 This meeting is being recorded. Okay. Welcome to the Amherst Historical Commission public hearing. Oh no, it's just a public meeting. Right. Yes, sorry. On Wednesday, November 9th, 2022. This meeting is still being held virtually using the zoom platform. The best way to find instructions to join the meeting by zoom or by phone is to is to visit the town website. Which you would have already done if you're listening right now. But you can find all our information for tonight's meeting by clicking on the historical commission entry and the link. This is the old. My name is Jen Markward and his chair of the historical commission. I'm calling this meeting to order at 6 34 PM. We'll take a roll call of commissioners in attendance. And when you hear me call your name. Please unmute answer in the affirmative and remute. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm here. Robin Fordham. Yeah. Madeleine Helmer. Yeah. Patricia. Present. And heavy startup. Yeah. And I am here as well. public comment during the general public comment period later in the agenda. Please be aware. Anyone listening in commissioners need not respond to comments during that period. Okay. We'll now move to our agenda. Which begins with announcements. Ben, do you have any announcements for tonight? No, I guess I just, a few updates. We are opening the second round of the West cemetery headstone project for bidding. So I met with some contractors out there today. The bids are due in a week from today. So we'll see what we come back with. How many bits do you expect? I don't know. It's usually. Anywhere, hopefully one and three or four or something. So you met with a number of them though. No, it was two. The same company. Okay. So we shall see. Yeah, otherwise. Okay, we'll save your big announcement till three. Okay. So should we jump straight into CPA projects? Is everybody ready to do that? As we discussed last meeting, we're no longer going to do the ranking and prioritizing and recommending of the backed amounts since it's really up to CPA to do that. And it, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. So we're just going to, I think. At least my preference. And you can all tell me different. Okay. So we discussed the projects just in terms of what you think are highlights that we might put in a letter of general support for all of them. Or, you know, for the ones that we want to support, but without any particular ranking or any recommendations. On the amount we feel they should get. If you want to say anything else about them, go ahead. That's fine. That's my understanding. I think the. In years past, there's been such an emphasis on, you know, the historical commission ranking and prioritizing every project and putting forth a funding recommendation. In my experience, I haven't, it doesn't usually translate that well over to CPA. I mean, no, the CPA committees don't take it into consideration, but ultimately they're weighing so many other factors. That usually what's more helpful is just kind of like the context that we provide in terms of, you know, how important is this building or kind of what is this, you know, how crucial is this project for the preservation of the building. That level of detail. So, and I think, yeah. And more useful to you, Robin, as our rep, right. Yeah, I think there's some, especially this year, given the incredibly high amount of asks there. I mean, I would, I would, I mean, I, I can, I can argue on my own, whatever seems like the most urgent. I mean, the urgency is definitely an issue, but yeah. Yeah. And all of them seem pretty urgent. There's not a whole lot of, we just like to do this because. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well, let's talk briefly then in order, how we feel about each one, we saw presentations by most of these people. Some of us went and visited each of the locations. And, and then talk about things that I can actually put in a letter, I will take notes on, you know, for each one, what we should say, and I'll just make a paragraph for each one letter if that makes sense to everybody. Yep. Okay, great. Well, let's start with the North Congressional Church. I think it's the biggest ask, but they didn't state amount in their application, which is kind of unfortunate because we talked about them doing it over a series of years, Robin. Yeah, I have some just looking that over, I have some feelings about that. I mean, they had they had one estimate which came in late. What I'm not seeing is any sort of phasing of the project. I'm not, and I think that something that I discovered and I actually talked to sacred places, which is a National Trust organization devoted to churches and I had a discussion with one of my friends. She was working in Connecticut and Connecticut's funding for projects like this requires the use of a preservation architect. And I think that we're kind of missing that piece here and a lot of these larger projects. So when I look at this project now, I think the recommendation should be for funds to stabilize it. And I don't know if that's just that. I don't know if we can, you know, come back to ask CPA for more funds. I mean, just basically to stop whatever damage is happening as a result of that collapsing roof. I don't think that the exterior. I mean, I used the building as a case study for one of my classes. I mean, I'm not particularly deeply trained in this area, but it didn't get the impression that I mean, it definitely needs to be painted. That's no doubt about that. But that part is not a priority. What's a priority is that roof. Yeah, preservation in its elemental sense doesn't necessarily include something cosmetic like painting. I realize that painting would, but we're talking about deeper issues here. So when you say stabilization, you're talking about replacing the roof and the support of it, right? I mean, I think, I think that they don't, if they haven't had the kind of work done, then we don't know what needs to be done in order to stable it, you know, to, to correct any, you know, engineering issues that are, you know, that are imminent. And then, you know, seal that roof off so that it's not leaking anymore. I don't know that they need a full roof replacement. I don't know if they should go for a slate roof. I mean, it's, this is a really, it's a very tough proposal because it's a really significant property. It's only going to deteriorate further if nothing is done. And yet we don't have the right kind of expert yet to advise us on. Yeah, I got the first step. Reading it that they took our enthusiastic support for the project almost as enough. I felt like they didn't then try to really work in all the kinds of suggestions we have for how they needed to pursue it. I mean, I think that, that this really just brings home the fact that property owners are not really in a position to understand that, you know, I wouldn't really expect them to be able to. And that's kind of where I get stuck in this, you know, CPA circle of like what you can pay for and what you can't. We should really be paying for somebody who's the preservationist architect to be on that project who can determine what needs to be done, phase it and create an appropriate ask. Yeah, the phasing is just to me a big, big issue here. Don't have any idea how much they want. Okay, well, um, any other comments that we can say Pat. Well, I'm just, you know, I, I agree that the, the priority is to stabilize the building to do whatever necessary appears to the roof because otherwise the building is going to continue to deteriorate, but could part of the recommendation be that they get a preservation architect to advise the first phase. And that the funding