Community Preservation Committee

April 24, 2017, Page 1 of 13 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES April 24, 2017 A special meeting of the Community Preservation Committee (CPC) was held on Monday, April 24, 2017 at 6:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Chair Kevin Cornacchio, Vice Chair Leslie Tuttle, Joanne McCrea, Tim Shea, John Boris, Carole Hamilton and Mickey Northcutt. Also present was Jane Guy of the City of Salem Department of Planning & Community Development. Entering later in the meeting was Bart Hoskins. Present in the audience was Erin Schaeffer and Tom Devine from the Department of Planning & Community Development. Public Comment Lise Hansen, Hawthorne Street, Hathorne Street, stated that she represents the Saltonstall School Playground Committee which is the co-applicant for the Saltonstall School playground application. She stated that one repeated theme at the meeting two weeks ago regarding all the projects the CPC evaluated was the project impact. She stated that she sees impact as accessibility and location, as well as whether people will use it. She stated that are 383 kids that will use it 180 days per year. On weekends and during the summers, it will be open to the community. Ms. McCrea asked about flooding issues. Ms. Hansen believed there were some plans for that, which may be why a barrier was suggested along with a raised bed with mulch. Tom Devine, Senior Planner, stated that he is the project manager for the Lafayette Park project. He stated that when the application was submitted on March 17th, the City was still going through the public visioning process. He noted that four days later, the final plan was selected by the Park and Recreation Committee and it is now on track to be a shovel ready project in eight to ten weeks. He stated with this momentum there is an opportunity to have an immediate impact. The project will further the goals of the Open Space and Point Vision plans. He added that, as the neighborhood around is being revitalized, it is an opportunity for the park to catch up. Ms. Tuttle asked what plan was chosen. Mr. Devine provided a copy of the plan, and noted that the architect was able to include the varying voices. He stated that, in the end, the Park and Recreation Committee decided that some of the park’s existing trees were the wrong species in the wrong place and that trees were too close together and made the park dark, which encouraged inappropriate behavior. Erin Schaefer advocated for the Charter Street Cemetery project. She stated that the CPA funds will fully support the MCC grant for which the City has applied. She stated that now is the time to invest in this property, noting the Grimshaw house next door being privately restored, the $80 million PEM restoration/expansion, 289 Derby Street acquisition, as well as various new business and restoration in the area, with Charter Street Cemetery being the eyesore in the  April 24, 2017, Page 2 of 13 middle of all this nice new development. The cemetery sees over 1 million visitors per year, therefore the impact is great for residents and visitors. She is hoping to have the project fully funded all at once, as each component depends on each other. Ms. Schaeffer stated that she also submitted the bike rack funding request. The Zagster bike- share program will launch May 16th and bike racks are proposed for key areas, particularly park and recreation locations across every ward, which will enable bikes to travel to all 45 of the City’s parks. She stated that all neighborhoods will benefit. There will also be bike fix-it pole stations for pumping up tires, etc. Mr. Shea stated that he was concerned that less than full funding of the Charter Street cemetery project would not be helpful. Ms. Schaeffer stated that partial would still be helpful, but ideally it is important to have matching funds to support the MCC grant, noting that having those funds in place will give the application top priority. Ms. McCrea asked what plans are in place for maintenance. Ms. Schaeffer stated that there is a 2002 downtown cemetery report and that as part of that there are maintenance plans in place. She received word that the DPW is updating those plans for long term maintenance and restoration for all four downtown cemeteries. She stated that there are many people and tour groups going through cemetery and that the City Solicitor is looking at licensing to try to find a mechanism for programing on site to have less of an impact on the site. Mr. Hoskins joined the meeting at this time. Budget Update Ms. Guy read an email from Stuart Saginor of the Community Preservation Coalition stating that the State has not officially provided the match percentage, but that it is slated to be 15%. Ms. Guy stated that she would not be able to submit the recommendations to the City Council until she gets official word, but that she has provided the budget and spreadsheets based on the 