City Property Committee — February 19, 2026

Gus, you up there?

Gus, you're up.

Yeah, okay.

All set.

All right, ready?

He said all set.

Good evening, everyone.

Welcome to the Committee on City Property.

The date is February 19th, and the time is 7:00 PM.

Welcome to the City Council Chambers.

I'm joined tonight by my colleagues in government: Councilor at Large Jean Abreu, Councilor of Ward 2 Scott Pemberton, Councilor of Ward 1 Leo Choquette, Councilor of Ward 5 Joseph Lopes, Councilor at Large Brian Gomes, Councilor of Ward 6 and City Council President Ryan Pereira, Councilor-at-Large James Roy, and Councilor-at-Large Naomi R.A. Carney.

I'm Sean Oliver, the Ward 3 City Councilor and the Chairman of City Property.

Please note that this meeting is being live streamed and recorded.

City Council and committee meetings can be viewed on the City of New Bedford's homepage under Quick Links, then Meetings.

We'll ask the clerk if there's anything to be read into the record.

There is.

I have I have one letter to read into the record, uh, from Councilor Burgo.

Dear Chair Oliver and honorable members of the committee, I'm writing to inform you that I am unable to attend tonight's committee meeting due to another commitment.

Please read this letter into the record to make my colleagues and the public aware of the reason for my tardiness.

Motion to receive and place on file.

Motion received and placed on file by Councilor Pereira, seconded by Councilor Lopes.

All those in favor say aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Uh, Mr. Chairman, yes, I'd like to make a motion.

I'd like to, uh, waive reading on number 1 and make it to the full city council for no further action.

Motion to waive the reading of item number 1 and refer to the full city council for no further action by Councilor Pemberton, seconded by Councilor Abreu.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Number 2 is a written motion, Councilors Pemberton and Oliver, requesting that the Committee on City Property meet to begin the process of the disposition for the Phillips Avenue Elementary School located at 249 Phillips Road.

It was referred here on January 8th, 2026.

Number 2 is before you.

Motion received and placed on file by Councilor Abreu.

Seconded by Councilor Choquette.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

The— any opposed?

The ayes have it.

The item is before you.

Uh, I guess, uh, do you have anybody that you'd like to speak to first, or we just bring up Josh, uh, Amaral?

Uh, we can just bring up Josh first.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Amaral.

Good evening, councilors.

Good evening.

Uh, I guess just kind of an overview of what's happening with that property, or— Yeah, absolutely.

Thank you.

As you know, in the Building New Bedford housing plan, we set out to dispose of a number of city buildings for housing.

Phillips Avenue School is one of those that's been on the list for a long time.

Obviously, there's a history with that building and previous attempts at that.

We've tried to prioritize those that have in our view and what we see from the development community, the most demand for housing development.

And so given the previous history at Phillips Avenue, that one fell kind of on the list below the Kempton and Taylor School dispositions, which we put out last year.

Those need to be redone, so we've been strategizing on how to do that this year.

We do have a Phillips Avenue RFP drafted and ready to go, as we do Kempton, Taylor.

We've also been looking at the Armory.

And other municipal buildings.

And so we plan to file those within the next couple weeks, including Phillips Avenue School.

And given the council's interest in that, we can certainly prioritize that as one of the first ones that we issue this year.

We've had a lot of conversations internally about, you know, trying to get approval for all those and then staggering them throughout the year.

I think we learned last time there are advantages and disadvantages from doing all of those dispositions at the same exact moment, right?

It's not a totally crowded development market.

And so we want to make sure that there's equal opportunity and access to those RFPs from, you know, a variety of sources that seem to want them.

But Phillips Avenue School, I think, lends itself well to housing development and is one that we'd like to see what the market wants to do with.

Colleagues, any questions for Mr. Amaral?

Councilor Abram.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good evening, Josh.

Good to see you.

Uh, you know, without naming names, have there been any, uh, developers or any possible builders who have reached out to your office inquiring about this property?

Uh, it's been a little while since someone's reached out specifically about it.

I want to say maybe 2 years ago, uh, there were some, some developers that were interested, and we walked through the building, uh, with the help of DFFM.

Uh, there wasn't an active procurement at the time.

It was more For us to gauge, you know, level of interest and how feasible it was, I was, you know, pleased that the building appeared to be in good enough shape for redevelopment.

I think from a developer's perspective, it's a relatively small project.

I think even the proposal that had been considered here before was something like 15 or 16 units.

I think with the use of historic tax credits, which is likely in that development, it's probably going to be smaller than that.

I think 14 units maybe.

I think the footprint and physical size of the building is very similar to Dunbar School.

And so I know that's a property the council is very familiar with.

That project is set to move forward.

I would say the developer is probably going to close on their financing in the next quarter or 2 in 2026 and then get started on that project, which is now 14 units.

I would expect something similar in scale at the Phillips Avenue School.

That said, you know, there's It's sort of a niche market of developer that looks for a project of that size and with the level of effort you need to access all those subsidy sources.

So while I think there's demand and interest in it, it's not like, you know, the, the most lucrative or, you know, people aren't lining up necessarily for that opportunity.

It's kind of a niche development.

Okay.

Thank you.

Last question for me.

When, when RFPs go out for these public projects, these public properties and buildings, when we do our due diligence, we do our jobs, and then no other department needs it here and it goes out.

We have a successful applicant and we award a bid to somebody, they get it, or even before that, how do we network or market that property out before we get to that point of getting into the end zone?

I mean, do you just put a link on your website and, hey, you know, let the phone ring, or is your office a little more proactive, like making calls to known developers that you know?

Is there a network that you have of people, like a pool, if you will?

Hey, this group of 40, 50 people, just letting you know this is coming online, just so you know?

And how does that all play out?

Yeah, no, I appreciate the, the question.

Uh, I think we've, we've been fairly aggressive in marketing those properties, particularly Kempton, Taylor, uh, the 2 fire stations and police station that we've talked about recently as well.

Uh, so purchasing is very helpful with this.

Uh, the city uses a BidNet system, and I defer to Director Gilfeather to expand on that.

But all of our developers and folks that we work with, we encourage to sign up for that system, which provides automatic notices when there's a housing disposition or municipal building disposition for them.

That also tracks the folks who take out the bid documentation so you can see who's sort of looking at it, who's interested in it.

And it also makes sure that they stay informed if there are amendments to that bid package at any period in time so they get all the notices.

Nobody can, nobody can miss the notices.

But even outside of that system, we've marketed it to all the developers we've done business with here in the city of New Bedford or that we know of.

We do research at times to see who's done successful school conversion projects in other nearby communities, for example.

We also use the help of the Economic Development Council in networking to their developers and construction contacts to help us market those buildings.

So we get them pretty far and wide.

I will say, while we were unable to get to the end zone with Kempton and Taylor specifically because of some sort of technicalities with the RFP, we saw pretty much unprecedented demand in those buildings.

I think we had nearly 100 different developers take out the bid packages.

Molly's nodding yes.

And then we got, I think, 7 or 8 bids on each building.

In the past, our experience has been we're lucky to get 1 or 2, but those we got several, which has given us some good feedback for us to revise those RFPs to be a little bit more specific and get— engender better responses, I think, from the development community.

But we do a lot to market them, Council.

Yeah, thanks a bunch, Josh.

The reason why— and I knew the answer, I've been here a little bit— but know, I, I wanted you to explain it and expand upon it because there are developers who do watch our meetings, who are following what we're doing, especially in this committee and other similar committees where it relates to economic development.

So I wanted them to learn the process, the processes that we have internally, uh, if they want to come into New Bedford, because obviously we're, we're addressing a lot of bureaucratic and red tape measures this year.

And from the administration to us, we're working together on that in many ways.

So this is another step, I think.

So I think it was important for you to explain the process of how it all kind of shakes out.

