City of New Bedford Meetings
Search and subscribe to city meeting topics that impact you
Newsletters
Subscribe
← Back to video
Finance Committee — July 22, 2026
−
Fit
+
IN
0:00
OUT
0:00
Length
0:00
▶ Play selection
Export clip
Keyboard:
I
set in,
O
set out,
←
/
→
nudge playhead 5s.
0:44
On Wednesday, July 22nd, call this Committee of Finance to order.
In
Out
0:48
Note this meeting is being live streamed and recorded.
In
Out
0:50
City Council committee meetings can be viewed on the City of New Bedford's homepage Under Quick Links, then Meetings in Attendance tonight, we have Councilor Elijah E. Abreu, Councilor of Ward 2 Scott Pemberton, Councilor of Ward 1 Leo Choquette, Councilor at Large and First Vice President Shane Burgo, Councilor at Large and Second Vice President Naomi Carney, and Councilor of Ward 3 Sean Oliver, and myself, Joseph Lopes, Councilor of Ward 5 and Chairman of Finance.
In
Out
1:16
We have one— we have letters to be read into the record.
In
Out
1:18
We do.
In
Out
1:18
We have 2 letters to read into the record.
In
Out
1:20
This one's from Councilor Gomes.
In
Out
1:21
I'm writing to inform you that I expect to be late for tonight's committee meeting.
In
Out
1:25
As I will be attending the Traffic Committee meeting at this time.
In
Out
1:28
Please read this letter into the record to make my colleagues and the public aware of the reason for my delayed— delayed arrival.
In
Out
1:34
This one's from Councilor Pereira.
In
Out
1:36
I'm writing to inform you that I'll be delayed in arriving at the Committee on Financing on Wednesday, July 22nd at 7 PM due to attending a community meeting.
In
Out
1:44
I ask that you read this letter into the record to make my colleagues, those in attendance, and the public aware of the reason for my delay.
In
Out
1:50
Can I get a motion to receive and place on file?
In
Out
1:52
Made by Councilor Carney, seconded by Councilor Abreu.
In
Out
1:53
All those in favor?
In
Out
1:54
Opposed?
In
Out
1:55
The ayes have it.
In
Out
1:56
Item number 1 is communication.
In
Out
1:57
Mimic City Council submitting a proposed housing development incentive program tax increment exemption agreement and resolution approving a tax increment exemption TIE for the redevelopment of the vacant Holy Family Elementary School located at 91 Summer Street into 44 condominiums.
In
Out
2:14
It was referred here on June 11th, 2026.
In
Out
2:17
1A is the housing development incentive program and 1B is the resolution.
In
Out
2:24
Made by Councilor Abrams, seconded by Councilor Burgal.
In
Out
2:25
All those in favor?
In
Out
2:26
Opposed?
In
Out
2:26
The ayes have it.
In
Out
2:27
Mr. Amaral, would you like to give us a brief synopsis on the project?
In
Out
2:36
Good evening.
In
Out
2:37
Uh, thank you, Chairman Lopes and members of the committee.
In
Out
2:42
I'm here once again with a tie agreement for a new housing development in the city.
In
Out
2:48
As you know, the state has the Housing Development Incentive Program, HDIP.
In
Out
2:52
It's a state tax credit program to subsidize housing development in gateway cities.
In
Out
2:57
We've had some success with this program over the last few years with a few different awards.
In
Out
3:01
One of the key requirements to accessing that— those funds is that the municipality show support for the project and basically matching support financially for the project, typically by way of a tax increment exemption agreement.
In
Out
3:16
So within the confines of what the law prescribes, the municipality grants some tax relief on only the improvement value of the building.
In
Out
3:24
So the city receives more tax revenue than it ever had before, but the developer gets a little bit of a break to help make the numbers work on the overall project.
In
Out
3:33
The value of the tax increment exemptions that we've tended to adopt here in the city are— the value is very modest.
In
Out
3:42
However, it opens the door for tax credits from state government that are not so modest.
In
Out
3:46
They're up to $3 million currently, which can really make or break a project like this one.
In
Out
3:53
J. Peter Vanko is the proprietor of Vanko Studio Architects.
In
Out
3:56
They are the developer behind this project.
In
Out
3:59
They're experienced with adaptive reuse projects, historic buildings, comparable projects to this, so have a track record that speaks for itself.
In
Out
4:08
The project that's before you is 91 Summer Street.
In
Out
4:11
Most recently, you may remember that as the Holy Family Holy Name Elementary School for a very long time.
In
Out
4:17
Before that, it was the Cook School and a city building built 100-plus years ago.
In
Out
4:25
It sat vacant since that school has closed until Mr. Vanko has come to terms with the diocese for its renewal.
In
Out
4:34
He's put forward a very high-quality plan and design that's sensitive to the neighbors.
In
Out
4:38
That adds parking that isn't there now to try to accommodate both the new residents and the neighborhood in general.
In
Out
4:45
What we have put forward with him and has been endorsed by the TIF board is a 10-year agreement which graduates the, uh, basically the, the tax hit on the new valuation of the building.
In
Out
4:56
Uh, in year 1, 80% of that new value would be exempt, and then it decreases 10% a year through year 10.
In
Out
5:04
So at the end of the agreement, it would be 10%.
In
Out
5:07
What is different about this development from other HDIP projects that we've brought before you is that it is proposed as a condominium project.
In
Out
5:16
So each unit will be owned.
In
Out
5:18
The tax benefits are not particularly the developers.
In
Out
5:20
They will actually be to the benefit of the residents who purchase these units and live in them as condominiums.
In
Out
5:26
So we have some estimated values on this, but they shouldn't be taken to mean that Vanco Studio is going to have less tax obligation.
In
Out
5:35
It's going to be the 44 owners of the condos that will have less tax obligation.
In
Out
5:39
Vanco Studio will simply finance the construction of the development and then sell those units.
In
Out
5:43
We calculate the overall improvements to the building between $5 and $6 million, and the exemption over the 10 years would total $230,000.
In
Out
5:53
During that time, we estimate that the city would receive $389,000 more than it otherwise would have.
In
Out
6:00
It's actually much more than what the city otherwise would have, because until recently, this property has been tax exempt for the last, you know, 100 years or so.
In
Out
6:08
So we think it's a good deal for the city.
In
Out
6:10
Most importantly, it helps address our critical need for more housing in the city and in particular, more housing that's helping folks build equity through homeownership or in this case, condo ownership.
In
Out
6:22
If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them.
In
Out
6:24
I know Mr. Vanko is here as well.
In
Out
6:26
And is happy to speak to the project.
In
Out
6:28
Councilor Abril, you're first.
In
Out
6:30
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In
Out
6:31
Good evening, Josh.
In
Out
6:32
Good to see you.
In
Out
6:33
Um, I— you could have mentioned this during your open, but I didn't hear it.
In
Out
6:38
And if you have to repeat yourself, I apologize.
In
Out
6:40
But these 44 units, um, do you know— are we talking market rate, workforce, affordable, a combination of all?
In
Out
6:48
Or what are we looking at here for the rents and where we're going to be at with this?
In
Out
6:52
Yeah, in their current iteration, there's no income restriction on the units.
In
Out
6:57
However, I would say that the anticipated sale prices of the units is reasonable.
In
Out
7:04
So in the summary, we have it here from Mr. Vanko.
In
Out
7:08
The sale prices of the units range from $185,200 per unit up to a maximum of $327,690 per unit.
In
Out
7:17
I think in, in both cases, certainly on the lower end, but even the higher end the mortgage payment on those units would be less than your typical market rate rental were it to be a rental project.
In
Out
7:29
And so we're excited about the possibility of folks that may aspire to be single-family homeowners someday, but being able to get in the door with condo ownership and then, you know, perhaps eventually moving on from that.
In
Out
7:39
But those rates are reasonable.
In
Out
7:40
So, okay, I just would— to summarize, I would say it's a market rate project, but market rate doesn't necessarily mean you know, out of the price range of New Bedford residents.