be applied to that and that they can apply again for the other phases. Does that make sense? You mean have CPA fund the architecture, the architects, the architect and, and, and have the immediate need be considered phase one. So the immediate need is the preservation architect and the decision about what has to be done immediately. Well, that's not their application and we're only commenting on the application as it stands. So we can't now come in and suggest that CPA do that. I don't think that's, that they haven't. Well, we're suggesting, I think we've made suggestions in the past that things be phased in and, and you're right, they didn't listen to that part of our recommendations. But if this comes back as a recommendation that it's, it's a worthy ask, but it has to be done differently. Yeah, Robin. I think that it's, it may be Ben can weigh in on this. It's this really confusing gray area. I mean, I know that we've had project, a project. I think it was the tender park. I can't remember. We got some town project that was off to grant cycle. We've received applications that were. Incomplete before and discuss them before. The committee. So I don't want, I don't know. I don't know how we provide a recommendation. You know, I sort of feel like if, you know, I was working for another organization, I'd ask for, you know, a revision of the application. But, but the issue is that like we need. Somebody needs to help people understand what they need to do. And it's not of us. I mean, we did try. I know, but I'm, but I'm saying it, I guess what I'm saying is that that's the piece that I see that is really missing in CPA. And I don't know how other towns do it. You know, I don't know how other people fit this really important piece in, which is, you know, you need the expert to create the project in order to have, and ask you just can't expect that of property owners. So I don't want to, you know, not recommend this project. I sort of want to bring it, I guess I want to bring it to CPA and, you know, ask the town, you know, what, what do we do? Do we give them more time to locate a preservation architect? Do we contact someone for them? Do we contact, you know, like technical support. At PBPC, I know there are technical support hours to figure out what this piece is because I don't think it's just this project. I think it's all of them, you know, in Salem place. And it was the women's club. Anything that's large like this really needs that, that piece. And I'd like to, instead of answering it for this project, I'd like to say, we need this answer for all projects going forward. So let's have, you know, the town work with us to figure out the solution. And then if in the letter that comes from us, I just say we think this is a really worthy project that absolutely needs attention right now to keep it from tearing further, but we realize the application still needs some work and, and it's hard to know how and what to fund at this point. And then you can take it from there in the meeting. Okay. I would suggest language that, that talks about, you know, just brief, but talks about phasing and. Yeah. And, you know, emergency stabilization. Yeah. I also don't see why Pat's suggestion can't. They can at least consider using some of the CPA funds to hire preservation architect, even if it's not in their application, I mean, there's still some. You think. CPA could come back and say, we're not going to give you what you asked for, we'll give you this. No, I think if it's, if it's a matter of. Like funding the, like supporting if the roof is really like a primary focus, like supporting the roof and replacing the roof, I don't see why CPA can't say, you know, we want you to do this project, but we also think we need an architect. Yeah, more about how it would be built and structured. I mean, there's applications change from the time they're submitted to when they're funded in my experience. Oh yeah. Great. Okay. Well, I think I can work with that. And then, Robin, you can take it from there in a way. Yeah, I mean, it's just kind of, you know, a general framework from the commission. Right. Right. But yeah, I'm, I'm, I think I'm just concerned about. The applicant, you know, just the, the challenge to the applicant of being able to manage this project without someone like that. Because we have a language issue here. There's, it's tough. It's extra tough for them compared to some of the other groups. Absolutely. There isn't anybody that specifically supports some of those concerns either. Right. Right. Well, I think it's also just that the nature of the knowledge that you need to have to preserve a roof on a historic structure is not the same as how to grow a congregation or offer pastoral support to the, you know, people who come to your community church. You know, I just think they're really, they're really going in different directions. Right. Or even just to replace a roof. I mean, it doesn't look like this project is just to replace. That would be pretty straightforward. Right. You know, we don't know what's going on. So. Unless you happen to have somebody in your congregation who's a specialist. And it may be that it's not a, sorry. It may be it's not a preservation architect. You need, but a structural engineer. Well, I could preservation architectural training. You know, I mean, some gum pits and Hager come to mind, you know, because they have decades of experience in doing. They submitted the Coon Riddle estimate and I just don't know. I mean, I actually did send an email to, I talked to Bruce Coldham who's listed on the project team. I talked to, right? I emailed with Chris Farley. I think it's his name. It can riddle, but nobody's really at the center of it. You know, they're like Bruce was like, well, you know, I gave them this advice and they didn't seem to quite take it. And Chris was sort of like, well, you should talk to the church. And I just keep, I'm frustrated because I'm sitting here going, you know, they need this other person. I don't know who it is, but. You know, maybe it could be, maybe it could be a criminal thing. It just seems like there's another conversation that needs to happen. And I just don't know how to do it within this framework. Yeah, I, you know, I'm looking at the documents again. I didn't see anything that specifically related to the major emergency. The Coon Riddle was a, that was a. Was that a review of everything? Like looking at the bell tower and the structure there. And that's where all the damages. And it could, could be that they thought Coon Riddle was taking the role of a structural engineer or an architectural engineer, because they're architects. And, and it sounds from what you said, Robin that they're really not at the core of it. They just did some cursory evaluation. And I think, yeah, they're not there yet. But their fee is not about the work. It's about their fee for doing the study. Right. We don't have anything that actually lays out what the emergency is. Right, because they don't have any money to pay for the study. I think, I mean, that they're coming for money for that, but I wouldn't want to just fund the study and then not fund that's going to tighten up that roof so it doesn't keep leaking. Right. It's just, that's why the proposal is so. Right. Amorphous. It doesn't address the elephant in the room. Right. Okay. I'll work with that. The South congregational church. Comments. Okay. The one comment I can throw in about the South congregational church is that in my opportunity to ask questions, I put in both churches, you know, whether or not they've communicated with each other, because it seems like there's a tremendous amount of expertise. At the