So I thank you for that.

Mr. Chairman, I'm all set at this time.

I'll yield.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any further questions of our guests?

If, if the, uh, no objection, the body has— the chair has a few questions.

No objection.

Uh, Josh, um, you did say that this was a niche kind of project, um, but there was some interest in it, correct?

Was it a multiple developer?

I wasn't here for that.

So was it multiple developers or— Yes.

Okay.

There was— it was a little bit before my time, but I followed the process and I've sort of read up on it.

There was one developer that took that property through this committee unsuccessfully.

I think it was rebid at another point in time, at which point another developer emerged.

And this is purely speculation on my part, but I think if we were to issue it again today, we'd have more than one developer interested in it.

Okay, so it's something that's, that's probably lucrative to do.

There'll be some interest in it.

The other thing, I think you had mentioned that you had gone through the property some time ago.

When was the last time that we've been through that property?

I'd say it's about 2 years ago.

About 2 years ago.

Okay.

And do you think that the condition is similar, worse?

Do you know?

It's, it's— I'm sure it's not better.

Yeah, but I doubt it's drastically worse.

The exterior of the building, the sort of brick facade, I think needs, needs some significant work.

Yeah, it looks worse on the outside than I think it is on the inside.

But of course, any redevelopment for housing is going to be a really substantial renovation.

So even if it were in slightly worse or slightly better condition, I don't think it would make much difference.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, colleagues.

Anyone else?

Any other further questions?

I'd like to make a motion.

Uh, so the motion I want to make is the— we're just gonna move the pursuant to Section 265 of the city code, the committee notified the department heads that the committee is considering the sale of the Phillips Avenue Elementary School located at 249 Phillips Avenue and notify the committee whether said property is needed for municipal purposes.

Okay, motion by Councilor Pemberton, second by Councilor Pereira.

All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, point of order through you to the clerk.

Should we table item 2 now?

Well, it can stay in committee.

It's going to stay anyway, right?

So we'll just leave it.

All right.

I mean, either way, it's going to be here no matter what, right?

So, all right.

Okay.

Item 3 is before us.

Read them all together if that's okay.

Uh, 3 is a communication.

Mayor Mitchells to the City Council submitting request for proposals draft for the redevelopment of a portion of the municipally owned Wheeling City Golf Course.

As an advanced manufacturing campus, AMC.

It was referred here on January 23rd, 2025.

February 20th, 2025, it was tabled.

March 19th, 2025, it remained in committee.

3A is a request for proposals draft for the redevelopment of a portion of the municipally owned Wheeling City Golf Course as an advanced manufacturing campus, AMC.

Referred here on January 23rd, 2025.

February 20th, 2025, it was tabled.

March 19th, 2025, a vote was taken to determine that the property is not needed for the municipal purposes, and a vote that the city offer the property for lease.

A vote for that the purchasing department proceed with issuing the RFP, and a vote took place that the city also offer the property for potential sale, and it remained in committee.

3B was a communication Mayor Mitchell to the City Council in conjunction with the request for proposals draft for the redevelopment of a portion of the municipally owned Whaling City Golf Course as an advanced manufacturing campus, AMC.

Requesting that the Committee on City Property vote to authorize the Planning Department to conduct an appraisal of the property being contemplated for potential disposition and authorize the Planning Department to conduct a survey of all city departments to determine whether the property is needed for municipal purposes.

It was referred here on the 23rd of January, 2025.

February 20th, 2025, a vote to authorize the Planning Department to conduct an appraisal of the property being contemplated for potential disposition.

A vote that the Committee on city property, send a communication to all city departments to determine whether the property is needed for municipal purposes.

It was tabled.

On March 19th, 2025, a vote was taken to determine that the property is not needed for municipal purposes.

A vote took place that the city offer the property for lease.

A vote took place that the purchasing department proceed with the IRF— with the RFP.

And a vote took place that the city also offer the property for potential sale.

And it remained in committee.

3C is a proposal.

Charter Development Company LLC submitting a proposal in response to the city's RFP for the creation of an advanced manufacturing campus, AMC, of a portion of the municipally owned Whaling City Golf Course.

February 5th, 2026, the office received the proposal via the purchasing department, and it was sent to all city councils— 3, 3A, 3B, and 3C are now before you.

Motion to receive and place on file by Councilor Pereira, seconded by Councilor Pemberton.

All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Items 3A, 3B, 3C.

Mr. Chairman, if we could receive and place on file, uh, for 2 PowerPoint slides.

No, no, all we need to do is receive and place on file the request for proposal at this time.

At this time, is that made by you?

Second.

All those in favor?

Well, the motion receiving place on file the RFP by Councilor Pereira, seconded by Councilor Abreu.

All in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Call up Neil.

No, he's going to speak, but then he's going to speak first.

We'll have, uh, Neil come up and, uh, speak in reference to this.

All right.

Thank you, Chairman Oliver.

Thank you, Mr. Oliver, and the, uh, members of the committee.

The advantage of coming to the mic after Josh Amaral is that it comes pre-adjusted.

Thank you, Josh.

We're here to recommend the selection of the bidder pursuant to the RFP that was just described, and if the committee is agreeable to the recommendation of the evaluation committee, we would seek permission to begin to negotiate a purchase and sale agreement and/or a development agreement.

I thought I would just offer a few words before we get into the presentations about where we are with the project for new councilors and for the public.

This is 10 years, nearly 10 years in the making.

There have been— we've been through a pandemic.

We've been through drastic change in the capital markets related to the Ukraine war, which impacted the project.

Throughout that, we've— we are have appreciated the collaboration that we've had with the committee and with the council.

Together we've passed the home rule petition that addressed all of the Article 97 challenges associated with the site.

We've passed a zoning ordinance specific to the site, and over the past year we've been engaged in a refined RFP effort.

So we are glad to be here tonight for an important procedural step.

I would add to that that There is nothing binding about the council votes tonight.

The work that proceeds following any permission we receive from the, from the committee tonight would require us to come back to the committee and the full council to present a draft purchase and sale agreement or a development agreement.

The council and the committee have full approval authority over that.

So what we are seeking tonight is simply the permission to continue to work with a prospective developer if the proposal is selected.

With that, I just— I do want to acknowledge some of the support and the partners that we've had.

The multiple administrations at the state level have supported this project.

We've received, I think, 2 site readiness grants from MassDevelopment.

We've also more recently in the fall, the Healey administration committed $600,000 MassWorks grant to allow us to continue design and plan for the project.

We are at present— we are reluctant to engage in the use— in using those funds until we have a development prospect to sit across the table.

You know, we've designed this project.

We've invested significant resources in designing the project using the previous state grants.

But at this point, to further design and plan for the project is design and planning for its own sake.

So we're really looking to have a development entity across the table so that we can begin to both negotiate the purchase and sale and to do the necessary design work that still needs to happen locally.

I just— I do want to acknowledge the town of Dartmouth and the Dartmouth Natural Resources Trust, which are partners to us in resolving the Article 97 issues related to the the project.

And certainly the entire New Bedford legislative delegation has been critical in their support, which has been unanimous.

On the city side, the number of departments here tonight, as well as a number of consultancies that have advised us, including Robert McNeil from Northeast Golf Company to address the golf course-related issues.

Niche Consulting has worked with us on the design layout and engineering, geotechnical work, and here tonight.

You'll be receiving presentations from R&D Consultants, which has been our advisor on the RFP, as well as CBRE Appraisal Services, which conducted the appraisal that you'll hear from— you'll be hearing from them tonight.

I also want to acknowledge the evaluation team, which consists of a number of city departments, including the chair.

We've invited, as in his capacity as ward councilor, we invited Councilor Oliver to score the proposals.

Proposal as well.