In
Out
7:51
Okay.
In
Out
7:53
And this could be for the Vanco representative, but maybe you would know since you were in on this and you've studied this at great length.
In
Out
8:00
The Vanco Studio Architects, have their architects or the development team at Vanco, have they completed similar adaptive reuse projects in the past similar to this?
In
Out
8:12
Yes, I think it would, it would be beneficial for the council to hear from Mr. Vanko himself, but it's known to me that he's participated in similar projects, including in Fall River, adaptive reuse of similar aged, similar constructed buildings, and those projects have been successful and then highly marketable to local residents.
In
Out
8:31
Thank you, Josh.
In
Out
8:32
Mr. Chairman, what I'll do is I'll yield at this time if others have questions for Josh.
In
Out
8:35
I had 2 other questions, but it was more for Mr. Vanko, so I'll yield at this time.
In
Out
8:39
Thank you.
In
Out
8:39
Thank you, Councilor Abreu.
In
Out
8:40
In attendance, we also have Councilor Baptiste from Ward 4, Councilor-at-Large James Roy.
In
Out
8:45
Councilor Burgoyne, you're first.
In
Out
8:47
Thank you.
In
Out
8:47
Um, I just had, I guess, a clarifying question regarding how the tie, um, would affect the— in the situation we're selling these as condos and the ownership, you were, I guess, kind of touching base on the fact that it would affect essentially the condo owners in this sense, would they be— I guess my question is, would they be notified of this situation, seeing as the fact that each year there's going to be a reduction in the TAI over the first day?
In
Out
9:17
I think it's like 10%, then until it reaches that, the 20% reduction, then it goes to 15%, and then 10%, 10%.
In
Out
9:24
So I use the word reduction, but we know a reduction in the exemption is really an increase in their tax bill.
In
Out
9:30
Are they going to feel as though, like, What the hell, my taxes keep going up even more than anticipated, or are they going to understand that's because the exemption is being lifted little by little each year?
In
Out
9:42
So a couple thoughts.
In
Out
9:43
We have given that some consideration.
In
Out
9:45
First and foremost, I would imagine that in the sale of these units, that will be part of the marketing materials, right?
In
Out
9:50
It would be— you would, you would be aware that you're buying a unit that comes with this, like, tax relief for the first 10 years.
In
Out
9:57
I think for the first several years, You know, that might play out differently as the units fill up, and they might be owned by one condo association or by the developer, depending on how quickly they, they sell and how they're developed.
In
Out
10:09
We have structured the TAI agreement very gradually on purpose with that in mind.
In
Out
10:16
So other TAI agreements that we've brought here might be, you know, 80% exempt, 80% exempt, 50%.
In
Out
10:25
20%, right?
In
Out
10:26
So you've got these big cliffs where in effect that tax bill is doubling for the owner of the property.
In
Out
10:32
In this case, we've graduated at 10% a year, and the last 2 years, years 9 and 10, are both 90/10, and the years before that just go in 5% increments.
In
Out
10:42
So it's 80/20 in year 7, then 85/15, 90/10, and then 90/10 again.
In
Out
10:48
And we thought that that would be the best way for those taxpayers to, you know, kind of be brought on the off-ramp, if you will, from the TIE agreement.
In
Out
10:58
But we'll have to make sure that there's some notification given to those folks throughout the process.
In
Out
11:02
Do we know if this will affect their financing in terms of if they're— depending on how much the condo is going to cost, if they're taking out a mortgage to purchase the condo, will that affect their ability to get a mortgage I don't think so.
In
Out
11:18
I don't think so.
In
Out
11:19
If anything, it should help, right?
In
Out
11:21
Because it will reduce what they would pay for a duration of time.
In
Out
11:25
The bank may underwrite their mortgage at the, like, year 10 number perhaps.
In
Out
11:30
But I'll be honest, if the units are selling, like, for $200,000 or so, the 10% increment might be fairly minimal on that one unit, which is not to say that someone's property tax is going up $200 a year or something like that might be minimal.
In
Out
11:44
We're going to lower everyone's taxes.
In
Out
11:46
We always are going to do that.
In
Out
11:47
Exactly.
In
Out
11:47
Um, in this case, uh, we'll have to be mindful of that as the project gets started.
In
Out
11:52
Perfect.
In
Out
11:53
Thank you.
In
Out
11:54
I yield.
In
Out
11:55
Thank you, Councilor Burgo.
In
Out
11:55
Councilor Carney, on your first.
In
Out
11:58
Yes, thank you, Mr.
In
Out
11:58
Chair.
In
Out
11:59
Um, my good councilor to the right was on the same track that I was.
In
Out
12:04
It's the, the, the tax incentive goes to the property owner once they purchase.
In
Out
12:12
Yes.
In
Out
12:13
So, um, I mean, I mean, that's a nice thought, whatever, but I'm thinking about all the other people in the city buying houses and whatever houses for sale, and, um, individual people were sitting there looking at taxes and we're not giving anybody else a tax relief.
In
Out
12:27
I'd like one of those too.
In
Out
12:28
Can I get a— as would I.
In
Out
12:30
But yeah, but I'm, but I'm saying I, I, I get the idea, but I don't like the length of time and the amount, because we have so many taxpayers in the city, I, I don't think it's really fair to pass it on.
In
Out
12:43
Now, it was developers showing us that the jobs creation to build the project and all that stuff falling in there, but to pass this on to an individual who's purchasing, I think it's kind of unfair to the taxpayers of New Bedford who are already paying taxes and don't get any breaks.
In
Out
13:04
I understand the thought process.
In
Out
13:07
What I would say is, first and foremost, we want to create the 44 units of housing.
In
Out
13:12
In order to create those 44 units of housing, Vanco Studio needs access to $2.5 million of state tax credits to make the project work.
In
Out
13:20
In order to access those $2.5 million of state tax credits, they need to have a TIE agreement in place.
In
Out
13:25
And so we've structured the TIE agreement this way.
In
Out
13:27
It could be for fewer years, it could be for more years, it could be for more dollars or less dollars.
In
Out
13:31
I could— I would like to say if less dollars and for fewer years, that would be more palatable for me.
In
Out
13:37
But at the 10-year mark, I'm not for that.
In
Out
13:41
Maybe if you go to 5 years and reduce that so it's not— I understand that they need this to, to access other tax credits.
In
Out
13:50
I mean, so we're looking at not getting many taxes out of this in the first few years.
In
Out
13:56
Shorten it, shorten it up and lessen the tax credit so they can get so they can have a tax incentive.
In
Out
14:02
But for 10 years, for people coming and buying, it's a hard pill to swallow when we just hit everybody on their property taxes.
In
Out
14:10
And I just got my bill that went up.
In
Out
14:12
So it's, it's a tough pill to swallow to approve something like that for 44 units.
In
Out
14:18
So 44 homeowners.
In
Out
14:20
Understand your point, Councilor.
In
Out
14:22
I do hope the council considers it regardless.
In
Out
14:25
If the tie agreement is not approved, it was endorsed by the TIF board with no problem.
In
Out
14:30
If the tie agreement is not approved tonight, it will, it will likely imperil the project's ability to move forward until the spring of 2028 instead of next spring, if not sooner.
In
Out
14:42
So you mean to tell me that the, that the, the board can't go back and take a look at this and shorten it up?
In
Out
14:49
The, in a They, they could, they could, but the next time for the developer to apply for the state tax credit is in December.
In
Out
14:58
So you would miss this current round and then have to wait 6 months, which would create a backlog of other projects, right?
In
Out
15:05
Once again, it comes before us that the thing, if you don't do it now, it's done.
In
Out
15:08
Well, I'm not going to be hanging like that anymore because it, it, it happens all the time.
In
Out
15:15
The administrators in administration because something and it's so time sensitive that, oh, if you don't do it now, then you're going to lose everything.
In
Out
15:22
It happens all the time.
In
Out
15:24
So I'm sorry, but I can't agree with it.