15% match. Ms. Guy stated that the amount available for funding projects is $717,782.97. With $63,250 required to be set aside for housing, it leaves $654,532.97 available for funding projects until additional funds are available in November, including unspent FY17 admin, surcharges received over the estimate, state match over the estimate, etc. Development of Fund Recommendations Ms. Guy read the Disclosure of Appearance of Conflict of Interest from Leslie Tuttle regarding her membership with Hamilton Hall and the House of the 7 Gables. Ms. Guy stated that the City is withdrawing the application for the Dickson Memorial Chapel Plan. The Committee reviewed the following applications that were previously ranked High, Medium or Low:  April 24, 2017, Page 3 of 13 HIGH City (DPCD) Nathaniel Hawthorne Statue Restoration Historic $45,000.00 City (DPCD) Charter Street Cemetery Restoration Historic $300,000.00 City (DPCD) Salem Common Fence Restoration Historic $150,000.00 Salem Public Salem Public Library investigation into cracking Library around 3rd floor Historic $25,000.00 House of 7 Gables Turner-Ingersoll Mansion Roof Replacement Historic $42,500.00 Bicycle Rack Acquisition - Open Space & City (DPCD) Recreation Locations OS/Recreation $36,450.00 City (Park/Rec) Winter Island Function Hall Deck OS/Recreation $82,853.00 City (Park/Rec) Ryan Brennan Memorial Skate Park Renovation OS/Recreation $75,000.00 City (Park/Rec) Palmer Cove Assessment & Concept Plan OS/Recreation $27,000.00 School/PTO Saltonstall School Playground OS/Recreation $106,546.48 MEDIUM City (DPCD) Lafayette Park Renovation OS/Recreation $100,000.00 Conservation/Restoration of Historic Artwork City (DPCD) (Council Chambers) Historic $25,000.00 Hamilton Hall, Inc. Fence Restoration Historic $47,977.00 LOW City (carried over) Broad Street Cemetery Historic $25,000.00 City (carried over) Fort Lee Restoration ($50,000-$125,000) Historic $50,000.00 Hamilton Hall, Inc. Storm windows Historic $90,000.00 Salem Community Arts Center St. Mary Italian Church Grotto Historic $42,100.00 Ms. Tuttle stated that with the new information provided by Tom Devine, she would move Lafayette Park up in priority over some other things. Mr. Shea stated that the CPC already had that discussion. Mr. Northcutt noted it had been medium only because it was not close to shovel ready at the time the application was submitted in March. Due to limited funds, the CPC individually ranked each High priority project to determine an overall order to develop funding recommendations.  Charter Street Cemetery Restoration Mr. Shea stated that his business abuts the Charter Street Burial Ground and that would be abstaining from the discussion and left the room. Mr. Hoskins questioned what would happen if the CPC funds Charter Street Cemetery at $300,000 and the grant does not come in.  April 24, 2017, Page 4 of 13 Ms. Schaeffer stated that she has also made a request to CIP in case MCC does not come through or the CPC decides not to fully fund the match. Mr. Cornacchio suggested funding half. Mr. Northcutt stated he was concerned about funding only have because the nature of work is interconnected. He stated that it is not like Common fence where we can do sections every year. It is a sensitive area and it shouldn’t be dug it up more than once for pathways and lighting. Ms. Guy questioned if the $43,000 in soft funds could be funded elsewhere. Ms. Schaeffer stated that the soft costs could be taken out, which is a reasonably small number to make a request from another funding source. She stated that it is a $600,000 project with eggs in three baskets of which none are guaranteed. She added that CPA is important because it leverages the MCC grant dollars and sets the stage for leveraging CIP dollars. CPA will put us in a better position to leverage CIP dollars. Ms. Guy agreed that CIP dollars are more likely to be awarded when matching grant dollars are in place. Ms. Hamilton stated that she would like to see this project move forward at $260,000. VOTE: Mr. Boris made a motion to recommend an award of $260,000 with $231.52 from the FY17 Budgeted Reserve, $116,676.45 from the Fund Balance, $63,250 from the FY18 Historic Reserve and $79,842.03 from FY18 Budgeted Reserve . Ms. Hamilton seconded the motion; all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Shea rejoined the meeting.  Saltonstall School Playground Mr. Hoskins stated that the request assumes that they will be getting $20,000 from another source. Mr. Cornacchio asked if they will continue fundraising. Ms. Hansen stated that they have approximately $7000 in-hand and intend to raise an additional $20,000 through local grant opportunities, etc.. She stated that she conferred with another committee member who said to their knowledge, that there is no flooding within playground area, the surface will be placed upon the current land grade, the proposal does include edging to hold surfacing within the playground area and it does not fall into flood zone in FEMA maps. Mr. Shea noted that the proposal does not include the breakdown of the costs per piece. He stated that he was concerned about it being such a dense neighborhood and being open to the public with this metal phone device, in terms of being appropriate to the neighborhood. He was concerned about someone at midnight deciding to play it.  