And so tonight from the EDC on the evaluation committee was Derek Santos, Jennifer Carlone, the city planner, Josh Amaral from Community Development, and Molly Gilfeather Rodriguez as well supported us at purchasing throughout the RFP process.

So with that, with all of that said, what I would suggest to the chair and the members of the committee is I think the first order of business that we would like to brief you on are matters related to the appraisal of the property.

And I suggest that because I, I think it would be helpful, it would be in the city's interest to be able to present that in an executive session to preserve our ability to negotiate with a prospective partner.

And so with that, I would ask the chair to consider that, and we can move on.

We can either do that at the beginning of the meeting, or we can do that at some point further on, but I think it's best addressed up front, and then we can move into Charter's presentation and the substance of their proposal.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Melo.

Uh, Councilor Abramowicz.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

At this time, I make a motion to move that the committee go into executive session for the specific and exclusive purpose of discussing value and pricing of the property that may need to be negotiated as part of this transaction in order to accommodate various contingencies that may need to be built into the contract for the purchase consistent with the open meeting exemption under General Law Chapter 30A, Section 21, subsection A6, and further that the committee will reconvene in open public session following said executive session.

Okay, motion made by Councilor Abreu, second by Councilor Pereira.

All in favor?

Roll call vote.

Sorry.

To go into executive session.

Councilor Abrams?

Yep.

Yes, Councilor Abrams.

Councilor Carney?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Carney.

Councilor Choquette?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Choquette.

Councilor Gomes?

Yes.

Councilor Gomes.

Councilor Lopes?

Yes.

Councilor Lopes.

Councilor Oliver?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Oliver.

Councilor Pemberton?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Pemberton.

Councilor Pereira?

Yes.

That passes.

Councilor Roy, I'm sorry.

Yes, sorry about that.

That passes 9 to 0.

Okay, okay, all right, we're going to, uh, enter into executive session at this time.

And we will reconvene for public session after what we hear from, uh, the executive session is over.

Gus, would you please pause the recording?

We're gonna take a brief recess.

We are back.

We are back from executive session at 7:53 PM.

All right, I'm moving on here now.

Um, well, no, I think we're gonna have a presentation now.

Nope.

So presentation is this one?

Yeah.

So what do you have?

What do we have?

A lot of technical stuff, right?

I believe Charter is passing along, uh, some information.

Can I get a motion to receive and place that on file?

Uh, and also, no, is that what we received?

And this one too?

No, this is another one.

And the, um, I believe this one as well is a different one.

Awesome.

Motion, motion made by Councilor Lopes, seconded by Councilor Gomes.

All those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Thank you.

So both of these were received by Councilor Lowe and Gomes.

Yes, thank you.

I believe Charter is now going to give us a presentation when they have it up there.

It's not helping.

You don't think it's going to help?

You know what, I can plug it right into here.

As if government TV wasn't already boring, you know.

I don't have cable, I'm not— we got off the grid.

Yeah, we don't either, we just have internet.

Yeah, yeah.

This is not your— this is not your— it's the— I just have those 2.

Yeah, that's the other one.

That's the answer.

Yeah.

Oh, 219.

All right, I can man it if you want.

All right, there we go.

Yes, it is.

Okay, I think we're— are we good?

All right, we're gonna have members from Charter, come and give us a brief presentation.

If whoever comes up to the microphone, if they can just give their name for the record before they speak, that'd be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

There we go.

All right, well, thank you.

Uh, good evening, members of, uh, the City Council.

My name is Robert Delhomme, and I am the president and CEO of the Charter Companies.

Charter development and charter contracting company.

We appreciate the opportunity to be here this evening just to walk through excerpts of our proposal.

It's really a privilege to be here and to be considered as a long-term partner to the city.

This isn't just about a transaction.

This is about a collaboration to deliver certainty of outcome on a, on a project that's been long planned and thought through by, by the city.

With me this evening is Mason Sandell, principal of Chartered Development, and Lucas Cohen, development associate at Chartered Development.

All right.

Yeah, thank you for having us.

Again, I'm Mason Sandell with Chartered Development, and the, the handout that we've passed around in this presentation is really just an extract from the RFP itself.

There's no new information being presented here.

It's everything that's in the proposal.

And so what we thought we'd do is tell you a little bit about Charter so you know who we are, tell you about our team, give you a flyover of our development concept, talk a little bit about timelines, potential timelines, address the project sources and uses of funding, which is a critical element.

And then certainly want to leave time for questions from everybody.

So I thought we'd organize it that way.

So just a word on Charter.

We're 30 years in business.

And at our heart, we are a brownfield redevelopment firm with an affiliated civil construction, environmental remediation, and regulated materials management capability.

Each part of our business can and does go to market independently, but when we're able to combine those capabilities, we find we're able to deliver some really unique solutions to some of the most challenging brownfield sites in New England.

We're headquartered in Boston, but our focus is and our real passion is in developing projects in the Commonwealth's great gateway cities.

We're active right now in Everett.

We're part of the ownership team that acquired the former ExxonMobil oil terminal, the 95 acres.

The Davis Companies are the general partners there.

We're making great progress there.

Turned over one of the first phases just at the end of last year.

We're the named redeveloper in Brockton for the Trout Brook URP and making great project progress there.

And recently just turned over a signature waterfront park for the city of Lynn, 30 acres on the waterfront, the former landfill and an MGP site.

So again, it's our passion to tackle projects like this, and we're looking forward to partnering with the city to deliver a really special project here.

So with that, just a quick overview of our team.

So Charter Development is going to function as the master developer in working with the city.

Charter Contracting, our contracting arm, will handle the site work, any remediation.

It's a significant earth-moving project, as you're probably well aware.

VHB are a well-known, a blue-chip engineering firm that we've worked with on many occasions.

And they'll be doing site civil and a lot of the environmental permitting.

Dane Torpy, we've worked with for well over a decade on a number of very challenging projects.

And CBRE is our commercial broker and doing tenant outreach and looking at the follow-on vertical phase.

So finally, yeah, Anderson Strategic Advisors is an advisory firm that we've worked with to help secure public funding from a number of sources on a number of projects, and they're very well regarded.

So our development concept is to tackle the project in 2 phases, ultimately delivering approximately 1.1 million square feet of advanced manufacturing buildings over 2 phases.

You know, in support of the city's goals for redevelopment as well.

Phase 1 is 600,000 square feet.

It's just under 40 acres.

And it's comprised of— you know, this is a preliminary conceptual outline, but we think it's illustrative.

A new road coming off of Hathaway Road and 600,000 total square feet Importantly, to implement Phase 1, there's a significant earth-moving component.

There's about 300,000 cubic yards of material that needs to be regraded on site, of which about 100,000 yards needs to leave the site to deliver a pad-ready condition.

That's where Phase 2, we think, is integral to the overall project.

Phase 2 ultimately another 500,000 square feet following Phase 1.

Phase 2 will require potentially 700,000 cubic yards of imported material to get to a pad-ready condition to support follow-on redevelopment.

This is the original timeline from the RFP.

I think we're just, you know, this process is obviously well underway.

We're probably 6 months behind what, you know, again, this is from last May, right?

But illustratively, I think the relationships timeline-wise still hold.

You know, contemplating a, you know, being named, you know, shortly.

You know, we'd be able to get to ideally a closing probably by Q3.

There is some question about sort of overall timing of a closing relative to the MEPA process.

I think this shows us closing first and then running through the MEPA process.

There's a case that the closing could be delayed to the end of that process.

But that's to be determined, you know, upon selection.

These are the illustrative sources and uses for the total project.

For the land development phase of the project.

3-year total, approximately $12 million each of sources and uses.

On the sources side, you know, CHART is prepared to commit $6 million of its own equity to tackle the project.

We think another $6 at a minimum via public funding, via a MassWorks grant.

On the uses side, the primary use that we see is related to the earthwork and getting the site ready.