In
Out
15:27
Send it back, shorten it up, make it small so they can get their, their grants, and I'll be happy to look at that.
In
Out
15:34
But for 10 years at these increments, I don't think it's fair to the rest of the residents in the city.
In
Out
15:41
Understand your point.
In
Out
15:42
Okay, respectfully, the, the council's approved these when the the tax benefits are held by the developer.
In
Out
15:49
So in this case, they're held by the residents, which I understand the thought process, but it's the same difference really for the city.
In
Out
15:55
Well, well, when the developer comes before us and stuff like that, we're looking at more or less— I mean, they're creating jobs to bring in more stuff, and people are getting paid to get these things up and running too, which, which they would be in this project just the same.
In
Out
16:07
They wouldn't— that, that part doesn't change, right?
In
Out
16:09
But the project may never proceed.
In
Out
16:12
Without the agreement, right?
In
Out
16:13
But I— but the tax incentive is going to the homeowner for 10 years, but the project is still enabled to happen, right?
In
Out
16:20
It may not happen without it.
In
Out
16:23
That's okay.
In
Out
16:24
I mean, I'm just saying that it's— once again, it's— it's— you can't send it back to just tweak it to make it more palatable because you're on a time-sensitive— all development is imperiled by time.
In
Out
16:39
Right?
In
Out
16:39
So if our answer is we can't proceed, the costs of the project increase, the construction costs, the carrying costs, and then there's no guarantee of success with a competitive state program.
In
Out
16:49
So it would introduce significant risk to the project because we don't want the 44 condo owners to achieve a relatively minimal savings on what they would otherwise charge.
In
Out
17:00
It's also possible that the potential owners of these condos might pay a smidge more because they're paying based on their monthly payment, which would include the taxes.
In
Out
17:08
So, um, I think it's— yeah, I, I pay a mortgage and I pay it monthly and my taxes are in there too, so I understand that.
In
Out
17:16
Thank you.
In
Out
17:17
Thank you.
In
Out
17:17
Thank you.
In
Out
17:18
Thank you, Councilor Carney.
In
Out
17:19
Councilor Oliver, on your first.
In
Out
17:21
Thank you, Mr.
In
Out
17:21
Chair.
In
Out
17:21
Thank you, uh, Josh, for being here.
In
Out
17:23
Quickly, again, uh, just to reiterate, uh, this property is generating zero tax dollars right now, correct?
In
Out
17:30
That's correct.
In
Out
17:30
Okay.
In
Out
17:31
Well, I should say the city has recently started to impose taxes on it.
In
Out
17:35
But, but yes, but still, in the amount of the— since this property's inception, when it was like, we've pretty much gotten nothing out of it.
In
Out
17:44
That's correct.
In
Out
17:45
Just recently.
In
Out
17:45
Okay.
In
Out
17:46
So though it's starting to contribute now, historically it has not.
In
Out
17:50
So we still haven't seen a significant amount of revenue coming in from that property in its approximately 110 years of existence.
In
Out
17:57
It may have paid under $10,000 in Tax.
In
Out
18:00
Okay.
In
Out
18:01
What is the likelihood of a project like this in this market getting shovel ready or being ready without a TIE agreement?
In
Out
18:09
Very low.
In
Out
18:10
Yeah.
In
Out
18:10
Not, not impossible.
In
Out
18:12
But our standing policy is that we don't bring projects forward for TIE agreements or through this process if they have another path to being viable.
In
Out
18:20
So this is a scarce resource.
In
Out
18:22
We only get 2 bites a year at the apple.
In
Out
18:25
And so we, we don't take swings on projects that would work without it.
In
Out
18:29
So there's often no backup plan.
In
Out
18:32
And I mean, it may be a question for, for the developer, but I'm sure in your communication with them and the extent of how many projects like this have they done roughly?
In
Out
18:41
I don't need an exact number.
In
Out
18:42
Do you remember?
In
Out
18:43
I couldn't tell you, but, but several.
In
Out
18:45
Okay.
In
Out
18:48
The— if we were to shorten the duration, right, there's still a match that we have to achieve, right, as far as taxable credits for them to get their financing, correct?
In
Out
19:03
So even lessening it, we still have to match— we still have to get to that dollar amount, correct?
In
Out
19:09
The minimum— yes, the minimum, uh, tie agreement, uh, under the law is 5 years.
In
Out
19:16
The maximum is 20 years.
In
Out
19:19
The, the challenge to making the agreement, say, 5 years is that this is a competitive process.
In
Out
19:27
And one of the factors that the state weighs in where to allocate their tax credits is how serious the municipality is about supporting that project.
In
Out
19:34
And so if we had a 20-year agreement where we have waived all of the taxes for the entire 20 years, not all of the taxes, but all of the improvement value taxes, they would say that is like like the maximum you could support this project.
In
Out
19:46
If you have a 5-year agreement, that's 20% a year, which is the minimum— or 10% a year, I'm sorry, is the minimum.
In
Out
19:55
They would say, you know, you really don't support this at all.
In
Out
19:57
You're trying to take advantage of the state resource without it.
In
Out
20:00
So we try to stay in the middle of that.
In
Out
20:03
Frankly, the tax savings is immaterial to the developer, right, because it's going to be achieved by the residents.
In
Out
20:08
But the tax credits, the $2.5 million from the state, is really what the developer needs.
In
Out
20:14
And the 10-year— I know you said, you know, 5 being minimal, 20— is 10-year kind of the sweet spot for something like this?
In
Out
20:22
Is that kind of the industry standard, or is it just— does it vary project to project?
In
Out
20:26
Yeah, our sort of like standard off-the-shelf agreement is a 10-year agreement that's graduated 10% a year.
In
Out
20:33
In some cases, when a developer has shown to us that there's a financial need to go beyond that, we've adjusted those numbers or like the intensity of those numbers in certain years.
In
Out
20:43
But that's our, that's our standard agreement.
In
Out
20:46
And though, you know, 44 units is, you know, is great, obviously it's still far below the number that we need.
In
Out
20:53
But this is an alternative to homeownership, is it not?
In
Out
20:57
Is it?
In
Out
20:59
It is homeownership.
In
Out
21:00
Well, I'm just like, but the conventional— yep.
In
Out
21:04
You know, picture windows with the, you know, white picket fence.
In
Out
21:08
This is bridging the gap from, you know, single-family housing and rental agreements, correct?
In
Out
21:14
We're excited about the project because New Bedford doesn't have much of a condominium market.
In
Out
21:19
Historically, my belief is that's because the top of the market rents and the cost to have entry-level, like, starter home mortgage were basically the same.
In
Out
21:28
So top of the market renters were opting to rent because they didn't want to own a home.
In
Out
21:33
But as homeownership has gotten more expensive, that gap has grown.
In
Out
21:37
So now there's, I don't know, over $1,000 a month difference between top-of-the-market rents and, like, a starter home to a first-time homebuyer.
In
Out
21:46
And so we think that in that $1,000 is money where someone might pay $200 more a month for a condominium that they'll own and build equity in rather than rent that same unit.
In
Out
21:56
And I think that's proof of concept that would play itself out with this project.
In
Out
21:59
Awesome.
In
Out
22:00
Thank you very much.
In
Out
22:00
Thank you, Josh.
In
Out
22:03
Thank you, Mr.
In
Out
22:03
Chair.
In
Out
22:03
I yield.
In
Out
22:04
Thank you, Council Oliver.
In
Out
22:05
Council Baptiste, you're first.
In
Out
22:07
Thank you, Mr.
In
Out
22:07
Chair.
In
Out
22:08
How you doing, Josh?
In
Out
22:08
How's everything today?
In
Out
22:09
Good.
In
Out
22:10
How are you?
In
Out
22:10
Good.
In
Out
22:11
It still baffles me just having my kids go to that school and think of 44 units in that small little space.
In
Out
22:19
That's first and foremost.