April 24, 2017, Page 5 of 13 Ms. Hansen stated that something similar is in the Salem Common playground, but if it is a specific concern they could address it. Mr. Hoskins stated that, if it is in the Common, it is pretty muted. Ms. Tuttle asked what has been funded by CPA for playgrounds previously. Ms. Guy stated that Bates was awarded $49,000 and Bentley was awarded $73,500. Mr. Shea noted that the requests were not funded at 100%. Ms. Hansen noted that Saltonstall is a K-8 and since the equipment is ranked for specific ages, this proposal is geared to address the older children as well. Mr. Shea stated that this was one of his top four priorities, but that he was uncomfortable funding the full amount of money requested. He suggested the $95,000 range and to let them raise the rest or scale the project back. Ms. Tuttle stated that the committee has cut back other school playgrounds a lot more than this. She suggested something more like $75,000. Mr. Shea stated that they would be raising $38,000 and he did not think the others raised that much. Ms. Tuttle questioned if this is the Cadillac of playgrounds and Bates and Bentley are getting Toyotas. Ms. Hansen stated that she believed that Bentley was not planning to raise any additional funds and that their initial quote was with Steve Dibble’s company, which would include his services at no cost. Ms. Guy stated that they are not using Steve Dibble’s company now. She read an email update from Jonathan Baily concerning the design, soil samples and timeline and their extension request to complete the playground in the 2017-2018 school year. Ms. Hamilton verified that the CPC gave Bentley $73,500 for grades K-5 and that Saltonstall is K-8. Ms. Hansen stated that Saltonstall has a larger population than Bentley and the school year goes to July 1st, while the other schools get out a little earlier. Elizabeth Wrenn of 4 Gardner Street stated that durability and a different kind of space is needed for 6-8th graders versus 5th graders. Ms. Hansen noted that there is a small structure for kindergartners and that this will be for the older kids.  April 24, 2017, Page 6 of 13 VOTE: Mr. Shea made a motion to recommend an award of $95,000 with $63,250 from FY18 Open Space/Recreation Reserve and $31,750 from the FY18 Budgeted Reserve. Ms. Hamilton seconded the motion; all were in favor and the motion so carried.  Ryan Brennan Memorial Skate Park Renovation Mr. Shea noted that they are asking for $75,000, but the project is $210,000 to complete. VOTE: Mr. Shea made a motion to recommend $75000 from FY18 Budgeted Reserve. Mr. Boris seconded the motion; all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Hoskins stated that we heard tonight that Lafayette Park is more shovel ready than when it was initially ranked and asked if members feel they would change the ranking knowing that. Mr. Northcutt stated that it would be more impactful to spend on Lafayette Park than the Hawthorne Statue. Mr. Hoskins suggested re-evaluating the order of reviewing the remaining projects. Mr. Devine noted that the CPA request for Lafayette Park is for less than half the project cost. Ms. Schaeffer stated that the remaining portion is being funded through CDBG and the project is ready to go. Ms. Hoskins asked if the funding match for Salem Common Fence is in place. Ms. Schaeffer replied in the negative. Ms. Hamilton asked what would happen with Lafayette Park if CPA funds were not awarded. Mr. Devine stated that he would need to turn to CIP funds, which he believed are more competitive this year than CPA funds. Ms. Tuttle stated that she feels Lafayette Park has a lot of impact. Ms. Tuttle noted that while Winter Island function hall is highly ranked and is almost the same cost, she felt Lafayette Park has more impact. Mr. Shea stated that he was in disagreement. Ms. Tuttle noted that, having been on the Winter Island Planning Committee and being on the Park and Recreation Commission, the Master Plan has the function hall slated for demolition. The plan states that it is poorly built and is in the wrong place. She stated that it has septic issues because it is not tied in properly to the septic system. Mr. Shea questioned why the Director has it as her number one priority.  