South congregational church. You know, it would be really nice if, you know, some of our great. Preservation minded Amherst residents could, you know, be able to communicate with each other. Yeah. The same church. They probably see themselves as in competition at this moment. You know, but, but they have identified the problem of South church. Yeah. It's a much clearer application. You were. I just think, and a couple of these missed this. We're looking at if anything's approved, it's going to happen. I don't know, nine months from now, but I think the only one that built in for inflation was the cemetery. And I think that's a really smart thing. So I would suggest that as well. And can I thank you for bringing that up, Becky. I just want to jump back to the North church. That was one of my questions. And I think I put it in as a question to the town. Whether. Given the state of the roof. I don't know whether we can, I know we have reserve funds, whether we can fund something off cycle. Like that's what I would like to see happen. I don't want to see that. Wait till July. That's crazy. I mean, if you've looked at, you know, the way things are falling apart. Funding what? The study or no, the study. And I mean, I guess I would just consider it, you know, tightening the roof, you know, addressing funding the study. And then addressing any, any, you know, construction that needs to take place to keep it from, you know, continuing to fail, you know, I mean, whether it's collapsing or just water getting in, continuing to degrade things to, to tighten the roof. And which funds are you referring to that? So what I'm referring to is that every year in CPA, we have the opportunity to reserve funds. And I can't remember how much it was reserved. So that we have this money on hand. And that would be, that would be my, my question is whether, I'm not even talking about like, and I'm not, you know, I don't know, but like, I mean, I only know from, you know, hearing people talk about, you know, mock balling buildings, which is basically you just do everything that you can to keep it from getting worse and you stop. Like that's kind of what I'd like to see happen here. And I'd like to see it happen before, I'd like work to start before July 1st, because of the states the building is in. And I think that's the purpose of, you know, reserving those funds this, but I don't know if that's a, that's a question for Ben and for Sonia, I guess, but. This is what in historical studies, we call conservation versus preservation. And conservation is just, and preservation is to go. Right. Right. Right. Yeah. Yeah, this would be preservation versus rehabilitation. So we'd be preserving it or maybe. Conserving it. Yeah. Yeah. Well, how has that addressed Ben? Is that something that is that happens in the same CPA meeting? Or is this something that the town has those moneys and it's not through the CPA committee. That it would be through the CPA committee. But then it's still the town council that needs to. Authorize it as well. But yeah, I guess you could bring it up at the CPA meeting. While you guys are talking about it. You're talking about North Amherst, right? Yeah. Okay. I'm done with Norse. Thank you. Can we go back to south now, everyone? So we see it as a stronger, clearer application. Do we have any comments to make for my letter? I think I made, I think I wrote a letter to the church because I, this is my. Denomination. I am a member of the UCC. Not that church, but I'm a member of the congregate. Of the congregation. I don't know whether that means I shouldn't be talking at this point in the meeting. But. So I, they asked me, you know, as an Amherst president, I don't think they knew I was on the historical commission if I would write a letter. So I did. And on the question of whether they're sort of in competition. Can we, can we talk about that a little bit? I mean, that seems. Crazy. You know, this is the north and the south of our town. You know, these are the two. Spires that kind of. Mark the, you know, the. It's just sort of so symbolic in some ways. I don't know for a fact that they think that I'm just saying, if you, I just imagine if you have people in your congregation or friends. Your. Yeah. Movers and shakers who are able to help you. You probably think, well, we don't want to help any other application because we want our congregation to help you. But I'm making this up that may be my own. No, I understand that. Yeah. And I think, I think. I can see it. I can envision a situation where the minister and the, and the committee at South church. Could very. Graciously talk to the North church congregation and say. You know. Is there a, is there a conversation we can have? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. Is there, is there a conversation we can have or mutual site visits? Do the two churches even know they're both applying for this? I don't think I don't know. I'm going to. I'm going to call the minister. If I can, if I'm allowed to. I did play. I mean the questions. So CPA members are given the proposals and then asked to submit questions to the proposers. So all the proposers saw my questions. About, about this connection and the other thing that, you know, I would. Just put out there is the possibility that the. You know, that's stabilizing the North church might not be a huge ask, you know, stabilizing might not be that much money. Right. So. Might not be in conflict at all. Okay. It's, it's hard to tell for me from the proposal because I don't see anything about the current. Structural issues or what you're discussing. It's not here. So which proposal. The North. To North church. We're back in the North church. Okay. Well, that's the problem is that their proposal is very vague. Okay. But now we're on the South church. What about that proposal? Well, I think that's specific. And it's probably something that we would support because. To quote Heady. That's a spire in the South of Emerson, the North church is the spire. It's history. It's, it's, you know, it's, it's the monument to history. So there's, there's a lot of, there's a lot of people that have been supporting, but they're separate communities at the time. And so I think they're both worthy of supporting. It's just a question that the South church seems to have their information such that we can support it. And then North church. Needs another piece in there. To tell us what that conservation. Looks like in phase one. general statement that we're in support of the work proposed by the south church and that it's a historic streetscape in the south and on the common. Right, it is on the common, which is a historic district. Okay. I'm going to say to our surprise when they came to the top of commission over the summer. I remember pretty clearly that their number was closer to 150,000. And it is going up to 260 now so. You know, it may also be that they were working with old numbers and we know that all these calls of skyrocketed lately. Yeah, they're there the estimate estimate of based off of this from the end of September, so much more recent. They're probably working with older numbers. Yeah. Now is their proposal faced. Because it's like one is if I remember clearly it's one project where they go in they take things down they rebuilt and put them back up it's not really something that can be done in pieces I don't think. It's like, it's a one of it's one piece of work. Yeah, I'll be basically taking the steeple down and then we building it on the ground. Yeah, I'm going to get back up. Yeah. Okay. The Wildwood Cemetery Dickinson house. A couple of us went there and saw it and anybody else go. You can't see it in the street you