In
Out
22:21
But with the tie agreements, the thing that I, that I that I, that I worry about sometimes is every time there's a project that comes in here, it's very important that we get the tie-out and we have to do it in a certain amount of time.
In
Out
22:37
And we're always giving away, you know, 10-year ties, you know, at the same rate.
In
Out
22:42
You know, some places do 20, some places do 5, depending on the project and the municipality.
In
Out
22:48
How much of a benefit is it for us if we continuously keep on giving developers that come in here that make money on all these units and charge market rates, if we keep on giving them 10-year ties and they're getting tax breaks for everything that they're doing and all the money that they're making.
In
Out
23:05
So it seems like every developer that comes in here that's trying to build 44 units, 50 units, 60 units is looking for a tax break and they're always getting a 10-year tax break.
In
Out
23:15
So how How much is it helping the residents of the city by giving them continuous tax breaks?
In
Out
23:22
Well, a couple of answers to your question, and I understand the gist of the comment.
In
Out
23:29
A small percentage of developments in the city have sought TAI agreements.
In
Out
23:33
So it isn't all of them or most of them or half of them.
In
Out
23:38
But— well, the ones that come through here.
In
Out
23:39
Yeah, that's enough for me.
In
Out
23:41
In the case of this project, Right.
In
Out
23:43
We project that the city will collect $389,000 more in tax revenue over the 10 years than it would if the project were not to proceed.
In
Out
23:52
There is a savings to the, to the developer, the owners of the condos in this case, of $230,000.
In
Out
23:57
So the, the value proposition to the city is, in effect, if you give an exemption on $230,000, you collect $389,000 you wouldn't otherwise ever see.
In
Out
24:09
And so I think without a housing development proposal at this building, it's likely that this building will remain vacant and will continue to pay minimal taxes.
In
Out
24:21
All right.
In
Out
24:21
And I understand we need that.
In
Out
24:23
But how about if we shorten it?
In
Out
24:25
If we shorten it, right, and we shorten the amount of time that he can get it for the break, say 5 years instead of 10 years, what is he risking losing?
In
Out
24:36
By the, the difference between 5 and 10 years?
In
Out
24:39
Because I know that him paying more for the 5 years and saving more for the 10 years, he's going to make more revenue over the 10 years than the 5 years.
In
Out
24:48
So what would be the gap in revenue that he would make between the 5 and 10 years that would make it so significant that he has to do it for 10 years and not 5?
In
Out
24:56
Well, so to be clear, in this case, the developer receives none of the benefit of the tax increment exemption.
In
Out
25:02
But you still make money though.
In
Out
25:03
So when you get tax exempt, right, you're still saving.
In
Out
25:07
The developer will sell every one of the 44 units and will not pay these taxes.
In
Out
25:12
The owners of those units will pay the taxes.
In
Out
25:14
However, how will that affect them if it changes?
In
Out
25:18
They will, they will pay slightly less.
In
Out
25:20
Like, say the tax bill on your condominium would be $2,500 a year.
In
Out
25:25
It might be $2,300 a year if you are in a you know, for the duration of the tie agreement.
In
Out
25:30
But I didn't mean to cut you off.
In
Out
25:31
Go ahead.
In
Out
25:32
Yeah, but to your, to your point, right, a 5-year agreement or a 7-year agreement is better than no agreement tonight, right?
In
Out
25:39
So if the council wanted to proceed in that direction, I would take that.
In
Out
25:43
Uh, the, the problem is Mr. Vanko's project is competing against probably a dozen or so other projects in the state, and one of the factors in that competition is how much that municipality has expressed financial support for that project.
In
Out
25:57
And so at a 10-year term, on the, the, the terms that the TIF board has endorsed, I think we're in a competitive position.
In
Out
26:06
If the project is a 5-year term or a 7-year term, it's a less competitive position.
In
Out
26:10
It's not to say the project will or won't be funded, but it would hurt our chances.
In
Out
26:15
All right, I yield the floor.
In
Out
26:16
Thank you.
In
Out
26:17
Thank you, Councilor Baptiste.
In
Out
26:18
Councilor Roy, you're first.
In
Out
26:20
Thank you, Mr.
In
Out
26:21
Chair.
In
Out
26:22
Hi, Josh, how are you today?
In
Out
26:23
I'm good, how are you?
In
Out
26:24
I'm great.
In
Out
26:24
Um, just a couple questions.
In
Out
26:26
Uh, what's the difference?
In
Out
26:27
You said it's $385,000 the TIE is worth, basically, right?
In
Out
26:31
Uh, $389,000 would be the amount of tax revenue the city collects that it would not otherwise collect.
In
Out
26:38
So the math there is right now the city values this building as an assessed value on the building of about $3.5 million.
In
Out
26:45
We think that these improvements will be about $5 million in valuation, and post-construction, the building will be worth about $8.5 million.
In
Out
26:53
So the way we calculate those numbers is we look at what the tax bill is on the $3.5 base value, existing value, and then we look at what the tax value would be after you do $5 million worth of improvement.
In
Out
27:04
And so then we kind of split the difference on the $5 million.
In
Out
27:07
So if the current tax bill, just for the sake of discussion, is is, um, just for the sake of discussion, let's say it's $25,000 a year, um, and then you add $5 million of work to it, that tax bill might go to $100,000 a year.
In
Out
27:25
And so the $25,000 is constant.
In
Out
27:27
What we're talking about is how to split that $75,000 new value for the duration of 10 years.
In
Out
27:32
And the numbers are approximate though, right?
In
Out
27:34
So those numbers are very approximate.
In
Out
27:35
So I mean, how can we be sure that this is the actual know, savings.
In
Out
27:39
Well, there's a lot of moving factors to tax rate, valuation, etc.
In
Out
27:43
I guess what I'm looking for, Josh, is, is, is, is just a simple, hey, we're giving this 10-year tieaway, right?
In
Out
27:49
And I, I want to know, like, what it's— what the city— what the city is going to lose in $230,000.
In
Out
27:57
What would they lose if it was a 5-year agreement?
In
Out
28:00
If the project doesn't receive state tax credits, $2.5 million, it may not proceed.
In
Out
28:05
So, so instead of, instead of, you know, submitting a 10-year tie agreement, say we opted for a 5-year tie agreement because this is, this is a, this is, you know, the city's effort into, into, into trying to build more housing.
In
Out
28:17
So what, so if it's, what would that, the numbers, like just tell me the numbers, like, you know, it's $250,000 for the 10.
In
Out
28:24
What is it for the 5?
In
Out
28:25
What is it for the 7?
In
Out
28:28
Let's just say it would cut those numbers in half.
In
Out
28:30
Okay.
In
Out
28:30
Right.
In
Out
28:31
But the, the, the wild card is the project may never happen because the project won't be awarded tax credits.
In
Out
28:36
And on that point, what do other municipalities do, you know, with their TAI agreements?
In
Out
28:41
Have you done the research yet to find out what exactly is competitive?
In
Out
28:45
Yes, I'm sure you have.
In
Out
28:46
It's like, no, no, no, no.
In
Out
28:47
We want the— we want the council and the public to be, you know, aware of all these factors.
In
Out
28:52
We don't know what the projects that this project is up against might have.
In
Out
28:57
Right.
In
Out
28:58
We know that across the state there is a range of, of tie agreement structures that municipalities do.
In
Out
29:04
Some communities default to 20 years.
In
Out
29:07
Some communities do 5 years, 7 years, 10 years.
In
Out
29:10
I think most do what we do, which is look at what the need is for that project to move forward and then structure it accordingly.
In
Out
29:17
Most start at the 10-year mark.
In
Out
29:19
So we've had explicit conversations with the state folks that have said For, I'll say, 2 years ago, there was an influx of money into this program, and so they funded more projects than ever.
In
Out
29:32
Yes.
In
Out
29:33
So historically, HDIP was a $10 million a year program.
In
Out
29:38
A couple years ago, in the tax reform bill that Governor Healey passed, the $10 million expanded to $30 million, but they also created a $57 million fund to fund all the projects that had been like kind of stuck.