April 24, 2017, Page 7 of 13 Ms. Tuttle replied that it was because it is popular. She noted that because there is no insulation, it supposedly costs as much to heat as it takes in in function hall rentals. In terms of Lafayette Park being on an entrance corridor and adjacent to the point, it is similar in cost as pouring $85,000 into a building built in the 1980s as a restaurant. Mr. Northcutt felt $83,000 was a lot of money to give out. Mr. Hoskins stated that it is a popular space that is nice to have available to rent. Ms. Tuttle felt there are a lot more important structures in the City. Mr. Hoskins suggested re-ranking the order of discussing the remaining projects. He stated that it sounds like there is a move to bring Lafayette Park into the High category. Mr. Northcutt stated that he did not want to support $83,000 for Winter Island function hall. Mr. Shea suggested the CPC find out the facts about Winter Island function hall. Ms. Tuttle stated that the Master Plan priorities were the brick building and the hanger. The function hall was not listed in terms of priorities, although right now it is used and believed it was noted that once the other two buildings are saved, the function hall is not needed. Mr. Northcutt stated thousands of people drive and walk by Lafayette Park daily. It is an entry to downtown Salem. Mr. Devine stated that he was also involved of the Winter Island Master Plan project and confirmed Ms. Tuttle’s memory. Ms. Hamilton suggested moving Lafayette Park to high and re-ranking the order of discussing the remaining high priority projects. Mr. Shea stated that Winter Island Function Hall is one of his top priorities, but did not feel comfortable voting on it now. He felt this information should have been known prior to the initial ranking. Ms. Guy noted that the CPC will get additional funding in the fall from surcharge and the state match revenues received over estimates and unspent admin. Ms. Tuttle will get additional information on the Winter Island Master Plan.  Winter Island Function Hall Deck VOTE: Mr. Boris made a motion to table Winter Island to next the meeting where there is available funds. Mr. Northcutt seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Shea abstained from voting. VOTE: Mr. Hoskins made a motion revise Lafayette Park from medium to High priority. Mr. Northcutt seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.  April 24, 2017, Page 8 of 13 The CPC re-ordered the remaining high priority projects.  Lafayette Park Renovation Mr. Boris stated that thousands of people go by it. Ms. Tuttle stated that it is a very busy area. Mr. Shea asked about the funds in place. Mr. Devine stated that $140,000 is in place for CDBG funds and that some funds were used for design services and soil testing, leaving about $105,000 for construction. VOTE: Mr. Northcutt made a motion to recommend $100,000 from FY18 Budgeted Reserve. Mr. Boris seconded the motion; all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Shea and Ms. McCrea abstained from voting.  Salem Public Library investigation into cracking around 3rd floor Mr. Hoskins stated that he struggles with it, because the application sends a bit of mix message on the urgency. He stated that he sees a glimmer of hope that we can finally get an answer on whether the Library is stable for a while and they won’t come to us for money for a while. He stated that, however, it does have a mixed message in the application on the urgency. It does not seem to threaten the survival of the building , but until we take a peek inside at this beam, we won’t know if it will lead to more cracking which will lead to more requests for funding for repairs. He added that if not funded tonight, it could be considered high on the list for funding in fall. Ms. Tuttle stated that she always likes to support the library, but because it is not urgent and that funds are so tight, she is okay with not funding at this time. Mr. Shea and Ms. McCrea were in agreement. There was no recommendation for funding.  Nathaniel Hawthorne Statue Renovation Mr. Shea stated that the statue is viewed by numerous people and tourists and it is one of Salem’s most prominent forefathers. He felt for the amount of money, it was well worth to restore. It is in a well-traveled area on Route 1A. Mr. Hoskins stated that with statue restorations, he guessed that not a ton of people know we did it in terms of visual impact. He felt it plays to a small audience. He noted that someone should be out there waxing them every year, so don’t have to restore every couple years. Ms. McCrea questioned if anyone in DPW has qualifications to do it.  