have to. I was there recently. It's a good it's a farmhouse isn't it. And it looks like they've they've been doing a lot of work behind the farmhouse they've built a new. Sort of maintenance. Yes. So it wouldn't take a lot. Yeah, it's very, very nice. I really commend them for what they've done already to sort of take care of what is again a very, very, very important. Place in town. So I'm all in favor. It's pretty clear when you look at the building you can see the deterioration that's been caused by the water on the brick itself of brick walls on the chimneys which are in really bad shape and it's clear that the roof is, is not doing its job. Oh, I just wanted to say I'm in support of it. I think that the proposal was really clear. And I appreciated that it was well, you know, well worded well thought out I love that they've chosen. And I think I said this when they when they appeared that they've chosen something historic to replace the roof. It looks historic. It looks historic. But I do think in terms of clarity and numbers and everything else they've done a good job. Okay, Robin. Yeah, I thought they did a good job. I think this project reminds me to ask Ben, what the, what the status so CPA dollars are tied to compliance with the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation and one of the standards is you know, just, I'll just summarize it and it's basically like if you if you can, if you, you can reuse it you reuse it you don't replace old material, new material, unless it has to be replaced with new material. And I noticed that two of the chimneys, they said they were going to take them all the way down and build them back new fashion of reusing any of, you know, any with whom historic bricks. So, again, this really gets back to the fact that, you know, the CPA law was created with these requirements, and then kind of no structure for enforcement. I mean, it's a question that I'll continue to ask the town. One thing for working with Shannon Walsh is that she's providing a CPA sector and the Interior standards review for some towns that the towns are, you know, starting to work this into their, you know, into the kind of the progression of the project. And so it's not for me to sit at the CPA meeting and say this doesn't comply, but it is for me to suggest that it might not comply if I put that on my questions. And Robin, I can tell you what an answer might be from them if you brought this up. I have 19th century chimneys. I have had a chimney from 1969 that the bricks were so powdered that you could put your finger right through them and I had holes throughout my chimney. The bricks have to be replaced after a certain number of years they just don't hold up in weather and with the heat inside and cold outside. So I can't put my finger right down so I can imagine any of those bricks and those chimneys would be worthy of chimney you might be able to use it in some sort of decorative fashion, but it wouldn't, it wouldn't function. Okay, yep. I mean, I think the larger question still stands. Yeah, I mean, but in terms of those chimneys specifically I think that would be your answer. You just can't reuse those bricks for that. I'll just basically say we're in support of the project. The proposal seems strong and the work seems necessary and just the same general thing we're going to say about the south church, right, although it's not about streetscape and, and that sort of thing because you can't see it, but it is in a historic cemetery and this thing. Okay, the next one is our proposal for a consultant for preservation restrictions. We've all talked about this. We're all good. All I can say in the letter it's our proposal and we like it. What can I do. Right, it's all there. And the other one that's ours is Robin's years, which is also really coming from us. And obviously we support that and I mean all I can do is underline how outbuildings have been ignored if we feel it's time to address them. Right. Yep. And the final one is the Mabel Loomis Todd. Okay, this one I was. We talked about, I don't remember how it came up then but my writing a letter in support of the historical society's proposal and I don't remember if that was in my role as chair of historical commission or as an art historian. I talked to Gigi today and got more information about them. And I can see them if I want to. And my assessment of them is that they are not great paintings but they represent a really important moment in Amherst history in American women trying to be artists without any resources in paintings that represent horticultural examples of the area that correspond Emily Dickinson's poetry about the nature in the area and they were friends and maybe it was Tom course was her editor. Mabel Loomis Todd studied briefly with he Johnson who's a really important landscape painter and traveled widely as she did gathering information and images. I mean there's, you know, she was the wife of an Amherst college professor of astronomy she started the historical society she was one of the founders she did a lot of civic stuff for the time. She had other artifacts of hers so these are part of her overall that the historical society holds and they can't do this exhibition of the paintings unless they're preserved. But I'm wondering, should I just put a paragraph in our general letter or should I go ahead and write that letter for them to attach to their application does that is that any conflict of interest for us, Robin. I would like to see that when you bring it before the committee to see that so you're writing a letter in support of their having the restoration. What would the conflict of interest be. Well that I'm not doing that for any of the others. I mean a separate letter I mean I'm doing it. I can't do it as an art historian and not admit that I'm sure of historical commission. Right. I mean, I mean, I mean conflict of interest is that are we are we stretching that too far. You don't gain anything. No, of course not. It shows us favoring in any way by my writing that letter. I don't think so because I think you're writing it from different, you know, from your professional standpoint. I think we also have to be quite careful not to judge the paintings formally as an as a one of your fellow art historians on the commission. I don't think that's, I don't think we should even go there Jan. I think we should talk about them in terms of their historical importance. I don't know I don't think there's anything wrong with saying we recognize these are not great masterpieces, because they're going to look at it and say, these are pretty amateur flower paintings if they know anything you know and I mean I don't think we should pretend. Yeah, I agree. You know what I mean. Yeah, yeah, I think it's said they're still important for these reasons. I mean it's actually a really it's, it's one of the most important to sanctions around these projects, you know, is that, you know, we often support projects that people don't, you know, aren't particularly moved by visually, you know, or that's not one of the requirements so I think it's I mean I don't know if Ben and Nate want to weigh in on whether you should have the two, you know, have the letter as well as, you know, Yeah, I was just going to suggest there might just be easier. And, and worse, and also easier for the CPA committee because we'll be reading tons of letters to maybe just incorporated all into one letter. So what do they say about them professionally than I do about these other. Well, I think it's one of more it's also one of the more unique projects because all the other ones are like, you know, fairly straightforward building projects or per day consultant