And, you know, we've got a line here for earthwork, $3.2 million.

That's to handle the 300,000+ cubic yards that it's going to take to grade the site to a pad-ready condition.

Notably, I think one of the impediments to development around the earthwork You know, I think a traditional vertical-only developer would have a hard time doing this work for the $3 million.

And moreover, the 100,000 cubic yards that would need to leave the site, that's about 200,000 tons.

You know, this is soil, you know, coming from a former golf course.

So potentially, you know, if it goes offsite, that could represent a price tag for offsite T&D of, you know, potentially $5 $5 million or so.

So that's just a lens through which to look at the potential uses.

So I'll pause there.

And Bob, if you'd like to kind of add any detail or— we can keep going.

Summary of benefits.

This is both phases combined.

You know, we see, you know, 800 to 1,000 permanent jobs at full build-out.

$2.5 million a year property taxes.

And then during the construction phase, 650 to 800 construction jobs.

So that's the high-level flyover.

We're certainly happy to get into more detail on any of the components that we hit today.

Thank you.

Sure.

Uh, colleagues?

Councilor Pereira.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Um, for whoever can answer this, as far as, uh, what is, uh, lead times to acquiring MassWorks grants?

How long does that usually take?

And what is the confidence level in obtaining and getting awarded the grants?

I think a lot of the work has already been done.

The city has really jump-started the process through its initial application.

So we would anticipate that that process will have the ability to be accelerated from the state's perspective once a developer has been designated.

It really does then breed confidence.

So we would think in the next application cycle that would have a level of success.

The MassWorks grant lately has been a little bit dynamic in terms of how it's being administered.

But I think that once a developer is selected, we collaborate with the city in the next application cycle.

I would expect that to be a successful application.

A lot of good work has already been done within the MassWorks program to position the project well.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr.— uh, Councilor Pereira.

Chair recognizes Councilor Abram.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good evening, gentlemen.

Just a quick question, and, uh, my friend from Ward 1 was also mentioning it, and it was a question I was going to ask.

Your construction jobs, um, and you said about 800, correct, in the scale, correct, um, you anticipate.

The contractors you use, do they utilize union labor?

It's typically a mix, and we would, and we would adhere to the New Bedford Works policy program.

Good, because we're a union town here, so I just wanted to get that, you know.

Absolutely.

Okay, good, you're on the record.

Okay, thank you.

All right, Mr. Chairman, I'll yield.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Abreu.

Chair recognizes Councilor Lopes.

So I'm going to stay with that same line of questioning.

Since it will no longer be a city project, since it won't be a city project there's no need for the city REO.

So would you— your other projects, have you put a PLA on your other projects?

We haven't necessarily had to have a PLA.

There has been a PLA in one of the projects that we participated in, and that was part of the Everett Wynn Casino.

I wouldn't expect that a PLA would be needed on a project like this, but our stated commitment to the city has been to still adhere to the policy.

Thank you.

Just looking for clarification on it.

Thank you.

Yes, thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Councilor Lopes, anyone else?

Councilor Gomes.

Thank you very much.

Um, I like to go back to, um, the construction jobs.

You say 650 to 800 jobs.

How do you come to that conclusion not knowing what has been sold, what is going to come Where do you get them numbers from?

Maybe you'll be educating me, sir.

You know, a lot of it is, uh, using historical, uh, figures that come from published worked examples.

So when you're looking at the square footage to be constructed over a period of time in conjunction with the site work to be undertaken, there's a lot of, um, just, uh, public documents filed that provide really strong rules of thumb to apply to it.

So this would have been generated utilizing those manuals, prior experience based off of the square footage, the site work area, and the period of time for performance.

Could you answer the question on how you come to the conclusion of 800 to 1,000 jobs not having any concrete commitment?

It's, um, the estimate is based off of the concept in the manner that it's been outlined.

So it's really driven by the square footage that we've stipulated and the period of time to construct that square footage.

So it is, it has assumptions built into it, and it assumes that those buildings of that square footage will be built in that period of time.

And that is then the number of required workers.

So it's not— and to clarify, it's not our— those don't tend to be our estimates.

Those come from published reference manuals that are well established in terms of establishing total number of workers required.

Okay.

So then 800 to 1,000 jobs could possibly not be 800 to 1,000 jobs at the completion of the project.

It could be 650.

I'm not— I'm sorry, sir, I don't— I didn't understand the question.

I'm, I'm going based on your answer just now as where you get these numbers from.

Uh, oh, I apologize, I was referencing the construction jobs.

Okay, I had jumped to the permit.

Okay, jobs within— um, again, it's, it's, uh, those number of jobs is also predicated on the intended use under the advanced manufacturing campus, the zoning and what the likely uses are, the square footage of the buildings.

And again, there's just public reference manuals that would tell you for planning purposes the estimated number of jobs to be created.

So if the project were smaller or if, if there were an end user that the city was really excited about, If there was a local company that was growing, but it had a use within the advanced manufacturing campus, but it had a different employee ratio, that would certainly affect it.

So today everything is just us applying industry standard rules of thumb based off of the programming that's been provided.

I'm glad you just pointed out what you pointed out as far as the numbers are concerned and where to get them.

Possibly expansion from other companies within the city of New Bedford.

I wouldn't want to see the city of New Bedford develop an area and leave another area vacant for us to work at, if you understand what I mean.

That's, that's, that's been done before.

That, that flip has been done before where you're going to build out or whatever, but then I'm losing what I have somewhere else.

To go to that new site, I, I— what did I really accomplish?

I might have accomplished an additional 100 jobs, but I left a large-scale building vacant now to do something with.

Understood, sir.

Yes, thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you.

Does anybody else have anything for Charter?

Okay, without a— nope.

Chair recognizes Councilor Pereira.

Thank you.

Just really quick on the tax revenues, uh, the estimated value, that's based off of current assessing values?

Yes, correct.

So as those values and stuff change over time, those— the estimates?

Yeah.

Okay, very good.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Pereira.

Uh, anybody else?

Without objection.

Some questions from the chair?

Without objection.

Thank you.

Uh, thank you, gentlemen.

Um, I have, uh, first off, some concerns.

Obviously you spoke about the extent of this project.

Would this be, uh, your biggest undertaking, your most, uh, I guess, uh, earth-moving, if you will, undertaking that you guys are taking on?

Or are there other projects?

I know you spoke about Everett and things like that.

Are they similar to this?

Is this a completely different animal?

I would— it's a good question.

No, I would say that this project in scope and scale really sits squarely in our wheelhouse in terms of, you know, really in all aspects, certainly in the technical elements of the work that has to be done.

But I think more so in the spirit of we tend to be very selective about the projects that we take on.

We take on projects on a very strategic basis with engaged municipalities because it really— it's, it's not only about the technical work being done, but it's really about having a partnership and collaborating with the city.

And so when we target a project to pursue like this one, We're really committing and going all in because delivering certainty of outcome and delivering a successful project to the city is really our priority.

And so the technical work is squarely in our area of expertise.

The regulatory and the entitlement component we're really comfortable with.

And I think that the thing that we do best, candidly, and we do the physical work really well, is that partnering and collaborating.

To get to the outcome that the city endeavors.

Okay, and I'm glad that you brought up collaborating.

And obviously there's a tenant that's there now with the municipally owned golf course.

Your relationship with prior, um, you know, or adjacent tenants that you've done projects with— I'm not— I'm hoping that you guys will be understanding on how Those folks still want to be able to use the recreation that they've been accustomed to.

Could you speak about a little bit of the collaboration that you're looking to do while that project is going on and the remaining parcel of the golf course is still being utilized?

Yes.

I mean, I think that spirit of collaboration has already started.

I had the privilege of touring the golf course and having been able to spend some time.

And so we would continue, I think, on this project.