In
Out
29:52
And so the funds were plentiful, projects were moving out the door.
In
Out
29:56
Now we've moved back to the standard amount.
In
Out
29:58
There's no $57 million fund to help get things over the hump.
In
Out
30:02
And the instruction that we've gotten and what we've seen in practice is municipalities who are basically just doing the TIE agreements to say that there is one are not getting those projects funded.
In
Out
30:14
And, and, and, and that would be like the minimum?
In
Out
30:17
Yes, a 5-year one.
In
Out
30:19
Yep.
In
Out
30:20
All right, um, moving on.
In
Out
30:23
The difference between this TAI is the tax incentive is going to the, um, the potential owners of the units, right?
In
Out
30:30
Instead of the developer.
In
Out
30:31
Have we ever done a TAI like that before?
In
Out
30:33
No, first time we've done one for an ownership project.
In
Out
30:35
Um, how can we stipulate— I probably probably can't, but do we expect New Bedford residents moving into these new condos, or do we expect, like, you know, more folks coming from out of town buying these condos because of the tax incentives?
In
Out
30:53
Maybe they're, you know, better off financially.
In
Out
30:55
What do you expect, like, as far as, you know, who would fill up the building?
In
Out
30:59
I expect they will be New Bedford residents primarily, perhaps not exclusively, but I think, like, primarily, you know, Like 75%, 50%?
In
Out
31:07
If I were estimating who I think make up the condo market, I would say about 75%, but I would defer to Mr. Vanko, who could talk to you about his plans to sell the units and how he might consider that.
In
Out
31:16
All right, thanks, Josh.
In
Out
31:17
Thank you.
In
Out
31:18
Thanks.
In
Out
31:18
Thank you, Councilor Roy.
In
Out
31:19
I also want to welcome Councilor Lodge, Brian K. Gomes.
In
Out
31:22
Anyone else on their first?
In
Out
31:25
Seeing no one on their first, Councilor Carney on your second.
In
Out
31:27
Okay, what was that?
In
Out
31:28
Well, could you give me the, the total amount of taxes Was that $389,000 over the 10 years or a year?
In
Out
31:39
It's over the 10 years, right?
In
Out
31:40
10 years is what I calculate the city would receive.
In
Out
31:44
Over 10 years.
In
Out
31:45
So the city would receive over 10 years $389,000.
In
Out
31:49
More than it would if the project were not to happen.
In
Out
31:54
What is the— okay.
In
Out
31:57
This building pays taxes right now every year.
In
Out
31:59
Right, right.
In
Out
32:00
Well, it should be paying— they're only exempt, Catholics.
In
Out
32:05
That's when we looked at the churches and were only exempt for 3 years.
In
Out
32:08
After that, it's not exempt now, is my understanding.
In
Out
32:12
What?
In
Out
32:13
The building is not exempt?
In
Out
32:13
No, no, no.
In
Out
32:14
I'm saying Catholic schools and Catholic churches, it's only 3 years.
In
Out
32:18
After that, the diocese has to pay the city and state taxes, right?
In
Out
32:22
You know, so what you had said, so you're only talking $389,000.
In
Out
32:27
That's the benefit.
In
Out
32:28
That's $389,000 over 10 years more to the city.
In
Out
32:32
More to the city?
In
Out
32:33
Yes.
In
Out
32:34
Over 10 years?
In
Out
32:35
Yes.
In
Out
32:35
So divided, that is $38,910, right?
In
Out
32:40
It's not— so that's 30— what did you say, $38,000?
In
Out
32:43
$38,910.
In
Out
32:45
So, so the city is going to be making $38,000 more per year on, on that building.
In
Out
32:52
See, it's— I see where you're coming from about this, that they need this.
In
Out
32:59
What other— you said that we gave somebody else— who did we give the TIE agreement to?
In
Out
33:04
Another— we've done a few of them.
In
Out
33:06
We did the housing on Commercial Street above the National Club.
In
Out
33:11
We've done the Keystone site on Union Street.
In
Out
33:13
We've done the Kudo Nursing Home.
In
Out
33:15
We've done the project at the bottom of Elm and North Water Street, Elmwater Landing, that we cut the ribbon on recently.
In
Out
33:21
Recently, right?
In
Out
33:22
But how much was— what was that?
In
Out
33:24
Those were 10 years?
In
Out
33:25
Uh, the Keystone site was 20.
In
Out
33:28
The others were 10.
In
Out
33:29
The others were 10.
In
Out
33:30
And were they the same?
In
Out
33:31
That was— but those aren't condos, so those weren't going to the homeowners.
In
Out
33:35
That was going to the developer who is building the thing so they could, instead of spending X amount of dollars— I, I just— the only hard time I have is giving it to a homeowner when we have homeowners all over?
In
Out
33:51
That, that's, that's, that's the— if I understand your difficulty with it, what I would say is my difficulty with it.
In
Out
33:59
So I would rather see if we could, if we can move it down to 5 years, I'd be, I'd be— I just, with, um, we did the math on the $38,000 a year for the city, the savings to the residents of the building Our $230,000 over that term, which is $23,000 to the building divided by the 44 units, is a relatively small amount of money per unit in savings.
In
Out
34:23
And look, I think it's the nature of the beast to do tax benefits and tax exemption deals in ways that often the profits of the project go to the developer.
In
Out
34:35
With respect to Mr. Vanko, we support his project wholeheartedly.
In
Out
34:38
I would rather see the tax benefits go to the owners of condominiums than to the developer.
In
Out
34:42
Oh, yeah.
In
Out
34:42
Oh, I totally agree.
In
Out
34:44
But if you agree, then you would support this.
In
Out
34:45
I said I totally agree that going to an individual— my angst right now is we just raised the taxes on people.
In
Out
35:00
I just got my new tax bill.
In
Out
35:02
So does everybody else in the city.
In
Out
35:05
Nobody's getting a tax break in this city who has been putting their blood, sweat, and tears into the city.
In
Out
35:10
City, and now we're going to give it to people walking in purchasing a home.
In
Out
35:15
So condominium's a home.
In
Out
35:16
I was in a condominium, but it was, it was, it was my mortgage.
In
Out
35:19
It was a home, even though then you have to pay your condo fees on top of that.
In
Out
35:23
But that was— that's what I'm seeing, is that we got these people walking in, you're giving them breaks on their property taxes, and my guys are not getting breaks at all.
In
Out
35:33
In fact, they're not happy with the rising of their taxes right now.
In
Out
35:37
I, I completely understand, and it might be bad timing that we're before you to think about it that way, but ultimately, if the project doesn't proceed, though it is just $38,000, $39,000 a year the city will receive, that is money that those taxpayers will have their bills reduced by, you know, $2 a property or whatever that may be.
In
Out
35:55
It's more money coming into the city that we might not otherwise get.
In
Out
35:57
And so I would ask the council for their support.
In
Out
36:00
Thank you.
In
Out
36:01
Thank you.
In
Out
36:03
Seeing no one else on the first I'll say— hold on, we still have council, uh, and we still have Mr. Amaral, if you don't mind, from the chair.
In
Out
36:10
So Josh, simple, simple, quick yes or nos, don't need detailed analysis.
In
Out
36:14
Right now, before this developer bought it, we were paying no tax— no taxes were paid on this property for 110 years.
In
Out
36:20
Yes, correct.
In
Out
36:21
We have a developer that's willing to buy the property, put it back on the tax rolls, and pay the city a value greater than what we're getting today, correct?
In
Out
36:30
Yes.
In
Out
36:31
Correct.
In
Out
36:32
This is the first time we're having a development that's going to get tax incentives that doesn't benefit the developer.
In
Out
36:37
It benefits the potential asset holder, i.e., the condo owner, correct?
In
Out
36:43
Yes.
In
Out
36:44
100% of the benefit goes to the resident, not the developer, correct?
In
Out
36:48
Yes.