April 24, 2017, Page 9 of 13 Mr. Shea stated that it costs about $1000 to do Viking at Salem State for waxing maintenance. Ms. Schaeffer stated that the plan has been provided to the DPW and a training was done with the DPW guys by the specialists who showed them how to do the maintenance work. She stated that she hoped it would not be more than $40,000 and that there are some excellent restoration foundries. She noted that the size of this statue differs from the Choate statue, so she requested a little more money. She stated that if it comes in under budget, the funds will go back to the CPA pool. She stated that, unlike the Choate statue, this statue has never been moved, so she did not anticipate that the statue needs interior restructuring or bracing. She stated that there is a copper seal around the base that has degradation. Ms. Tuttle asked if there was a sense of urgency. Ms. Schaeffer stated that for statue restoration, we are not only looking at historic preservation of the statue, but also historic preservation of art and artwork. She stated that this statue is quite special in terms of historic value, not only for Nathaniel Hawthorne and the naming of Hawthorne Hotel, but also as a piece of artwork. The artist also did some work outside the Boston Public Library. It is also in a park, that is accessible statue, unlike the Choate in a traffic island. She stated that it is a component of public space and on a state route that is designated as a scenic byway. Mr. Shea stated that the work done on the other statues was remarkable, was a tremendous upgrade and was quite noticeable. Ms. Schaeffer stated that she is also working with Electrical Department to try to uplight it. Ms. Tuttle asked if the Hawthorne Hotel has volunteered to assist. VOTE: Mr. Shea made a motion to recommend $45,000 from FY18 Budgeted Reserve. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. The motion was voted on. Mr. Cornacchio, Ms. Leslie Tuttle, Ms. McCrea, Mr. Shea, Mr. Boris, Ms. Hamilton and Mr. Northcutt voted in favor. Mr. Hoskins voted in opposition. The motion so carried.  Palmer Cove Assessment & Concept Plan Mr. Shea stated that he was in support of the project, noting that it is one of the most utilized parks in the most dense neighborhood in the city. He stated that he felt the baseball field should not remain there. He added that they need more than one basketball court there. He stated that it is in a critical area, and could be utilized a lot better. Ms. Tuttle stated it is a beautiful waterfront park with incredible potential. She stated that the community gardens are popular and they play street hockey on the old tennis courts. Mr. Hoskins stated that he is having a little fatigue with wishlists. He stated that this will result in $3-500,000 in renovations.  April 24, 2017, Page 10 of 13 Mr. Northcutt stated that in addition to CPA, CDBG dollars can be spent in certain areas of the City. He stated that this is the last big park in Point in terms of open space and is by far the most important. It is vastly under-utilized, but still heavily utilized. There is a lot of dead space. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to recommend $27,000 from FY18 Budgeted Reserve. Mr. Shea seconded the motion; all were in favor and the motion so carried.  Bicycle Rack Acquisition - Open Space & Recreation Locations Mr. Shea stated that he did not feel it appropriate to spend CPA money on bike racks. Mr. Hoskins stated that he viewed it the same as playground equipment or skate parks. If people want to take bikes to a park, that should be encouraged. If there is no place to lock a bike, they will get locked to a sign post or a fence. Mr. Northcutt stated adults will use the bike racks, too. Mr. Shea stated that he did not disagree, but stated that he did not feel it fits into the CPA. He said we don’t buy golf clubs for the municipal golf course. Mr. Northcutt stated that we don’t buy bikes. Ms. Tuttle stated that it is supporting a recreation activity. Mr. Hoskins stated felt it was infrastructure, because it is securely pounded into the ground and not moved around. He stated he would entertain funding in a lesser amount. Ms. Guy stated that the racks at the seven schools on the list would not be eligible for CPA, it would have to be on open space or recreation areas. Ms. Tuttle stated that there are not enough bike paths on city streets and felt that bike lanes are needed first. Ms. Schaeffer stated that she is comfortable tabling the application until the fall. She noted that there are plans for infrastructure in terms of bike lanes and painting. She stated that there will be a Zagster launch in May and an expansion of Zagster in August. She stated that there will be data associated with that to see where people ride and how people ride. She noted that there may be other funding opportunities, that they may be able to make better decisions in the fall and that she can revisit the application and make better recommendations on connecting infrastructure and locations. Ms. Hamilton stated that there are some neighborhoods where you can get to a park safely on the street and that bike racks available would be good. The application was accepted for future consideration of funding.  April 24, 2017, Page 11 of 13 Mr. Shea suggested inquiring the Community Preservation Coalition to see if there is a precedent in other communities for bike racks.  