Has, has been long developed and so much hard work has gone to getting it to the point that it's in, that all the stakeholder engagement and I think the cooperation is there.

And so the foundation is there for us to come in and just continue to do that and, and work very closely with the golf course to make sure that everything is done in an efficient and coordinated manner.

Okay.

And with this type of development, Do you guys have partnerships with folks that are already kind of looking for this type of thing, or is it going to kind of be a build it and they will come type?

Is it— you're going to put the pads up and then look for folks, or how does— or are certain pads going to be built around some, some interested entities?

Well, I think it's— that's a, that's a really good question.

I would say it's a little bit of both.

So we've already started having conversations out in the marketplace.

It's still premature, but you can never start too early.

So that would continue and we would do that in a cooperative manner with, you know, recognizing that it would be our primary responsibility.

But we would also want to make sure that we're working in a really integrated manner with the city.

I mean, the city has a long track record of attracting really high-quality and prospective businesses and enterprise to to the area.

So we would continue with that.

It's really what happens on a site like this is it doesn't— it doesn't become real until you start getting buckets in the ground.

And so everything up until this point is there's interest.

Let's talk about the location.

Let's look at the zoning.

And so we would continue to be having market outreach, particularly through CBRE in cooperation with the city.

And then, you know, the typical flight path on a project like this is you start to— you start to create awareness, you start to create visibility, you try to cultivate interest to the extent that you can.

But until permits are in place and buckets are in the ground, it's really hard to get that firm interest.

But we would be starting right from the beginning.

And in fact, we started, you know, probably a year or 18 months ago already having conversations.

Okay.

Has there been any community outreach that you guys have tried to do thus far with just the general public or anything like that?

Or is it just all, all talks have been with the administration as of late?

It's— I would say that the communication has really been limited to the square corners of the procurement and RFP process.

Okay.

And you talked about fill.

A substantial amount of fill.

Where would that type of fill be coming from?

And, um, just because I assume that you guys will use proper fill, but just some ideas of where this will be coming from.

Sure.

No, it's a— I mean, it's such a, you know, uh, as, as we all know, it's very, very regulated.

And so, um, because of the nature of the site and its current existing conditions, it would all be clean fill.

Source from, you know, many different projects and locations.

We really do believe in the integrated Phase 1, Phase 2 project because, you know, we feel like it's going to deliver the long-term value to, to the city and to the region by integrating those 2 projects.

And it would be very difficult to do Phase 2 at a later date.

In particular, as Mason pointed out, there is a— there's a— there's a surplus of material on Phase 1 that could be utilized in Phase 2 and then really start to unlock the value there.

So it would be— it would be a very highly regulated and scrutinized process in terms of how site development activities would take place.

And again, that's squarely in our area of expertise.

Okay.

And then I'll have— I have one final question, and then I'll see if my colleagues have any others.

The amenity space— there was talk about an amenity space in there.

Is that going to truly be a public space?

What's the idea of that space?

The RFP had outlined some of the intended uses of that amenity space.

And so I think for today, it's envisioned to be in conformance with what was outlined in the RFP process.

And it's just— it's so early that it's really difficult to tell, but it was clear that that was important, and so we preserved it and really stayed committed to it.

Okay, um, well, thank you, uh, colleagues.

And Councilor Gomes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Just, uh, triggered me off when we talked about the soil and what you're taking out and what you're bringing in.

There is a way of using some of what's there and cleaning it and to use for your pad.

So we— you won't be trucking everything out of there, correct?

Did I understand you correctly?

And I, I, I, I like that idea.

I am not— I'm a professional as you are, but the, the less truck traffic and movement that we would have with this project would be great.

And when you talked about tons of soil being taken, and you're saying that you can use some of— Correct.

The surplus materials from Phase 1 would go to help enable the Phase 2 project.

And that would be getting cleaned and whatever on-site or whatever the process is?

It would— our assumption going into it is that that material is clean and suitable for reuse.

Years.

So it's just a matter of movement.

Yes, sir.

Thank you very much, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Councilor Gomes.

Anyone else for, um, what is it, charter?

No?

Okay.

Um, anyone want to speak with anybody else, any of our invitees?

We got— it's a rare opportunity, we got everybody here.

Oh, and the golf course, right?

Okay.

All right, thank you, gentlemen.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

What's the, uh, guy's name?

The, um, I don't know.

All right, can I have your name please?

Name and, uh, uh, can we have your name for the record please?

Yes, uh, Andrew.

Andrew Julian with R&D Consultants.

Okay.

Yeah, Andrew Julian.

Yeah.

Okay, and we've already received and placed that on file as well.

So you have a brief presentation for us?

Yes.

Awesome.

Yeah, thank you.

So, as I said, my name is Andrew.

I was the project manager for the procurement process and the real estate advisory work that we did for this AMC RFP project.

Quick background on R&D.

We're a real estate and transportation advisory firm, locally based firm in Massachusetts.

We've done a lot of these different disposition processes for municipalities in Brockton and Medford and Malden, kind of all over the place.

And so we came into the project and provided some background on kind of the procurement strategy and creation for this project, and we helped develop kind of a robust marketing plan to get it pushed out to as many folks as we could.

We worked really closely with the planning department, the purchasing department, to make sure everything was kind of square in the parameters of what the RFP was supposed to say and made sure that it was following a lot of the city's goals and objectives for the site.

So just a quick background.

So I'll try to go through this kind of high level because I think some of you all know a little bit about the procurement process.

So we came into the project.

We decided to do kind of a 2-tiered procurement approach.

We did an RFI and an RFP.

Once we got to that, you know, RFP standpoint, We pulled together an evaluation committee.

That evaluation committee was able to review the proposals, do independent scoring, come together as a team to provide that recommendation to the council tonight.

And as a part of that process too, we did conduct an interview.

During that interview process, it was really a good opportunity for the evaluation committee to kind of get out any questions they had for clarification, meet the team, you know, in person.

Get a feel for who they are, things like that.

So it was a really important component of the process.

And then that brings us to today where we're here, you know, post, you know, post-RFP process looking to make just the recommendation to y'all for an award component.

So just to cover the proposal scoring, a lot of this was covered in Charter's proposal.

Presentation.

But they talked, they answered the RFP in a manner that was— that met both our 2 components of the evaluation criteria.

So we had a Part A that was, you know, the minimum qualifications, which was really mostly a pass/fail sort of positioning.

And then the comparative evaluation criteria, which really focused on, you know, either highly advantageous all the way down to, you know, an unacceptable proposal.

Or not advantageous.

And so I think the big thing to take away here is that I think for the most part every evaluation committee member highlighted a highly advantageous scoring in those components.

And those components included, you know, tell us what your program development is.

Give us a narration.

Give us a description of what you feel the site is going to be.

Upon completion.

Give us an impact analysis.

Tell us what you expect the annual tax revenues to be.

Tell us what you think the job creation is going to be.

Then we asked them about the budgets and the financing structure.

Tell us what your sources and uses are.

Tell us how you propose that the structure will come together upon a purchase.

And so that was kind of like the main components.

And those components they answered thoroughly and in depth and in line with a lot of the goals and objectives that were outlined at the beginning of the RFP process.

So we kind of highlighted some of these.

I think I want to get right into— yeah, so we're just going to provide, you know, from R&D's perspective, just an overall kind of objective review and analysis of, you know, what we saw from the proposal.

There's kind of 5 main pillars here that we pulled out, but I really want to focus on like the 3 pillars kind of in the middle there.

The quals and experience, the financial capacity, and just the partnership approach.

On the quals and experience, what we saw was Charter is a very niche firm that seeks out these types of sites and these types of projects in communities like New Bedford.

And I think it reached an audience, you know, that really wanted to Um, you know, take a bite at the apple, um, for that— for this type of work.