In
Out
36:49
The state has limited amount of money to do these programs, correct?
In
Out
36:52
Yes.
In
Out
36:54
Additionally, understanding how this program works, there's two— there used to be two times a year, every 6 months, that you could apply for funding.
In
Out
37:01
From the state for these programs, correct?
In
Out
37:02
There used to be 3.
In
Out
37:03
There's 2.
In
Out
37:03
Okay, so 3, and now it's down to 2.
In
Out
37:05
If you miss the funding requirement, it's automatically a knock the next time it's reapplied, correct?
In
Out
37:11
Yes.
In
Out
37:11
And we have other projects because I remember we had this issue with Dwayne Jackson prior to you serving in this role.
In
Out
37:16
So additionally, we're now making the city more marketable to developers that want to build condos when we've had a lack of condo development, which is easier access for ownership normally at a third to two-thirds value depreciation compared to buying a house right now in the city of Everett that is averaging over $472,000, correct?
In
Out
37:38
Correct.
In
Out
37:39
So even if the higher end of the market, it is two-thirds less than somebody buying a pseudo, pseudo quote starter home, at least.
In
Out
37:48
Yeah, correct.
In
Out
37:49
If somebody was to buy a starter home at $430,000 or $470,000, they get no tax benefit, correct?
In
Out
37:55
That's correct.
In
Out
37:56
So we're allowing people to move into the city.
In
Out
37:58
We're allowing developers a new opportunity to engage and repurpose older properties that have a higher, substantially higher cost to rehab because it costs more money to rehab than it builds brand new, correct?
In
Out
38:15
Yes.
In
Out
38:15
I'd add, though, that we think the vast majority of people who will reside here won't be moving into the city.
In
Out
38:20
They're here now.
In
Out
38:21
No, I'm just saying if somebody— so yes, there's not a lot of negatives in a project doing like this.
In
Out
38:26
There's actually more positives, and it allows for the city to take a property that had been off the rolls and bring it back on the rolls.
In
Out
38:33
And the increase in tax revenue is, from my simple math in my head, 68% increase versus what we're giving back.
In
Out
38:45
So $231,000 to $381,000.
In
Out
38:47
It's a plus in the city's favor of about 68%, correct?
In
Out
38:50
Don't tell Mr. Vanko, but I think it's the, the least generous tie agreement we've brought forward.
In
Out
38:56
Understanding that the benefit is to the city, the default on this project— and we put XI, a $5 million redevelopment project in the city— increases the tax rates from $3 million to $8 million, correct?
In
Out
39:08
Correct.
In
Out
39:09
Thank you.
In
Out
39:09
Thank you.
In
Out
39:11
Anyone else have any questions?
In
Out
39:13
For Mr. Amaral?
In
Out
39:15
Seeing none, Councilor Abril, you're first for Mr. Vanko.
In
Out
39:18
Thank you, Mr.
In
Out
39:19
Chair.
In
Out
39:19
Mr. Vanko.
In
Out
39:22
Good evening, sir.
In
Out
39:23
Good evening.
In
Out
39:24
I'd ask a question of Director Amaral, but I think you would be better equipped to answer it.
In
Out
39:28
Talk about other similar reuse projects analogous to this that you've already done, and tell us a little bit about, you know, how that worked out and kind of how that all sort of shook out for you.
In
Out
39:39
Sure, uh, 25 years of track record here for me as an architect and in a development role.
In
Out
39:45
This is our 4th purchase from the diocese that has converted either a church or a school.
In
Out
39:53
Large part of my practice is adaptive reuse, so we do all types of changing of nursing homes that we've, we've picked up and have done condo projects.
In
Out
40:03
We do a lot of these types of adaptive reuses.
In
Out
40:07
So it's right up our alley.
In
Out
40:09
And this one's a great one in the fact that it's such a valuable building.
In
Out
40:13
The building's beautiful.
In
Out
40:15
It's in incredible shape.
In
Out
40:16
And it's definitely one that's worth preserving.
In
Out
40:19
If you've seen the plans at all, maybe you haven't, I'll just do a brief summary here in that we're really not having to do a lot.
In
Out
40:27
It's such a wonderful building on the inside that we're maintaining a lot of the character and the typology of the building.
In
Out
40:36
Yeah.
In
Out
40:36
Okay, great.
In
Out
40:37
Thank you.
In
Out
40:38
Um, uh, assuming— and again, you never want to assume— but say you were to go forward this evening and to go forward in the process with this body, uh, do you have a construction timeline?
In
Out
40:49
How does that look?
In
Out
40:51
We are shovel ready.
In
Out
40:52
We have a building permit issued by the city.
In
Out
40:56
We are fully financed on the— we have our senior debt in place.
In
Out
41:01
That was my next question.
In
Out
41:02
Okay, good.
In
Out
41:02
Yep.
In
Out
41:03
Yeah, absolutely.
In
Out
41:04
And, um, We have a seller who is distressed and really wants to sell the building badly to us.
In
Out
41:12
So that's— we're ready to go now.
In
Out
41:16
My partner is the GC on the project, of whom we have delivered roughly, to answer somewhat of your former question as well, we've delivered around 500, 550 units.
In
Out
41:28
You said your partner is the GC?
In
Out
41:30
My partner is the GC.
In
Out
41:31
And the name of the company is?
In
Out
41:32
Yeah, Broadway Capital.
In
Out
41:34
Okay, so they are secondary to us.
In
Out
41:36
Yeah.
In
Out
41:37
What about some of the subs?
In
Out
41:39
Do you have a preference?
In
Out
41:40
And I would hope you'd want to keep the sub work locally and New Bedford-based.
In
Out
41:44
And indeed, yeah.
In
Out
41:46
What about union work?
In
Out
41:47
Do you support union labor?
In
Out
41:49
Certainly.
In
Out
41:50
We've reached out.
In
Out
41:51
So we actually have a local civil contractor on board already, Circle Earth, who is signed up for the project.
In
Out
41:59
And they certainly have their New Bedford base, and we certainly have connections.
In
Out
42:04
They have connections locally with those labor markets.
In
Out
42:06
Absolutely.
In
Out
42:07
Good.
In
Out
42:07
Well, that's all good to hear.
In
Out
42:09
Yeah, absolutely.
In
Out
42:09
Thank you for your willingness to want to support local in this whole process as well.
In
Out
42:13
Thank you.
In
Out
42:13
Absolutely.
In
Out
42:14
Love New Bedford.
In
Out
42:15
It's, it's absolutely amazing.
In
Out
42:16
I appreciate you being here.
In
Out
42:17
Thank you, Mr.
In
Out
42:18
Chair.
In
Out
42:18
All yours.
In
Out
42:18
Councilor Abreu.
In
Out
42:19
Councilor Ryan, you're first.
In
Out
42:20
Thanks, Mr.
In
Out
42:20
Chair.
In
Out
42:21
Hi, Peter.
In
Out
42:21
How are you?
In
Out
42:22
Great to see you.
In
Out
42:24
Just a question similar.
In
Out
42:25
To the question I had for Director Amaral.
In
Out
42:28
Um, we would like— I mean, me personally, and I don't want to speak for everybody on the council, but I'm sure they agree— um, if we're going to give tax incentives out to folks buying condos or first-time homebuyers, we'd probably like to give them out to the folks who grew up in the city, live in the city now, um, versus, you know, folks that are coming in.
In
Out
42:48
Indeed.
In
Out
42:49
Can you give us any assurances to how you'll market the units to New Bedford residents?
In
Out
42:56
Yeah, I mean, it really is— we would much rather see people who— well, I'll tell you who the building is really being built for.
In
Out
43:05
Ideally, it's that first-time homebuyer, that person who wants to exit the rent cycle.
In
Out
43:10
Ideally, it's someone who is starting out.
In
Out
43:13
If they're not a first-time homebuyer, maybe they're actually downsizing.
In
Out
43:17
It could be on the back end of someone's life.
In
Out
43:19
They're exiting a single family.