Salem Common Fence Restoration Mr. Shea asked if there was any insight on partial funding on fencing and if it is worth it. Ms. Guy stated that $50,000 per year has been set aside for the fence. She stated that question is if we should wait next year for a larger project. Ms. Schaefer asked how much remained in CPA funds that could be awarded. Ms. Guy replied that there was just over $52,500. She asked Ms. Schaefer if a $100,000 project was feasible. Mr. Shea asked if $50,000, one-third of the request, would have an impact. Ms. Schaeffer stated that it is really difficult to proceed with less than $150,000. She stated that, if funded with CPA at $50,000, it would not be able to move forward if CIP falls through. There was no recommendation for funding.  Turner-Ingersoll Mansion Roof Replacement Ms. Guy read an email from Kara McLoughlin from the House of the Seven Gables concerning the pursuit of legal action with regard to the failed nails. Ms. Hamilton stated that Gloucester had the same situation and were given the same advice to not pursue. Mr. Hoskins stated that he supported getting this done. Mr. Cornacchio was in agreement. Mr. Shea recommending support at $27,500 in order to reconsider taking the artwork out of medium priority. Mr. Hoskins stated that we were given a pretty good rundown on the situation with the Gables and stated that they don’t have a lot of pots to draw from and have a maintenance backlog. Mr. Shea stated that he much prefers funding city projects, but supports two thirds of this funding because it is the House of the Seven Gables mansion. Mr. Cornacchio liked Mr. Shea’s suggestion.  April 24, 2017, Page 12 of 13 Ms. Tuttle stated that the CPC should support non-profits, otherwise the City would probably end up owning these properties and being responsible. Mr. Northcutt was in agreement. Mr. Hoskins stated that there has been significant testimony on how it is legal and is done all over the Commonwealth. Mr. Northcutt stated that it is the kind of building that if they cease to exist the City would never let it be demolished or developed. He added that he is not a big fan of partial funding. He stated that it is not the kind of thing for which you can go to a foundation to fund. A lot of those grants are program oriented and not focused on preservation. They would have to go to same grant sources as City. He felt it was not a huge dollar amount to us, but to them it could be a critical difference. Mr. Shea stated that, in comparison, we just told a PTO that they have to raise another $37,000. Mr. Northcutt stated that he felt the PTO should scale project back. Mr. Shea agreed, but stated that he felt the Gables has more resources to get the remaining $15,000. Mr. Northcutt stated that he felt they are a pretty lean operation. Ms. Schaeffer stated that, as a Salem resident, she is in full support of fully funding the 7 Gables project. She stated that from a construction perspective, it is difficult to scale back something like a roof restoration and it would also take away other funds from operational expenses (i.e. public service, marketing, programming). Mr. Shea stated that he would like to fund the artwork restoration. Ms. Hamilton stated that she felt the CPC should deal with high priorities first. Ms. Schaeffer stated that public art can sit on the wall another 6 moths, but getting the roof done before the next winter season makes a lot of sense. Mr. Shea made a motion to recommend $27,500. There was no second. VOTE: Ms. Hamilton made a motion to recommend $42,500 from the FY18 Budgeted Reserve. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion; all were in favor and the motion so carried.  Conservation/Restoration of Historic Artwork (Council Chambers) There was no recommendation for funding.  Hamilton Hall Fence Restoration  April 24, 2017, Page 13 of 13 There was no recommendation for funding.  Broad Street Cemetery There was no recommendation for funding.  Fort Lee Restoration There was no recommendation for funding.  Hamilton Hall Storm Windows There was no recommendation for funding.  St. Mary Italian Church Grotto There was no recommendation for funding. VOTE: Ms. Tuttle made a motion to carry over all proposals that were not recommended for funding in this round. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. VOTE: Mr. Shea made a motion that if state match is less than 15%, the shortage would come first from 7 Gables and next from the Palmer Cove project. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Other Business There were no Determination of Eligibility applications for review. VOTE: Mr. Hoskins made a motion to approve the minutes of April 11, 2017. Mr. Boris seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Next Meeting Date Ms. Guy stated that the next regular meeting date is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, May 9, 2017. VOTE: There being no further business, Ms. Hamilton made a motion to adjourn. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion; all were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Jane A. Guy Administrator