That type of work being, uh, you know, a site that's just a little bit more complex in terms of, you know, topography.

They talked about the earth-moving items that, you know, need to be done, and that's something that is really in their wheelhouse.

In terms of the financial capacity, uh, the independent patient capital, I would say, is a big, big component that we saw in their proposal.

Independent being they're coming to the table with dollars, right?

They're not having other shareholders that they need to call to for when it comes to this piece of the project, at least at this point.

And the patient capital in terms of, they see this as the long-term project.

They're not seeking to get the funds in and out immediately.

And that was something that was very clear once we had the interview process as well.

And then the partnership approach.

You heard a lot from them tonight on that.

I think just the framework and the mindset that they speak from in terms of really bringing the city in as a collaborative partner, the state as a collaborative partner, and other local organizations and communities as a part of the community engagement process, that really stood out to us in terms of their, their proposal.

So those are the kind of 3 big ones to highlight there.

Um, the— so I'll kind of breeze through this because you saw some of these numbers, you know, already.

But just an objective review of the components that we pulled out.

Economic impact, the $2.5 million.

Um, I think the total budget, if I remember correctly, I might have had the numbers, um, changed up, but of estimated $500 million in private investment over the course of both phases.

Was it— was a big component of that.

The job creation numbers, 800 to 1,000 in the permanent jobs, and then the 650 to 800 in the construction jobs.

On this environmental and more, more so on the infrastructure value, I just kind of want to highlight the, the superior experience with these types of sites.

Having the equipment, having the staff, having the, the brilliant team that they've pulled together to execute on this type of a project is really something that is invaluable to a site of this size too.

And then the community benefits, supporting the local unions and abiding by a lot of the new Bedford Works policies that's been put out.

So I think next slide.

So the next— actually, I'll say the next 2 slides are really aerial shots.

Uh, the one thing I just want to call out on this slide in particular, um, is the golf course will be reconfigured to retain its existing 18-hole play.

That was something that was consistent with the RFP's request and in their proposal, and I know that's been in continued conversations too as well.

So I just want to highlight that as a component, but I'll stop there.

If anybody has any questions about the procurement process or any questions for us, colleagues, you're, uh, any questions?

No?

Okay, thank you.

Thank you very much.

Bless you.

Golf course.

Okay, we'll just have Molly come up and speak on the evaluation committee and their process and how that all went.

Sorry, just give me a moment.

So I wasn't a member of the evaluation committee.

It was Chairman Oliver and Derek Santos, Neil Mello, Jen Carloni, and Josh Amaral.

But I speak on behalf of them that the evaluation team unanimously recommends award to Charter Development for all of the reasons already discussed.

To recap, in awarding to Charter, the tax revenue goal will be met, the jobs goal will be met, Charter has robust experience, including in working with municipalities and on municipally owned properties.

They have worked on sites that are topographically complex, such as this one.

Their team is comprised of leaders in their respective fields, and they have patient capital, as has been mentioned, and they're comfortable with a long-term ROI.

They've partnered also.

Not only is their team comprised of leaders in their field, but they've also partnered with like VHB and Andersen as discussed and their leaders in their fields as well.

So does anyone have any questions about the procurement process or on behalf of the evaluation team?

Colleagues?

Nope.

Seeing none.

Thank you, Molly.

Thank you.

We have a representative from the golf course here.

Anybody want to talk about that or about that group?

Councilor Prior, do you have a question?

If there's more to the presentation, I'll yield, Mr. Chairman.

I do have general questions.

I don't know who can answer them, but, uh, whatever your discretion is.

Okay, I think there is a member from the golf course, uh, design team that I'd like to have them come up briefly.

And I'm so sorry, I'm sorry, our golf course consultant is here.

Yes, yes, Robert McNeil, the Northeast Golf Company golf course architect.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, I, uh, I just wanted to, uh, again, because it's been a while, uh, could you just talk about, um, what the, the envisionment of the golf course is?

Because initially it was going to be 9 holes and it's 18.

Now we've got the commitment that it is going to be 18 holes.

I just wanted to kind of talk in, uh, about the— for the general public and the users of that golf course, um, what type of impact that they're going to be under during the reconstruction of that course?

Sure, sure.

It's always been the intent of the team here to get back to a quality 18-hole golf course.

It's got some history to it as a 1920 Donald Ross golf course.

There's some great pieces and bones to the golf course that we've tried to capture in our process of design, but the challenge was getting it from 9 18, back to 9, back to 18 over the course of the phasing of the development of the adjacent property.

And that's what we've done, and that's what's represented in this RFP and in this plan that you see on the screen here now.

As far as impact goes, there's going to be some impact relative to the timing of the phasing of the adjacent property.

That's really what it comes down to.

I think there's holes that we can build that are not impacting the golf course at all.

Ultimately, there's going to be 2 to 4 new holes or pieces of holes on the golf course to reconfigure it as an 18-hole golf course.

But the impact will again be dictated by the activity adjacent to the, to the golf course.

Phase 1 encumbers essentially holes 1, 2, and 3 and the practice facility right away, if that's going to be impacted.

Then we're gonna have to replace those holes as quickly as possible.

But just taking those holes out of play is gonna result in a quality 9-hole golf course in the meantime as we develop the new holes, which you can see, which are the darker green holes, are the new holes on the golf course.

The lighter green holes on the plan you see are the existing holes on the golf course.

So there is a sequence.

We can build a couple of these holes independently of disturbing the golf course at all.

But overall, it is a— it's probably a 2-season sequence of converting from 18 to 9, back to 18, and having a final 18-hole quality project at the end.

At any point during the project, would the course have to close completely, or can it stay in operation, in your opinion, throughout the entire development?

We believe it can stay open throughout, throughout the entire process.

Okay, as at least a 9-hole course in that time?

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

Colleagues, any questions?

Okay, seeing none, thank you very much.

All right, Councillor Perrott, I believe you had, uh, some questions for— I don't know who can answer them.

I'll just direct them out and then whoever can jump up and answer.

All right, uh, the first is just a request that, um, I'd like to see all money spent on attorneys, consultants, and appraisals pertaining to the golf course, to the, to the, to this project, to the AMC.

How much has been spent on attorneys, consultants, and appraisals?

Yeah, we can absolutely get external stuff, not internal.

I can tell you that the— I can't say.

You got to come to the microphone.

Yeah, yeah, sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry.

Just to address, uh, Councilor Pereira's question on the outside consultants and attorneys that have been associated with the project.

The lion's share, the overwhelming share of those costs have been borne by the state grants that I had referenced.

There are 2 site readiness grants, and we do have a MassWorks grant that we received in the fall administration that will be used going forward to pay for the engineering and the outside consultants.

If it's not too much trouble, can that be shown how much has been covered by— yeah, we can work with the CFO's office to develop a cost sheet on that.

Sure.

Okay, perfect.

Thank you.

If we were to— so my next question, Mr. Chairman, uh, if we were to move forward, uh, and, and at some point this gets sold, uh, the P&S gets executed, what, what's going to happen with those funds?

Uh, the, the proposal before us in this case that we're going to be voting on shortly is one in the area of $1.8 million.

All goes well, that's what, what will become of those funds.

Sure.

So our CFO Bob Edstrom is here and he can elaborate on this.

I'll give you the quick overview.

The proceeds from the sale of real estate under Mass law require it to be used in only a limited number of ways— towards capital investments, towards retiring existing debt, and And so we envision, as I've talked about in the presentations that we've done in the past, we envision using the proceeds whenever they might come in to address the financing costs of the city.

So between the proceeds and the additional tax revenues, and Bob has done some modeling on this if you, if you'd like to get into it further, we're going to be in net positive territory.

The cost of financing the debt service and so forth that will be required to support the city's city's costs, which will be restricted only to the golf course.

That's, that's the city's responsibility.

