into the exact same criteria as something like that. Got it. Okay, thank you. So, let's see. Mark, you're up next um on the next item in the agenda as well around senior affordable housing at the Shadic Street Town Hall. Could you provide us an update on the um meeting that was held last week? Um so we um we held a public forum about the Shadic Street project. Uh I think there were roughly 2530 people there. Uh they we talked about moving town hall and um and turning the existing building into deeply affordable housing. There were a lot of questions um about it. Um um and we're determining the select board is still determining the best course forward at um the Maytown meeting. Um there's two articles 12 and 13. One to declare 13 is basically declaring the property surplus and 12 is a special legislation and we're working through the best course to try and make progress. Any comments or questions?

It sounded like it's going to be a long-term process. Yeah. So, the special legislate legislation takes at least 6 to 8 months um to work through the process. And it doesn't sound like if we even have voted in in May that that proc it sounds like if we voted in May, we might have it done by this time next year. So, and then the process of doing grants for the um I forget what the name of the grant is for the the tax credits. That's an 18 to 24-month process. So, there's a lot of a lot of hurry up and wait type activities that we're going to be going through. There's also the schedule if if town hall wants to move to the someplace on the 550 King Street site, that's going to be a four or five year process anyway. Yeah, quite possibly. Yeah. I think the only thing I would add to that schedule information is that before a developer can apply to the state for the low-income housing tax credits, they have to have um design in hand and permits in hand. So, so then that adds to the timeline then. Yeah, correct. Correct. Um but I have expressed several times um that it would be great to see it move forward. Um the town is considering one um grant application um possibly under the it's community one-stop grant but through the Mass Works underutilized properties program. Um, and I believe right now the way I'm thinking about it is the request would be for a feasibility study and

architectural design and for detailed site plan and um uh engineering for uh the 37 Shadex Street property. um trying to consider if if that um would be a good way to get funding in order for the town to be able to see um some of that work move forward and partner with mass development um on funding for that. All right. Anything else? Okay, so let's move on to board business. Let's see. Trustee and town planner updates. Um, Bartlett, do you have any other items that you would like to share with everyone? No, I think um I've said everything about Derky that I know. Thank you, Angus. How about you? No report. Maryanne. So, I just wanted to thank um you Anna and Bartlett Magus for speaking at the select board meeting and of course to Mark and um Matthew. Um sorry I couldn't make it. I did watch the the replay and it was a good update. So, I just wanted to say thanks. You're welcome. Mhm. Yes. Angus and Matthew did a wonderful job in updating. Uh let's see. Mark, anything else? Uh nope. Matthew? No, nothing from me. Okay. Susan is not with us this evening. Uh let's see. I have just a couple of items. Um, every year the affordable housing

trust um goes through the audit process the same way that the rest of the town financials do. And so the auditors have completed their um their audit and um there no no findings of concern. We're not going to go to jail. Wanted to report that out. Correct. Uh second um I also had sent over uh the MHP conference information and uh the cost to attend is $100 per day 175 for both days. So I don't know if any trustee is is interested in that and if so Marin how would they how would we attend and if that could get paid for and if so how does that come then out of our our budget? It would be just a vote of the um trust to pay for those funds and yes it would be out of trust funds. planning department doesn't have additional um training budget to cover that. Okay. All right. So, does anybody seem interested in attending that MHP conference? It's going to be held at the DCU Center in Worcester. When was it again? I think it's like June 4th and 5th. I'll be out of town. Uh I'm a possibility of attending. I don't Yeah. Um well if if you do want to attend um could you let me know for our next meeting in May next regular meeting so that for that. Okay. Yeah. Great. If

anyone else wants to attend I will gladly give up my seat. All right. I'll think about it. Wait, question. Yes. Is the trust only going to pay for one participant or is it as many trust members that can go? Well, I don't know that we've necessarily had an opportunity like this before where we've asked if folks would like to attend and and have it be paid for because that that is um a larger amount to, you know, pay as a volunteer. So, I'd be open to saying anybody who wants to attend should be able to attend. I think it's part of building capacity which is one of our strategies um or one of our goals I should say. So we if we want to be able to build the capacity of this board it means attending conferences like this. So I would be open to that. All right. So same same thing applies. Just let me know if you think you would like to and we can just add it to the May agenda. Okay. Moren, is there anything else that they would need to do? Um, I would recommend um as soon as you know that you want to go would be to sign up for it and then um we can work on um getting a check cut to cover that expense rather than doing a reimbursement. Yeah. So, make sure you take a look at the email. It was forwarded with all that information in it. Yep. I had the pleasure of going um a