kind of stuff and this one is, you know, it's the historical mission role to kind of put them in context I guess. I think, yeah, I think you go either way but you have any thoughts on this. He disappeared. Oh yeah, there you are. I would say that the paintings are really ugly. Hi everyone, I'm Nate a planner with the town I'll be taking over for Ben. I was listening for a little bit. The, so you know, at first I think this, you know, the Commission could vote to send a letter through the chair. And in years past the Historical Commission has written a letter with rank order. The housing trust had done that too and we've kind of stayed away from that the last few years just because the Commission, like the trust also submit CPA proposals and sometimes it seems odd that we'd be kind of formerly prioritizing things I think in general, the letter can state you know preferences or recommendations. So I think it would be good from the committee, you know, you know, we say the Commission voted, you know and authorize a chair, you know, it's through the chair but it's the Commission is writing it. In terms of the paintings I think it's fine to say that they're not masterpieces in terms of their quality but their importance to the history of Amherst and I think that's a good acknowledgement just because the CPA committee, you know they might ask those questions right because they have detailed questions for the housing proposals so they're meeting tomorrow night and some of their follow up questions you know they had their initial questions and then they've had follow up questions. They're getting down to some pretty detailed points and I could see where they might ask follow up questions of the historical society and say well what's, what's significant about these paintings and why these and not other parts of a collection and so I think you know referencing you know the ties to Amherst but that yeah that you know taken out of context it may not be as important as the CPA project taken within the context of the society and Amherst and so. And it felt like the proposal only really focused on them be part of an exhibition upcoming and they had to be fixed for that and there's more to it than that to me. I think Jan was asking if she could submit a detailed letter in support of the application and then also submit a brief recommendation in this letter with all the other recommendations because she. I guess I misunderstood that. Yeah. I guess I mean you'd have to be clear that you know, your personal letter is Jan. No, I would do it from the Commission I think just also saying I'm an art historian on. But then I think in the general letter when I get to that item I could just say a separate letter has been submitted with you know in support of it. Yeah, I don't need to say anything else in that. Or you could summarize it Jen with a little summary you just gave a few minutes ago about the importance of. I know but you can you can summarize it like in five sentences as opposed to however many you're going to use in the letter. Six. Their request their request is in for too much money. No, it's not a big project. But it needs to be in context and Jan was very eloquent about the context. Okay. I just have a question for the Commission when we're done discussing. Well I think that covers the projects anybody have anything else to say on any of them before we move on. That's what my desk I'm sorry. That's what my question relates to so when I get there. It's my responsibility to, you know, argue on behalf of all these projects. And so we're in support of all them so that's pretty straightforward. I was getting a little bit confused when I mean with the, when I tallied up the numbers for the asks this year I was kind of gobsmacked. Huge amount of money. And, you know, I suspect that something will have to be cut. And so then the question comes to me as a member of the CPA committee. You know, it's going to be my voting for the project. Knowing that all my other CPA committee members are going to vote against it and it's going to get, you know, taken off the off the slate or am I, you know, am I using my judgment to say we just can't. You know, we're in support of this but we can't fund it like that's where I get a little bit confused on my, my yes no it's been pretty. You know, to, with our, you know, to represent the fact that we think all of our worthy then I guess all you could say is gives them less but support it. I mean you can't in a way you can't propose to cut any of them if you're representing the fact that they're all very, very worthy at this point I don't know. Yeah, what I mean, there's $8 million and asks with all the proposals and there's you know one point. I don't know 123 I don't know, but a fraction of what's requested and so, you know, for the housing trust we said maybe it might come back to them. If the CPA committee really needs to know what is the highest priority so it may you know maybe Robin you could say that if the CPA committee is really struggling. You know, you could ask like would they actually make a referral or you know ask the commission to weigh in again. I do think so I think things have to be cut, you know, typically the CPA committee tries to fund every proposal whether that be through bonding or partial funding but I think it's just impossible. Yeah, and that's what I mean that's what I'm anticipating and then I'm, you know, that I'm going to, you know what I mean I'm a representative but I'm also a member of the CPA body, you know, to be helping pick what we can fund I mean so it's not a contradiction to say we're in support of this project you know I mean any foundation, you know, has to pick from their applications and some of the ones that they like her so that's I think, I think it'd be important to say that all, you know, the commission finds all the projects eligible. Yes, worthy. Because the CPA committee I feel like in some of their questions they were asking a little bit, you know kind of asking that indirectly. Maybe some don't make it I you know, even for housing there's been too many recreation as a huge ask. Yeah, it's just, I, you know, I think people are trying to take advantage of, you know, it is a large CPA funding every year that large amount but it's. Yeah. Okay, so I'm thinking back to last year like, there's a way to prioritize like, like phase one like phases of a project like I remember having conversations with Jane was weighing in about like, Oh, the women's club like let's make sure that everything that they need scaffolding is, you know, that's what we're looking for and I think it's important to do those things together. Right. And maybe like the subsequent work and wait for a following year so that that kind of cut their project budget quite good but there's we tried to do it's a Norse church. Right. We're just so we were just, you know, in that case, that's just a matter I think it's just a matter of missing expertise but yeah, I just wanted to be clear with everybody that, you know, if I know again something against the historical conditions recommendation as you know being part of this this other body. And interestingly enough the smallest ones where they might say well let's just give them all the small ones a little bit on the big ones all the small ones are, at least the two that we did are kinds of things that aren't emergency. Right. You know, so the emergencies are the big ticket items. I mean if we had a you know $15 or $20,000 I mean here's you know here's a theoretical if the if the North Amherst Church was $15 or $20,000 for stabilization. You know, would we say, I mean I would say, you know that's really the most at risk property right now and for that level of funding, if it meant kicking out one of our proposals which one would it be. And that's what I'm asking the committee now, which one would it be, you know that's why you know you don't want to obsess over ranking, but you know if I'm going to be arguing on behalf of something. You mean which of the two that we propose. Yeah, or what yeah right where to be the paint and neither of them are critical in terms of preservation. I don't know what what I don't know what the committee thinks about. It seems like preservation restrictions would be more important than outbuildings this year. That be correct. And we were talking with the internally of the chance the preservation restriction stuff could be funded through the administrative funds, perhaps. And that's a completely separate amount. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, so I think Sonya might have an update on that. Well we talked about maybe the outbuilding program could be done through administrative funds to. Yeah. Well, but if she had to she could argue that. I guess I'm, I mean I'm asking for some feedback here, you know, is, you know, we just keep coming back to saying you can handle this. I would, I would, if I you had to ask me right now and say, you know, stabilize the North church and skip the outbuildings till next year and, you know, do preservation restrictions because I know there's a backlog there. I mean, it's another fund. I mean, always push that if you could do that. Yeah, that's right. But that's, you know, I'm leaving all of that. I've made that argument a thousand times and I'm leaving it up to the town. They can tell me they're going to do it or not. It cannot argument anymore. I mean, at one point, Ben and I had mentioned, and I think the commission talked about having a policy on preservation restrictions. So at some point, you know, there would be a local restriction and then at, you know, there'd be a threshold amount or. Yep. There would be a permanent restriction. I do think that's something we could get back to because, you know, the restriction through mass historic takes a long time and they require a lot and a local one we still could require certain things but it wouldn't have to be the extent that mass historic does. I mean, they really do spend time just kind of looking over a grammar on the restriction itself and that can take six months. Yeah. You know, pagination they don't like if you don't use, you know, a certain font for the footnotes. I mean, it's things that just really delay a process. And, you know, they do require in terms of the drawings description and images and other things make it's more than staff would have time to do to take measure drawings and do scale drawings and certain things. So it's just, you know, the funding requested for that is really to help kind of not just, you know, the restriction we have a template now it's really just kind of all other pieces to it. Yeah, you know, Rob, I do, I hear your question I think it's something that, you know, even staff has, you know, staff has been asked a little bit to talk about the projects and you know it's interesting even if we don't recommend something it's not as if it may not be eligible and so, you know, we're really trying to help the CPA Committee I know Dave Zomek has talked about really helping them. So what could be a priority this year do things come back. You know, and even if it's, you know, not recommending it doesn't mean it's not eligible. So, they've never really been in this position where they've had to probably make some harder decisions. Yep. Yeah, it's the worst year I've seen. Okay, well I will put together a letter from us about all the projects, and I will finalize the project letter support whatever for paintings. And so we're ready to move on to the next agenda item. Yeah, I mean that sounds like everybody's comfortable with me, making my decisions that CPA. Yeah. Becky. Oh, I just wanted to ask you, and I would love to see the letter when it's final. Okay, if you don't, I would love to see it. You want to see it before I send it should we know. I'm happy to do that. I just don't know what the deadline is here. No, no, no, I don't want to slow it up. I just for me, after all this that we've gone through and studied, I'd like to see. Of course. Yeah, just if you could share it with all of us, Jen, that would be. Yeah, I'll send it to Nate and he can send it. Yeah, I think that the CPA committee meets next, it's next Thursday, right. Yeah, it's coming up. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, they meet, I think they're meeting every week. I'll try and get to it tomorrow. I'll add it to the pile. Okay, so the next thing is our staff transition. I'm sorry. Ben, Jan is presenting on the barns and outbuildings. To CPA. Because you can't. Right. That comes under staff transition in a way we're going to bring it up, but let's do it now. I can't be sure that I can be there. So I was going to ask Madeline if she would be willing to go and present. Yeah. Yeah. With your expertise. It's just because it's Robin's proposal and since she's our rep, she can't. She can't represent us represent it. Yep. For next Thursday. Yes, I could do that. I. Sure. It sounds good. Yeah. Chat about my thinking. Yeah. Give my number, Madeline. I think we, yeah, we met. Yes. Okay. Great. That would, I really appreciate it. Thanks. I've got all sorts of possible conflicts. And I didn't want to commit knowing that the last second I might have to back out. So. Okay. Staff transition. Take it away, Ben. Yeah. Thank you. Well, yeah, you probably all saw my email and now let me it's here. We alluded to it, but yeah, I just wanted to say formally. I've accepted a job elsewhere. Without asking us. Yeah. You guys did not make a motion and vote on it, but I. Yeah, I'm going to be working in Northampton for the state department of transportation and their regional office out here. It's a little bit closer to home where I live now. It gives me the opportunity to work kind of on a regional scale. It's all appreciate, but yeah, it's just been, it's been really nice working with everybody. And we've worked on some really good projects together and pass the bylaw with them proud of and the writer's walk completed. So it's been a really satisfying job and nice to work with you all. Thank you. And me, who some of you know, from two and a half years ago, from when I started this job, we kind of made a shadow Nate for a while while he worked with the commission. I'm not going to give responsibility back to Nate for this committee. Until someone is hired and maybe Nate will give it up. I don't know. Or Nate keeps getting stuck with us. You've been great. And we take a certain amount of pride and feeling like we got you trained to be the perfect historical commission rep. And now here you are. So we're going to miss you, but believe me, you're going to miss us more. And we'll never forget that. My words. We already told him his coworkers won't be as nice as the folks in town hall. So, well, if you have any committees you have to work with. You're yourself because we're, you know, we're sweethearts compared to most. Yeah. We definitely thank you, Ben, for your role. Yeah, you've been great. Other than Nate, you've been one of the best. Yeah. Yeah, you've been on there a while, Jan. Yeah. Yeah. So it's, it's great. I, you know, I worked with Ben for a bit and we've met with Shannon and PVPC for the preservation plan. And Ben's helping me get up to speed on some of the project. So. Right. Yeah, it's great. I think the commission's moved a lot forward in the last two to three years. And yeah, I mean, I will be taking