All of the costs that you heard about for roads and infrastructure within the business park are going to be addressed by Charter and their commitment that they've put into their proposal and MassWorks grants.

So we expect somewhat of a windfall from those proceeds that will help us pay for the investments that we're going to be making on the golf course side.

Okay.

Can we hear from Bob if that's okay?

Or from Neil?

I don't know who— does anybody have any other questions for Neil Mello?

I have more questions pertaining to this.

I don't know if Bob is more apt to answer to whoever, but okay.

Seeing none, Bob, would you mind?

Good evening.

Thank you, Bob.

Councilor Pereira.

Thank you, Bob.

Good evening.

Thank you.

So, uh, it was indicated that these funds will be restricted for use to specifically— would be for capital improvements or to retire debt.

Yeah, that's correct.

The state law doesn't allow us to spend, nor does our own charter allow us to spend proceeds from sales of assets on anything else.

And is that restricted to just, uh, retiring any debt the city has and any capital improvements, or is the spirit and the the behind that law kind of surrounding whatever the proceeds were from?

Can you— is there anything there on that?

Well, I'll speak to the spirit because that is the spirit, obviously, is to try to use the proceeds to take care of the next asset to replace the assets you've got planned or service the debt on that asset.

I don't know if that's legally or literally the state law.

I'd have to look that up.

But in this case here, with $1.85 million coming in against a planned $8 to $10 million general obligation bond, it could go to best use servicing that debt.

You know, we're in a position where we have a normal yield curve.

So serial— so general obligation bonds are serial bonds, and you're issuing— if you issue 20 years worth of bonds, you're actually issuing 20 separate bonds.

And someone who buys, let's say, the 2046 bond will be entitled to 40 coupon payments over the 20 years, and those are going to have very high interest rates, probably in the high 4s right now.

My idea would be to use the $2 million— $1.85 million to pay down the last 4 or 5 years.

The problem here is that the money is not coming in all upfront, so I— we may have to incur debt, which would then trigger— we'd have to have call provisions in our bonds and those are usually 2%, it's going to kind of wipe out a lot of what I was hoping to do.

So, trying to find a way to best use these funds to get rid of the longer— the last 4 or 5 years, which are going to have the higher coupon rates, it brings down the net interest cost, the total interest cost.

And a quick model I did for Neil earlier today, I could pretty much get about 3.8 to 3.9— I'm sorry, 4.8 to 4.9% on the money right now, which is— I'm sorry, I said that wrong.

It's 3.8 to 3.9.

So I can get about 50, 60, 70 basis points more by doing that than I could putting it in the bank or, you know, certificate of deposit, Treasury short-term stuff, which is all we really can do.

Okay.

So that's probably the— my recommended best use would be to get— knock off the outer years of this general obligation bond.

Okay.

And then So it seems like the conversations have been surrounding that you've had, and, and Neil is here, we can— I can ask him, but is to utilize this money to directly go towards any, any cost associated with the golf course?

That would be my recommendation to Neil.

Certainly there are other things that state law will probably let us do.

As I said, I commented on the spirit Sure, of the law, and I'm not sure about the specifics.

You gotta go to the microphone.

Yeah, sorry.

That's okay.

I was just going to add, one of the things that we've talked about that we might explore— and again, again, this is Bob's area of expertise— but there may be, when we come before the council to request a bond authorization, uh, to do the golf, the golf course-related, uh, work, there may be a way to add language to that bond authorization that directs the city to use to re— for any proceeds that come in to be used to address the debt.

Now, the specific way we address the debt, um, we'll have to think through a little bit, but we might be able to write that right into the bond authorization that we'll bring to the council.

Yeah, that would— if possible, that actually would be very, very, uh, comforting to the— I don't see any reason why we wouldn't do that if we could, if we can.

Okay, very good.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Bob.

Thank you, Councilor.

Chair recognizes Councilor Roy.

Can you remind the public or the council what we would bond?

What would be the city's obligation, um, if we went forward?

So the, uh, the range that I've got with this, the slides that Neil has put together, is $8 to $10 million.

And that right now is basically for the, for the relocation of the 3 holes, uh, of the golf course.

Most of that money is coming that way, but there are some, um, modest renovations to the golf course clubhouse as well.

Not a full rehab, but a few hundred thousand dollars, I believe, is what you'd said, Neil.

Yeah, so, so with this kind of usage, I really probably could get 30 years out of the bond because I was concerned that it was mostly clubhouse renovations, and I don't think we were going to be able to get, um, get a life's life expectancy certificate for more than, say, 20 years for a clubhouse.

But what with this being much more permanent, being earth movement, I think we could probably go 30 years, which would, you know, spread the payments more, but it gets us into, you know, even higher coupon rates when we get out to those last 10 years of serial bonds.

So we have a good fiscal advisor that can help us go through several alternatives.

Though, to sort of back up what I'm saying, or, or probably, or possibly steer me in a different direction.

Thank you, Councillor Roy.

Anybody else?

I have some questions if the body doesn't mind.

Without objection.

Thank you, Bob.

Although that we'll be going out for bond for, for this money, Uh, based on, uh, the build-out and, uh, prospective, um, tax revenue, at what point would we— not with the bonds, but would we kind of be at zero with that money coming in from the money that we've— that we're, we're putting out?

Even though the bonds will still be out there, we'll be accruing some tax once this property gets, you know, developed.

Sure.

So you're saying the incremental tax Correct.

At what point will that be enough on a year-to-year basis to cover the debt?

Correct.

So, you know, I don't have a good idea of how we're going to go from first groundbreaking all the way to that $2.5 million.

A lot of it's going to depend on that.

I saw some, some of the timelines, and there's 3 basic tracks that cover most of the 100,000 square feet.

Obviously, the real dollars don't come in until beyond the pad-ready stage where you have to actually get tenants and build out buildings.

So it's kind of hard to say because of that.

You know, I can tell you that the numbers I saw, I need somewhere in the neighborhood of $300,000 or so, $300,000 to $400,000 a year for debt service.

That's without the $1.85 million being brought in.

So if you got $2.5 million on the outer line and I need $400,000, it will be earlier than later.

But like, I can't really get you much more specific than that right now.

All right, thank you.

Thank you, Bob.

Anyone else?

Chair recognizes Councilor Lopez.

Yeah, and I know— I think I know the answer.

So there's been no Phase 1 as-built tax calculation of what the value would be including equipment, the whole tax burden, what Phase 1— not Phase 2, because everything says that's going to be down the road and more expensive— have we done a break-even or an as-built cost evaluation of what Phase 1 will look like at full build-out?

I, I have not.

Um, most of the numbers that are coming up— oh, okay, sure, sure.

This is the most specifics that I've seen on this.

It's a— there's a blended rate between the $70 and the office buildings at $116.76.

And again, those are the assumptions.

The number actually comes out to closer to $2.5.

I think the slide rounds it down to $2 million.

But the timeline on that is not specified.

So we have no idea if that's at full build-out with Phase 1 and Phase 2 or just Phase 1?

Oh, I'm sorry, that— this is full.

This is— this is full.

Yeah.

All right, so could— could we do a Phase 1 tax evaluation?

Because realistically, Phase 2 is going to take longer, and if we're going to look at, you know, short-term needs and cost expenditures, I'd like to see just what it'll look like at Phase 1, not a Phase 2 build-out.

That's very doable.

Perfect.

That, that's what I'd like to see.

Sure.

So thank you, Bob.

Thank you, Neil.

Thank you, Chairman.

Thank you, Councilor Lopes.

Anyone else for Bob?

Seeing none, thank you, Bob.

Sure.

Does anyone else have any questions of the invitees?

If you'd indulge me in speaking with Engineer Sean Said.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, Sean, for being here.

Quick question, what involvement If this is— if this group is selected, what involvement of infrastructure work is going to fall on the city?