In
Out
43:21
All their children live here in the, in the area.
In
Out
43:24
They want to be here, but they go to Florida for 6 months out of the year.
In
Out
43:28
This is a great way for them to get one of these units and be able to have that, that lifestyle, but still stay local.
In
Out
43:35
Our marketing team for the sales will be local without a doubt.
In
Out
43:39
So that's where we will push first and foremost.
In
Out
43:43
Right now we're selling out 18 units also in a diocese building.
In
Out
43:49
In Fall River.
In
Out
43:50
And I would say Joshua's exactly right, about 75-25.
In
Out
43:55
75% were local.
In
Out
43:58
That building happened to be— had affordability as a component of it as well.
In
Out
44:02
So, but that's what we've seen even with the extension of the train lines coming down.
In
Out
44:08
Certainly there were market pressures, people coming down from Boston.
In
Out
44:13
They're saying, okay, hey, I can move down to New Bedford.
In
Out
44:16
I also think that's a net positive.
In
Out
44:19
Personally, you're still getting a unit, you're still getting vibrancy, you're still getting all of— you're getting a new resident.
In
Out
44:27
So, you know, I think that's a net positive.
In
Out
44:29
But overall, it's a marketing issue, right?
In
Out
44:34
On that, you, in your developments, you've done leasing as well instead of as well as, uh, no, I typically am always doing condos.
In
Out
44:45
Okay.
In
Out
44:45
Yeah, I believe deeply in homeownership.
In
Out
44:47
Um, I haven't wanted to— all my rentals have, um, I've always switched them over to condos.
In
Out
44:54
Yeah.
In
Out
44:54
All right, thank you, Peter.
In
Out
44:55
Thank you, Mr.
In
Out
44:56
Chair.
In
Out
44:58
Thank you, Councilor Roy.
In
Out
44:59
Anyone else on the first?
In
Out
45:01
Councilor Carney on your first, and then Councilor Oliver.
In
Out
45:04
Thank you.
In
Out
45:05
So, um, so once you get the property and you apply for the HDIP, if you don't get the HDIP because it's a competitive market and there's only a couple out there, then what?
In
Out
45:16
What do you— what happens if you don't get the HDIP?
In
Out
45:18
Yeah, well, so our, our seller is wanting to close tomorrow if we could, and we have our senior debt in place.
In
Out
45:29
We have an equity chunk that we have raised, we put in place, but But our senior lender is willing to bridge that.
In
Out
45:36
So the— essentially getting rid of having to go to private equity or do bridge loans or anything like that, which is very expensive money, it helps us be able to put that back because we're saving on that bridge loan.
In
Out
45:52
We're able to put that back into the project.
In
Out
45:54
And as it's been stated previously, this really benefits the end user, the end buyer.
In
Out
46:00
Right.
In
Out
46:00
But I'm saying if you don't get the— yeah, are you going to proceed with the project or is it over?
In
Out
46:07
Yeah, well, we have difficulty certainly in getting to closing without, without HDIF because our lender is actually placing dependency on these bridge funds on, on obtaining HDIF.
In
Out
46:21
So what if you— if you— if you reapprove this, you go there, it's a no?
In
Out
46:27
Then what?
In
Out
46:28
Will you still proceed with the project or is it done?
In
Out
46:31
Is your lender going to let you proceed with the project and extend your loan over X amount of years?
In
Out
46:36
Or is this, is this a done deal?
In
Out
46:40
You know, it's, it's, it makes it a lot harder without it.
In
Out
46:43
Yeah.
In
Out
46:44
So would you proceed or will you not proceed?
In
Out
46:46
I'll talk to my partner on it.
In
Out
46:48
But it is, it's definitely, it makes it, it makes the go/no-go a much, a much, much harder decision.
In
Out
46:57
Right.
In
Out
46:58
Like Director Amrell said, it's a very competitive process up there with the HSTIP.
In
Out
47:02
It's extremely— it's worth going for.
In
Out
47:04
Right.
In
Out
47:05
I mean, it's worth going for, but it's very competitive.
In
Out
47:07
I'm just wondering, if you didn't get it, would you proceed with this project in other ways if you didn't get the HSTIP?
In
Out
47:15
That's a great question.
In
Out
47:16
We'd probably have to go to a Plan B.
In
Out
47:19
Which Plan B is, um, maybe less viable, but we just have to explore that at that time.
In
Out
47:26
Okay.
In
Out
47:27
Um, yeah, because my— both my kids went to Holy Family.
In
Out
47:29
My son was there at preschool and all the way to 8th grade.
In
Out
47:32
Now they can live there.
In
Out
47:34
I've been there.
In
Out
47:34
We went there to get all the pickings when they opened the doors and let us in.
In
Out
47:38
So, um, so, um, okay.
In
Out
47:42
Um, the other question I have is Once, once you purchase a property, um, are you responsible for the taxes until— we are— until you're up and running?
In
Out
47:53
We are.
In
Out
47:53
And if you don't, and if you don't, um, fill up the, the units in a year or a year or so, yeah, you're responsible for the— so we are— you're responsible for the entire taxes until they purchase the units and then they get the That's correct.
In
Out
48:12
So do you get the, um, you get the little break off those units if, um, you don't fill them up?
In
Out
48:19
That's a great question because you're giving it to the homeowner and there's no homeowner and you're sitting there for a year and you haven't filled them up and you got half of them open.
In
Out
48:28
Yeah.
In
Out
48:28
Who pays the taxes or do you get the break?
In
Out
48:32
We still are paying the taxes.
In
Out
48:33
Right.
In
Out
48:33
But do you get the break, the incentive on that unit?
In
Out
48:35
I would imagine so.
In
Out
48:37
I would imagine so.
In
Out
48:38
Um, but it is, uh, doesn't change anything in regard to the TIE agreement.
In
Out
48:44
The city still is getting exactly the same amount from a tax perspective.
In
Out
48:49
It's just coming from a different entity.
In
Out
48:51
Okay.
In
Out
48:52
I really don't want to be in that, in that position of having to— I hope they're all sold.
In
Out
48:57
That's really our, our goal.
In
Out
48:58
And that is also one of the things I, I can tell you after selling a lot of condos One of the biggest fears of a developer is to be stuck with units at the end of the day, especially when you're taking a chance.
In
Out
49:14
So from my perspective, and it obviously is less of a skin-in-the-game issue for me as it is the city, it— but that having that extra 10 years of graduated tax abatement really helps.
In
Out
49:31
It helps my— it helps buyers take the chance on New Bedford too, in terms of, in terms of doing a condo, New Bedford, taking it, taking a chance.
In
Out
49:41
They're already here.
In
Out
49:42
Yeah, hopefully, hopefully so.
In
Out
49:44
But taking a chance on New Bedford, but buying in though and really committing.
In
Out
49:50
Yeah.
In
Out
49:51
To saying, hey, this is really where I'm going to stay for a long time versus a renter who could leave, can go to a different municipality.
In
Out
50:00
When you actually have someone who's committing long-term to a unit like this, they really have bought into the community for a much longer period of time.
In
Out
50:08
Oh, I totally agree with the condominium aspect.
In
Out
50:12
I totally agree with the condominium aspect, and I think there should be more homeownership in condominiums.
In
Out
50:17
I mean, my first home was a condominium in Fairhaven.
In
Out
50:19
You have to, you know, you got to pay your condo fees, but I do believe in that.
In
Out
50:24
I think that's a good way for a family or an individual that wants to have ownership to start.
In
Out
50:32
So I, I have nothing against that.
In
Out
50:33
I'm just— you, you heard what my concerns are.
In
Out
50:36
Yeah.
In
Out
50:36
So that was the only thing.
In
Out
50:38
But I was just wondering about that, the whole tax thing.
In
Out
50:41
But I'm good.
In
Out
50:42
Thank you so much.
In
Out
50:42
Sure.
In
Out
50:43
What you said, the project— how many other projects?
In
Out
50:45
You said one in Fall River.