over for Ben. And I still have some other responsibilities. So I'll be. Stretched a little bit. I think. You know, we did advertise for Ben's position that town has, and we're hoping to have someone hired relatively soon. It doesn't mean that they'll be able to jump right in. So it could be that, you know, two staff attend the commission meetings for a number of months. And then we could make another transition. So we'll see. I mean, we haven't, you know, it also depends on. I don't know if another staff person, we have Maureen Pollock's a planner at the town. I mean, you know, we have a lot of people who are. You know, I know that there's a lot of stuff, duties around, but you know, there's been some talk about what. Committees might be aligned with other, you know, work and how do you do that? But you know, Ben staffed the local historic district commission and then CDBG. And they're not related, but, you know, it gives a planner a breadth of experience in different projects. So I do think the historical commission, local historic district, you know, I just, I told you, I'll only be with you one month, Nate, because I announced that I am going off at the end of the year. So everybody, you'll all be working with me. He's great. I've worked with him. Okay. One thing, major thing we have to decide then is we have named by name. Ben as our designate. Yeah. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question for the bylaw. Who decides the historic. Who decides present. I can't remember with call. God, we worked on that. What five, six years. Yeah. That something is not perfectly preserved. Is. Whether it's significant. Yeah. And we, we named him. We didn't say. That staff member from the town. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know if it's a designate, or call it the staff member or one of us. It could be. I mean, it could be both, right? A member and. That'd be too. Then it become, we've been through this. Then it becomes. It's an issue of open meeting. It comes with that committee. Yeah. I mean, you know what I'm saying. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. No. We were advised. I think it was sugar in or. Joel bars. He said that. Those are the two towns attorneys advised that that would. Technically be a sensitivity. If they're, if they're, if they're authorized. To me. Yeah. It caught us by surprise too. I'm kind of at the 11th hour when we were kind of passed the bylaw. So the way we've. Done this is like. Yeah. It was. Consultation. Person X is authorized to make the decision in consultation with. The chair. Yeah. Which is the same thing as. Post your people, but it doesn't look legally like a subcommittee. Right. It's like who is the person who's actually authorized to test the. They're significant or not, but they are encouraged. To consult with. So he sends me the proposal. And we, you know, he tells me what he thinks and then by email, I say yes or no. It goes from there. And if we're in any doubt, we bring it to a public meeting. Right. Yeah. And there's multiple provisions for, you know, If it's not, you know, the designee may opt to, you know, send it to the commission to make the distinction or designation. So. Yeah, they can, they have that option as well. Or if we disagree. It has to. So does anybody have any thoughts on that? How we should do this this time. If we designate. If we designate. If we designate. We'll have to then put the next person in as well. That's right. But we're not about naming Ben because at the time we, we trusted Ben, right? And. You know, there could be, we get assigned somebody. But we're not that sure we totally want them to make this decision. And so we wouldn't want to have them. So. Well, how cumbersome is it to change the name? I think it's just, we vote in a meeting like this, right? We don't, there's nothing written that has to be, you know, go through some sort of town council. No. Yeah. The bylaw says in the commission or their designee. And so I think it just becomes a, you know, an email that Ben would send around, I would send around that was, you know, go to the building commissioner or planning director and it becomes. Kind of a record that way, but it's not anything formal, you know, in terms of a change through town council or anything. Well, could we designate me until we know. Whether we need to change that. What do you mean? Well, if there's, if there's a new staff member and eventually they take over this position, then we would have to make a decision about that. And whether Nate. We continue to assume that or not, but in the, in your role with us right now, Nate, you, you were moving into Ben's role. And we know you and trust you. So. Well, yeah, I mean, we wouldn't keep it neat if we got a new. New staff person. So we need somebody. Nominated. As a designate. Well, it could be from the commission though, too. Is all. Okay. All right. I'm just leaving it open. It could be always the chair. But it seemed more efficient. To have it be the person who gets them. Seize them first and then decides. Send them on or not. So. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So if we designate. Nate, the issue is just that when he leaves us, we'll need to designate someone again. Right. Right. I would say let's designate Nate now. That problem. Take the can down the road. I like that. Yeah. I won't be here. Volunteer. You know, I mean, I was thinking. I don't think I'm ready to volunteer for that, but I don't want to volunteer her. It would up your load a little. Because you'd be having to look at all the applications that came in. Yeah, I don't think. I think I would be more comfortable having a staff member to that. We might at some point say that in consultation with you, rather than the chair, for instance, if we wanted to. So that when that something came, he thought maybe should be. Public hearing, he could just run it by you like he does me right now, but that's something later on you can decide if you want to. Just because you have the expertise that many of us don't. Later sounds good. For everything. Take a look at that. Okay. Okay. What else in the transition do we need to decide? Is there anything else then? You want to. There is one other thing that that brings up. We need to, did we need to vote on the letter for the recommendations for the projects? I would like everyone looking to support. I think we need a motion or anything, but I think we should have a motion. Yep. Okay. Yeah. I think we should have a motion. Okay. Okay. I assume that we. Doesn't make me. Okay. Anybody want a second? Second. Okay. I think I should do a roll call vote on this. How do you start up? Yes. Yes. Madeline. Yes. Rebecca Lockwood. Yes. Robin Fordham. Yes. And I vote yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for being unanimously elected to this position. I hope you hold it in high regard. Yeah. I mean, we're anticipating one or two applications soon. Well, you know, it could be a week, it could be a month, but sometimes applicants just kind of sit on it. So we've, you know, there's been a few questions and there's been some that have been kind of preliminary submitted, but nothing formal yet. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The other thing that brings up is that we need members for this committee and or this commission. And I send out a lot of letters. Three months ago or something. And turned up one person who is interested. Who lives here, but works in Mount Holyoke and nothing ever happened to that application. I'm not quite sure where in the process it died. And so I think that we have to, those who might be interested in beyond this, because they have to live in Amherst, which really narrows, you know, the number of people who are, who are interested in this kind of thing. But we're going to need two people. It's shrinking. So if you could help come up with names, wrecking, you know, suggest people easy for them to apply. I forget what it's called. And... Do you have any connection with UMass graduate program? I mean, any of their historic preservation or architecture graduate students lived in Amherst? I don't know about the students. I contacted a lot of faculty. I don't know about students. I mean, if you want me to... Yeah, right. Get into the names of likely people if they live in Amherst, but I don't quite know how I got that. I did ask those, I contacted if they knew anyone who might be likely. I only got a couple of answers back on that, but nobody said I'm here early. Yeah, sometimes, yeah. I think there's other boards and committees that are having trouble finding volunteers. And so, if you're... If you know someone who submitted a form, it would be unfiled. So when the commission, the process is the town manager likes to hold short interviews with potential applicants for boards and committees. So 10 to 15 minutes and then make a decision. And so, they'll go back three years to see who submitted any CAFs. I don't know what they're called now, but whoever submitted a form, they'll reach out to. We're doing it for another committee I work with. And they went back to 2019 or 18. And I said, really, we're gonna go back to 2018. And they said, well, just to make sure. I'm like, okay, but like that's four years ago. It's just that there's not, for some boards and committees, there's just not a lot of people submitting forms. We did Madeleine's interview with a bunch of others for other committees at the same time. And this one came in like that day. And so, it wasn't a good time for that. But I don't know what happened to it since because I just assumed, and the secretary said, it'll just be scheduled like in a week and nothing ever happened. So I don't know if Paul didn't like it or it got lost in the shuffle. But I thought maybe one of you might know where it is or what happens. Sometimes they like to wait until there's a critical mass of applicants before holding the interviews just so it can be a competitive, somewhat competitive thing. But maybe this one did get lost in the shuffle. I didn't realize it came in like right after the interview process. It's somebody who doesn't have as many qualifications as Madeleine, but is very interested, lives in Amherst, teaches at Mount Holyoke. It just, you know, as a homeowner, it just seemed like a great person. Jen, could you check back with this person to see if they indeed did make an effort? I did. And she was a little... She never got any response. Would she be willing to reapply? Just to get it to the top? Yes, she will. Well, no, but if it got lost, then... Then we'll find it. I mean, you know, she's already a little hurt that she didn't even have a response. So I'm gonna ask them. I don't, yeah, just a quick email search. I didn't see that the town manager's office emailed about that, but maybe Ben, you would have it. Yeah, I think we could reach out to the town manager's office and ask staff for names. And we could even just reach out. I can reach out if, you know, if they're not ready to start interviews, I could at least email, you know, the few applicants and tell them, you know, thanks for your patience. We're hoping to do something soon just so that they're kept up to date a little bit. I can email you her name so you know what to look for. Thanks, yep. Okay, great. So anybody, you know, else you can think of, everybody, encourage folk. Do we have any public waiting to comment? Nope, there's no one there. Unanticipated items. Sorry, eating my flowers. No anticipated items. Okay, great. Next meeting date, do we have one that is the December one coming up? Right? December 7th. Yeah. So Ben, that's not a regular meeting. Are you going to be at that meeting, Ben, so that we can fate you and raise a glass to you and stuff like that? Or are you going to? I will not be there. You will not, okay. Ben, you can come as a guest. I can come on to the channel as well. I can just watch the action. Yeah. That's not a regular meeting, right? Or did you just schedule it to deal with that issue early as a regular meeting? Yeah, I didn't think we had a regular meeting scheduled and there was this application that was partially submitted. So I wanted to get something on the books first and then. Yeah. But this application is still kind of pending, but. Okay, so that will be our meeting for December then. Yeah. The hope is that there's two pending demolition, I call them demolition applications. So they submitted building permits, but they haven't come through and submitted the application to the historical commission. And Ben's reached out to the applicants to say, if you can get them in by the end of next week, we can have a hearing on December 7th. Can I see? Otherwise, they won't be ready and we'd have to then hold another hearing possibly in late December, early January, just to meet the timeframe deadline. And so. What if that happens? Then we could cancel December 7th because we don't have that much else to do, right? We could. Yeah. I mean, I just want to tell the applicants. I almost wanted to say, we're going to schedule up for January at this point. I just, one of them's out of the country, evidently. And the other one, Ben's communicated with a few times and there hasn't been any follow-up by them. And so it's just, it's odd. I get it. We have to make sure the timing works, but it's. So we could say the 7th and then, you know, I will know in a week or so if, if we have any, if those proposals come in. Okay. Well, is everybody good with the 7th? If we just keep that as our regular meeting, whether those come in or not, if they don't, we'll just send them to January. But if they do, we'll have them then. Is that still a good date then for everyone? Yes. Okay. Great. Well, then that's our next meeting date and the only thing left to do is to move to adjourn. I moved to, that we adjourn. I second. Got it. Okay. We won't take a name re vote. We'll just do it by hands. So thank you, Ben. You've been a treat. Thank you so much, Ben. Good luck. And you're welcome to come visit on the meeting, at the meeting anytime. Well, the best to you always. Thank you. I really appreciate it. And Nate, looking forward to working with you again. Yeah, I have my historic picture of Town Hall up as my father. I know. You were really in the mood. You really got in the mood. I could tell you love this committee. You know, you love this commission. You always want to stay on it. I thought it was a quick story is that I got to go up into the clock tower at Town Hall today. Oh, wow. Yeah, our facility manager promised me I could go up there a few months ago. Now it popped into my head today. I was like, oh, before my last day I got to take them up on that. But it was it was really cool. I mean, it's still the original like all the years and everything and the bell is still there. Did you see out? Yeah, you can get a great view up there, too. You can see the North Spire and the South Spire. Oh, it's talking about. But yeah, the facility, I was up there years ago, but I guess it's really rough on the inside. They really have it, you know, even the ladders or stairs and the woodwork. I don't think it's really been updated. And it's still very much of the era it was built on like this building. Yeah, I've done that buildings from the 10th century, so we can't do that. Good. Well, thanks, everyone. And I'll be back in December. Take care. Yeah, bye.