Not only the city, but city workers?

Or is this something that'll, if awarded, that will be subbed out, most of the infrastructure work?

The construction would be subbed out, presumably by Charter or their subcontractors who they work with.

With.

The city's involvement would be reviewing their design drawings, engaging with the consultants, working through the MassWorks grant that DPI and Planning collaborated on to receive for the design.

Ultimately, we envision that this would be a city-accepted street so that in the end, all of the assets that are constructed as part of the project would be done so in accordance with all city requirements.

Okay, lighting, all that stuff?

Lighting, sewer, water, telecommunications, everything.

Okay.

And does any of that work— is that any of that work going to affect the operation of the golf course as far as utilities or things like access or anything like that, as far as the plans you've seen?

No, the way that we phased it is, um, and laid out the road, you'll see that the main access road as it's currently planned sort of loops around the golf course so that we can keep the parking lot for the golf course or build that and have that available to, to golfers without impacting their ability to access the clubhouse or the, or the golf course while the construction of the road that goes to the west can, can proceed.

And no interruption with, uh, water or sewer or anything like that?

Or will there be mild interruptions to the golf course for that?

I mean, there's always mild interruptions during construction, but we can always sequence it during downtime of the golf course, like during the winter.

Yeah.

Okay, awesome.

Thank you.

Um, does anybody else have anything for the city engineer?

No, thank you.

Thank you, Sean.

Great, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Oh, Councilor Gomes.

Oh, sorry, I am sorry.

Councilor, these, uh, this, uh, slide deck, uh, we had brought this just in case there were questions on this, but this is a slide deck that the council has seen a version of this several times before.

But so, um, happy to talk more about it.

So you're telling me that I have this information already?

When we came before the council for the RFP, and I think even in the past we have been working— this is something that Derek Santos and the, in the city team developed But this slide— there's an entire slide deck which we just did some briefings for the new councilors on that, and that's where all of this information is coming from.

So we've had this for, for some time now, and we've shared it with the council for some time now.

Have we received a copy of that?

Well, in the past, yeah.

Um, okay.

Yeah, I think the last time we shared something like this was in the spring when we came last year.

Okay.

Yeah, it's a lot of material.

Okay.

We can recirculate this if that's— if it's a help to folks.

We can email it around to the, to the council.

Thank you.

Sure.

Appreciate it.

If you can just give that to the, to the office.

Oh, okay.

Just, just so anybody who needs it can, can get it.

No, I've got all that.

Very good.

We'll do that.

Colleagues, any further questions from our invited guests?

All right.

Seeing none, the chair will, uh, entertain any motions at this time.

Chair recognizes— Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

At this point, I'd like to make a motion to move that the proposal submitted by Charter Development LLC is hereby selected as the successful proposal submitted pursuant to an RFP for the property known as 95.54 acres off of Hathaway Road at the municipality-owned golf course, uh, municipality-owned Wayland City Golf Course.

And I'll provide the language to the clerk.

Awesome, thank you.

So motion by Councilor Abril and seconded by Councilor Choquette.

On the question for Attorney Garatowski.

Okay, Attorney Garatowski, when you have a moment.

Counselor Garatowski to make it to the podium.

Can I ask the maker of the motion where that information was provided to him?

Through you, through you to the councilor's question.

This was language submitted to us by our attorney, Attorney Garatowski.

It was in conjunction with the, the city solicitor and our legal team and our legal, uh, uh, attorney as well.

Okay, just wondering why some of us didn't get it ahead of time and they did.

Yeah, it was, it was briefly before the, the meeting tonight and work with both the city solicitor and our attorney.

Okay, I appreciate privileged information being fed to the entire City Council and not just a selected few, Mr. Chairman.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

You don't need me now?

No, I do need you.

Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Attorney Garatowski, the motion that Councillor, the Counselor Abreu made, accepted the proposal presented by Charter.

I had a, you know, detail all that.

Is that authorizing the city to enter into a purchasing deal?

The first thing you're gonna do is you're gonna have one motion that would say we're approving and we're selecting this proposal to be a winning proposal in the bid, right?

That's the first thing.

Once you do that and now Charter is the selected proposal, if that passes, then you would authorize the administration to negotiate the purchase and sale agreement.

And that would remain in— they'd do that, the committee would do that.

It would remain in committee, and when something was structured, it would come back to the committee for its review.

So there's really Um, when the chair had asked me what would be the appropriate way to proceed, um, those were the 2 motions.

One motion is to select Charter if that's what you want to do.

You don't have to.

You can make any other motion you want.

Um, but if you're going to do— if you want to select Charter, you would make a motion to do so, and then if that passes, then authorize the administration to negotiate with them exclusively.

Um, and, and then any, any agreement, uh, development or purchase and sale agreement will come back to you for review.

And then if you're satisfied with it, you would then send it to the council for it there for the council's final approval.

Very good.

Thank you very much, Attorney Garetowski.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I yield at this time.

Thank you, Attorney Garetowski.

So, uh, we have a motion that has been made and seconded.

Uh, we will, uh, call— I'll have the clerk call the roll.

Yeah, just had to write that down.

I'm gonna make sure I'm recording the right vote.

Councillor Abreu?

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Abreu.

Councillor Carney?

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Carney.

Councillor Trickett?

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Trickett.

Councillor Gomes?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Gomes.

Councilor Lopes.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Lopes.

Councilor Oliver.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Oliver.

Councilor Pemberton.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Pemberton.

Councilor Pereira.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Pereira.

Councilor Roy.

Yes.

That passes 9 to 0.

All right, motion passes 9 to 0.

If you have— you got it.

I just— I make a motion to authorize the city to enter into a purchase and sales agreement with the selected proposal.

Uh, motion made by Councilor Pereira, seconded by Councilor Abrupt.

We'll take a roll call vote on that as well.

So the motion is that the City Property Committee authorize the mayor and the solicitor to negotiate the necessary contingencies.

Enter into a purchase and sales agreement.

Just put— negotiate a purchase and sales agreement.

Point of order.

It's just, Mr.

Chair, I know that these motions are very litigious and we have to get these exactly correct based on what our solicitor and what our legislative counsel have agreed on.

So I have the language that you were given, that you had given me as the vice chair.

So if Councilor Pereira's language is cool, then that's fine.

I just want to make sure we're absolutely correct, 100%, by the book, so we don't have any follow-ups here.

Okay, motion to withdraw and seconded by you.

All right, so I can withdraw, that's fine.

Okay, so we'll recognize Councilor Abril for a motion.

Okay, again, through you to the— to our body, this was written by our solicitor and our legislative counsel.

The motion is: move that the City Property Committee authorize the mayor and solicitor to negotiate necessary contingencies with any corresponding amendments to pricing and other necessary issues in order to execute the sale of the property substantially pursuant to the attached proposal, and that a final purchase and sale agreement be submitted back to the committee for its review.

All right, got a motion by Councilor Abreu and seconded by Councilor Choquette.

We'll take a roll call vote on that as well.

On a roll call vote, Councilor Abreu?

Yes, Councilor Abreu.

Councilor Carney?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Carney.

Councilor Choquette?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Choquette.

Councilor Gomes?

Yes, Councilor Gomes.

Councilor Lopes?

Yes, Councilor Lopes.

Councilor Oliver?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Oliver.

Councilor Pemberton?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Pemberton.

Councilor Pereira?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Pereira.

Councilor Roy?

Yes.

Yes, that passes 9 to 0.

Okay, motion passes 9 to 0.

Do we leave that on the table?

We leave that in committee.

It stays in committee.

Okay, uh, seeing no further business in front of us, motion to Motion to adjourn by Councilor Roy.

Second by Councilor Pemberton.

Aye.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed?

The ayes have it.

We are adjourned at 9:02.