City Council - Property Committee

Property 8/31/2022 Called to order at 18:07 Members present: Kwiecinski (chair), Gomez, Zaret Meeting was Remote via google meets and was recorded Minutes from 8/22/2022 were approved 3-0 (motion Gomez, second Zaret) Councilor Zaret added they will be amended to reflect the remote meeting and that it was recorded Minutes from 7/18/2022 approved 3-0 (motion Zaret, second Gomez) School Reuse Joe Banas Board of directors of COA: Support of COA moving to one of the schools Evaluating Pepin for such use Eileen Meyers Resident: Agree with COA moving to Pepin aware of previous discussions re Pepin combined uses Pepin can include artisans and shared work space Need use by the city’s population by one of these buildings Leslie Button Fox run resident: In support board of friends of COA Understands need for affordable housing Also needs for community use Brian English VP of EH basketball: Spoke about preserving Pepin Gym, and losing practice space and times for indoor recreation. Kiam McQuaid Resident: Member of affordable and fair housing. Spoke to the structure of the RFP and that it contains language in support of affordable housing while also allowing for preservation of existing community space Paul St Pierre East st: Spoke to pepin as a community space Need for gym and other amenities Wonders if Pepin and center can be separated Also spoke about moving the community center We need to continue to explore options and to weigh all options Tom Brown Resident 60 years: Member of school building committee, COA, edic All great ideas but need developers to make it a reality City may not be able to afford the process of consolidation Don’t know what is available until you put the RFP out there Don’t have to accept anything John Mason Parks and rec director: Pepin Gym is of the utmost importance Understands there are many needs RFP and process should reflect the needs and what to preserve Tom Peake Interested in consolidating buildings with all needed municipal organizations Maybe should have had that discussion before Deadline for this grant cycle is approaching There is cost to holding onto buildings Need to wait until offers actually are made to be able to consider them Can continue to be thoughtful in the meantime Chair Kwiecinski mentioned other constituents that want to preserve Pepin gym Kate Banigan White: Question for the committee Where are we in terms of sense of priorties with releasing RFP Why is the gym so important? The chair responded re timeline so far and history of the process Also asked John Mason about the gym: Need to look at feasibility and costs Zaret Discussed the process thus far. Encouraged people to move forward to actually receive offers Gomez Noted there public meetings by committee Can take time to figure out as politicians, but we can’t direct departments what to do in terms of use of buildings. Ultimately the operations are through the mayor Need to make language clear and work on it by 9/21 Jeff Bagg: A lot of the discussion that has come out has been brought up before Financial feasibility of retaining buildings is on the taxpayers Committee was formed to assist the council had broad representation Emily Innes Innes associates The RFP is a draft and we can work on the language. City Council does not need to accept incoming proposals Center and Pepin do not need to move together, but for the purposes of the RFP very undesirable to do so. Presented on reasoning for RFP The chair asked about the scoring system Emily Innes: usually two components any choice of points per column. Weighting score give certain criteria higher weight There will be a scoring committee Zaret: Can we increase the community connections Can we ask a developer to come back with additional options at the interview. Should we split up community connections into major and minor criteria or haven separate categories of community connections How to look at private public partnership Gomez: need to do “parking and playground” not “parking, playground” Can figure out interview or scoring after Gomez recommends public hearing on 21 and there was consensus by the committee Set meetings for the 8th and 14th of Septmber Will review and discuss sample weighting and language Committee voted 3-0 to set a public hearing on 9/21 at 6:15 PM (motion Gomez, second Zaret) The planner had sent the motion to accept the schools as surplus. Discussed and will present at full council meeting Chair: Does accepting the schools in any way confine a certain use Michael Owens: Doesn’t confine to a certain use Committee voted 3-0 to adjourn (motion Gomez, second Zaret) Adjourned at 19:49 Raise the bar on community connections Add number or better specify