number of years ago and it was well worth the time. um the uh speakers uh that they're able to bring to this conference are tend to be very very knowledgeable and um then you get to rub elbows with other um housing trust members etc. um interested in affordable housing and I think Laura from MHP is going to be one of the the speakers as I saw Maren um with regard to um updates. Do do you have anything you wanted to share? Just one more thing before I had shared that um MBTA communities determination of compliance. We received that. Uh the second thing uh we received is um HUD in HUD has published their new income limits um for federal FY25 um for 80% AMI for a family of four went from 130,250 to 132,300. Um, so that affects the housing trust uh programs. And my question for the trust would be um when you want um EHS to start using these new numbers. Last year it was delayed. Well, we did it on January 1st. Um this year we could certainly do it uh July 1st if if the trust wants to go that direction. Yeah, the timing is always off because we we don't get those income limits until like sometime in the first quarter. So, we can't make usually Right. Exactly. Usually probably beginning of April. Yeah. So, I think that if we were to

standardize it and have those new income limits take effect on uh July 1 with our new fiscal year, I think that makes sense. Yeah. So, so when are we reviewing the renewing the existing LRAPS? Can should we do it for when those are all being reviewed? Well, essentially, so the way that I thinking about this is that right now Amy is using the 2024 HUD income levels, right? and then she would continue to use those for any applications that she receives until June 30th, 2025. Then starting one, she would use the new HUD income levels for the next fiscal year. Right. Right. I understand for the for the new applicants, but at some point we're renewing the existing applicants and should we when we and I and um and are we reviewing the new the renewing the applicants with the new or the old information because those are going to come in mass, right? So So I I guess the question um thank you for that. I I guess the question would be does she look at them on June 30th for the renewal or does she look at them on July 1 for the renewal? I think we can I we should be able to accommodate um up getting those numbers updated so that when the payments for July go out um she's already already has the new numbers to use for that renewal process. um if if that if the trust would like to go that direction. So, this really wasn't on our agenda to discuss um and we have a little bit of time. So, I think we should add it to

the agenda for next time we talk to Amy about LRAP so that she can be a part of that conversation um just to make sure that our thinking is her thinking and vice versa. So, we have two components that we would need to add to the agenda for the next time. And that is um how do we want the new HUD income limits to affect new applications as well as renewal applications? And it sounds like what we're saying is that if they take effect on July 1 that that would be fine, but we just want to talk about it with Amy to confirm that that makes the most sense. Sound good? Yeah, I Yeah, I would I kind of agree with that, but I think the two are kind of separate processes, right? I got the impression from Amy that she was thinking of bringing all the renewals to us in May, right? But maybe I was misheard that. So that would basically mean we're approving the new income limits before we're reviewing her all of the renewals and then any new ones until um July 1st are against the old limits. Well, let's have the conversation in May because I think for now she still needs to be using the 2024 income limits. She she hasn't she hasn't said otherwise. We haven't talked with her about this. There hasn't been any other conversation. So if you have another thought about it, Mark, let me know. No, I'm I'm just wondering if it makes it hard to do the

renewals in May. That's all. if we're going to try and up the thing at the same time. Well, short of giving her a call right now, I don't know how else we're going to get that question answered because we don't know. The presumption is that she's continuing to use the existing data that she has, which is the 2024 HUD income limits. Okay. Marin, did you have anything else that you wanted to share? Oh, no. Thank you very much. Okay. Any thoughts other thoughts on these HUD income numbers? So that 132 300 is 100% AMI. 80% 80% AMI. Mhm. Wow. Yeah. Okay. The hefty sum. All right. Anything else before we move on to our minutes? Did everyone have an opportunity to take a look at the March 4th and March 19th minutes? And if so, are there any comments or questions? Anybody want to make a motion? I'll move

that we approve the March 4th and March 19th minutes for the Littleton Affordable Housing Trust. Uh I would like to second the uh March 19th minutes but abstain from the March 4th minutes. Uh I wasn't there. Okay. So we need someone else to second the March 4th minutes. I'll second it. All right. Bartlet. So, we have um motions to approve the minutes for March 4th and March 19th. Um Bartlett, yes. Approved. Matthew, yes. Angus, approved March 19th. All right. Mark, yes. Maryanne, yes. Nan is yes. All right. So, those minutes are approved. So, we next have our scheduling of the future minutes or future meetings. We have our Wednesday, April 30th at 6:30 p.m. with the focus being Derky and uh Laura will be at that meeting. So, everybody still good with that date? Yeah. And then we have our regularly scheduled meeting for board business which is on Tuesday, May 20th at 6:30 p.m. Any concerns about that date? No. Okay. So, I guess we've got our meeting scheduled. Anything else that we need to schedule or be in the know about? No. Okay. Um, I know Susan isn't here, um, but I seem to recall that I heard

the center at Shadic Street was going to have its, um, ribbon cutting on May 16th. Is that correct? I think so. I don't think it's been confirmed yet. I think that's the date that we've heard is probably going to happen. Okay. Anyway, I just wanted to raise that as a final item for folks who are interested in perhaps wanting to attend that particular event. Um, be on the lookout for any future information and hopefully to put a plug in for the 250th celebration this weekend going on over at the historical um society and FA Park. Okay. All righty. Well, everyone have a great evening. Thanks. Thank you. And you too. Thank you. Thanks everyone. Night. Okay. Bye bye.