In
Out
50:47
Where's the other ones?
In
Out
50:48
Oh, we've purchased 4 buildings from the diocese in in the last 5 years tend to focus on gateway cities.
In
Out
50:58
So one is Fall River.
In
Out
51:00
One's Fall River.
In
Out
51:01
The other 2 in Chelsea.
In
Out
51:03
Could you tell us the Fall River Diocese building that you purchased?
In
Out
51:06
403 Division Street.
In
Out
51:08
Okay.
In
Out
51:09
Yeah.
In
Out
51:10
Is it a church, a school?
In
Out
51:11
It was a school.
In
Out
51:12
It was a school.
In
Out
51:12
Yeah.
In
Out
51:13
Actually very, very similar to this one.
In
Out
51:15
Yeah.
In
Out
51:16
Not in very good shape.
In
Out
51:17
Okay.
In
Out
51:18
Is it up and running now?
In
Out
51:20
They're up and running and the condos are being sold and everybody's happy.
In
Out
51:23
And that's what, a 203 division?
In
Out
51:24
Completely done.
In
Out
51:25
Okay.
In
Out
51:25
Yeah.
In
Out
51:26
All right.
In
Out
51:26
And the ones in Chelsea?
In
Out
51:28
Yeah, there are 2 in Chelsea that have— one was a church at 242 Washington.
In
Out
51:38
That is all done.
In
Out
51:40
And the other is I can't think of the address.
In
Out
51:47
There's a nursing home that we did, 932 Broadway in Chelsea.
In
Out
51:52
That was a 40— that was a 40-unit conversion.
In
Out
51:59
Right around that, there's— you've had 4 of them.
In
Out
52:01
I just wanted to go by and look at the Fall River one, the closest.
In
Out
52:04
Oh yeah, good.
In
Out
52:05
403 Division Street is looking good, and that is selling out currently right now.
In
Out
52:09
Okay, super.
In
Out
52:10
Thank you.
In
Out
52:10
Yeah, sure.
In
Out
52:11
That one's the most local.
In
Out
52:13
Yes.
In
Out
52:13
Thank you so much.
In
Out
52:14
Sure.
In
Out
52:15
Thank you, Councilor Carney.
In
Out
52:16
Councilor Oliver, on your first.
In
Out
52:17
Thank you, Mr.
In
Out
52:17
Chair.
In
Out
52:18
Thank you for being here and looking to invest in the city.
In
Out
52:22
The councilor who spoke before me was kind of going down the path of my line of question is just, um, um, do you start marketing right away when you get— We do.
In
Out
52:34
It's okay.
In
Out
52:35
Yeah, pre-sales.
In
Out
52:37
We will try to be— try to get as many presales as we can.
In
Out
52:40
And have you been fairly successful with that, with these type of projects?
In
Out
52:44
Oh, very.
In
Out
52:45
And you said that the other projects have been or are currently selling or have sold.
In
Out
52:51
How long has it been from— how long has that kind of taken you from the shovel in the ground to getting the last unit sold?
In
Out
53:00
What's that timeframe average for you guys?
In
Out
53:04
Yeah, depends on the depth of the renovation.
In
Out
53:09
This, we have a 12-month construction schedule planned because we're not having to do a tremendous amount of renovation.
In
Out
53:16
There is an alternate, there's a change, but in other renovations we built whole additions on top of buildings.
In
Out
53:23
We've had to take, make holes in buildings.
In
Out
53:27
We're not having to do quite the same things here.
In
Out
53:28
So 12 months.
In
Out
53:30
Shovel in the ground to construction finish.
In
Out
53:33
Ideally, I'd love to be selling out at the end of that, that 12-month construction process.
In
Out
53:39
Realistically, it's probably maybe we're selling the last one 4 to 6 months after the certificate of occupancy is issued.
In
Out
53:51
That'd be the goal.
In
Out
53:52
The goal would really be to be completely sold out.
In
Out
53:55
As soon as we're finishing.
In
Out
53:57
Have you had that happen yet in any other projects?
In
Out
53:59
We have.
In
Out
53:59
So we've done a few interesting things where we do a model unit.
In
Out
54:04
So that allows potential buyers to come see a unit almost from, almost from the inception of construction.
In
Out
54:12
We've even done it in a construction trailer.
In
Out
54:14
We built a model unit with the bathroom, everything that you will see here.
In
Out
54:21
Our goal is to— we have we're going to do 2 units right off the bat.
In
Out
54:26
One is a model unit, and the second unit there would be for our superintendent to actually stay.
In
Out
54:31
So we'd be using it for our construction, full-time construction team who's really running the job.
In
Out
54:39
And, uh, not that it has any bearing on the decision, just so I know and maybe the general public knows, uh, would this be like pre-sales or anything like that?
In
Out
54:48
Are people going to have the option to customize their units while it's being built, or do you guys just have, this is what we're doing, cookie cutter, figure it out after you own it?
In
Out
54:57
Yeah, great question.
In
Out
54:58
So certainly we will offer upgrades.
In
Out
55:01
Certainly if someone comes to us and says, hey, we want to buy a unit, but we just don't really care for that tile.
In
Out
55:07
Sure.
In
Out
55:08
Yeah.
In
Out
55:08
Yeah.
In
Out
55:09
Well, thank you.
In
Out
55:10
Good luck with, with the whole process.
In
Out
55:13
Thank you.
In
Out
55:13
Excellent.
In
Out
55:13
Thank you so much.
In
Out
55:14
Thank you, Council Oliver.
In
Out
55:15
Anybody have any other questions?
In
Out
55:18
Councilor Gomes, on your first.
In
Out
55:19
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In
Out
55:20
I don't really have a question for you, Peter.
In
Out
55:24
We met some time ago.
In
Out
55:25
I'm most impressed with your project.
In
Out
55:27
I've looked at your project in Fall River.
In
Out
55:29
Thank you.
In
Out
55:29
I don't— I'm just having a brief discussion with Josh.
In
Out
55:33
There's no failure with you.
In
Out
55:36
You don't even have that word in your vocabulary or in the construction or anything.
In
Out
55:41
And that has been very impressive by this councilor.
In
Out
55:44
And for my colleagues to know, if you haven't seen this project or know what you have— are going to put in this project, is one that I feel is going to be a model in this city for other developers as they come along, or what we look for a developer when it comes to condos or whatever to do.
In
Out
56:02
You've worked with the neighborhood, the parking, the landscaping.
In
Out
56:07
It's just phenomenal.
In
Out
56:09
And I think you're You're a great fit for the city of New Bedford, and I hope this won't be your last project.
In
Out
56:14
And good luck.
In
Out
56:16
That's all I basically wanted to say.
In
Out
56:17
And that's because of our interactions already and getting to know what— know you and know about your company and your associates and how you do business.
In
Out
56:28
You're top-notch, and you're not going to give anything less to the city of New Bedford than a top-notch project.
In
Out
56:35
Thank you very much for that, sir.
In
Out
56:37
Indeed, Councilor.
In
Out
56:38
Thank you so much.
In
Out
56:38
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In
Out
56:40
Thank you, Councilor Gomez.
In
Out
56:41
Anyone else on the questions?
In
Out
56:43
Seeing none, what is the choice of the committee?
In
Out
56:46
Motion of referral to the full City Council for adoption.
In
Out
56:50
Made by Councilor Burgo.
In
Out
56:51
Second by Councilor Abreu.
In
Out
56:52
All those in favor?
In
Out
56:54
Opposed?
In
Out
56:54
The ayes have it.
In
Out
56:57
Motion to adjourn made by Councilor Burgo.
In
Out
57:00
Second by Councilor Abreu.
In
Out
57:01
All those in favor?
In
Out
57:02
Opposed?
In
Out
57:03
We are adjourned at 7:58 PM.
In
Out
57:06
Thank you all.
In
Out
57:07
August 20th.
In
Out
57:12
Okay, excellent.
In
Out
57:14
Thank you so much.
In
Out