Joined: August 20th, 2007, 10:17 pm

January 9th, 2018, 4:55 am #781

jasongrow wrote: I don't see how that's supposed to work. The bid they submitted was for $5.1M with full awareness of their obligations on the affordable housing issue. They can withdraw their bid if they want and make the city do another round of proposal requests, but that means dumping the money they spent so far on the overlay and the site testing and risking another developer coming to reap those benefits... I don't see that happening. I don't know what the legalities are in a situation like this in terms of disposition of public property -- but I seem to recall that the Council has to accept the final transaction. It would be interesting to know if the applicant can simply drop the price on their side of the equation. I'm kind of thinking not, but I'd like to hear what a municipal attorney would have to say about that...
Does anybody know where we can find a knowledgeable municipal attorney?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

January 10th, 2018, 9:16 pm #782

This is I4C2 redux.  The City - GRA or whatever - mucked up and made a deal contrary to the law on I4C2.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 25th, 2007, 6:00 pm

January 11th, 2018, 3:10 pm #783

GRA made the legal error but the mayor and city council and ZBA and Con Com  AND the governor backed the GRA.
Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?...   ..........
 George Orwell , 1984
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

January 11th, 2018, 3:38 pm #784

P&D agenda for Wednesday, January 17 - Fuller project discussion will be continued to a one-item special meeting on Monday, January 29.

p_d_fuller.jpg
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 25th, 2007, 6:00 pm

January 11th, 2018, 3:46 pm #785

I noticed that. I guess the Fuller project presenter was sick or something.
Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?...   ..........
 George Orwell , 1984
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 20th, 2007, 11:54 pm

January 16th, 2018, 5:34 am #786

This is going to get interesting. 

per the GD Times: "A consultant hired to evaluate developers’ costs for revitalizing the Fuller School site has found those costs do not constitute a hardship for the builders, and that the city would be “justified in committing ... the developer to produce the affordable housing units on site.”

http://www.gloucestertimes.com/news/loc ... b355a.html

All along I thought the sale price for the property is way below true market value and that's what the consultant thinks.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 5th, 2008, 12:22 am

January 16th, 2018, 11:19 am #787

Destino says he stands by the agreement, it's up to the city council to show some balls make the contractor accountable.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

Re:

January 16th, 2018, 11:39 am #788

Cathy (Admin) wrote: If the Council enforces the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (how could they not?) by requiring the affordable or a contribution in-lieu that is calculated per the ordinance, the developer may walk.  The headline will not read, "Mayor Screws Up."  It will read something like, "Council Kills Fuller Deal."  The developers will claim that the Council broke the deal they had with the Mayor (no matter that it was an invalid deal).
~ April 28th, 2017, 3:22 pm #450
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 25th, 2007, 6:00 pm

January 16th, 2018, 1:49 pm #789

The Planning Board seems to have cancelled their Jan 18 meeting on the subject of Fuller.
http://www.gloucester-ma.gov/ArchiveCen ... /Item/8374
Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?...   ..........
 George Orwell , 1984
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 5th, 2008, 12:22 am

Re: Re:

January 16th, 2018, 1:52 pm #790

Cathy (Admin) wrote:
Cathy (Admin) wrote: If the Council enforces the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (how could they not?) by requiring the affordable or a contribution in-lieu that is calculated per the ordinance, the developer may walk.  The headline will not read, "Mayor Screws Up."  It will read something like, "Council Kills Fuller Deal."  The developers will claim that the Council broke the deal they had with the Mayor (no matter that it was an invalid deal).
~ April 28th, 2017, 3:22 pm #450
It should read," council kills bad deal deal made by the mayor". Who cares what the developer says, they already proved they are not trustworthy.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

January 16th, 2018, 2:18 pm #791

Damon wrote: The Planning Board seems to have cancelled their Jan 18 meeting on the subject of Fuller.
http://www.gloucester-ma.gov/ArchiveCen ... /Item/8374
It was probably cancelled due to the predicted weather.  (P&D)

The entry in the agenda for that meeting indicated that the Fuller hearing, with the presentation of the review of the hardship findings, would be held at a special, one-item meeting on Monday, January 29 anyway ...
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

Re: Re:

January 16th, 2018, 2:36 pm #792

flounda wrote:
Cathy (Admin) wrote:
Cathy (Admin) wrote: If the Council enforces the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (how could they not?) by requiring the affordable or a contribution in-lieu that is calculated per the ordinance, the developer may walk.  The headline will not read, "Mayor Screws Up."  It will read something like, "Council Kills Fuller Deal."  The developers will claim that the Council broke the deal they had with the Mayor (no matter that it was an invalid deal).
~ April 28th, 2017, 3:22 pm #450
It should read," council kills bad deal deal made by the mayor". Who cares what the developer says, they already proved they are not trustworthy.
Oh, I was just making a prediction, lol.

While I do think that the developers have used plenty of smoke and mirrors to steer things their way, I don't know if I'd call them "not trustworthy."  They certainly did not end up in this quagmire all on their own.  They have been proceeding with their plan based on the provisions of the negotiations and Purchase and Sale Agreement signed with the Administration.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

January 16th, 2018, 2:45 pm #793

Cathy (Admin) wrote:
Damon wrote: The Planning Board seems to have cancelled their Jan 18 meeting on the subject of Fuller.
http://www.gloucester-ma.gov/ArchiveCen ... /Item/8374
It was probably cancelled due to the predicted weather.  (P&D)

The entry in the agenda for that meeting indicated that the Fuller hearing, with the presentation of the review of the hardship findings, would be held at a special, one-item meeting on Monday, January 29 anyway ...
Just saw that the Planning Board meeting for the 18th CANCELLED too.  Mixing up my board meetings, lol ...

Anyhow, the Special P&D meeting on the 29th is the next significant meeting in the saga ...
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 25th, 2007, 6:00 pm

January 16th, 2018, 3:14 pm #794

You had me confused all right :)
Yes, the 29th P&D is the big one but I wonder why the Planning Board is delaying.
Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?...   ..........
 George Orwell , 1984
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

January 16th, 2018, 3:34 pm #795

Damon wrote: You had me confused all right :)
Yes, the 29th P&D is the big one but I wonder why the Planning Board is delaying.
I think that the hearing keeps appearing on the agenda as a continued hearing, whether or not there is something for the Planning Board to discuss at that particular meeting, until their review is complete and their recommendation is submitted to P&D. - e. g., they authorized peer reviews on some aspects of the project, which I'm not sure have been completed.  P&D was the committee that asked for the hardship review.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

January 16th, 2018, 6:37 pm #796

Tomorrow there is no P & D meeting.  It will all be on Jan 29 and it will be a very important meeting.  A big turnout is expected and wanted and this allows time for people to contact the councilors in advance if they want to.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

January 17th, 2018, 3:06 pm #797

In case you missed it...LTE from Windover CEO...

http://www.gloucestertimes.com/opinion/ ... 06b21.html
Last edited by Karly on January 17th, 2018, 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 1st, 2012, 8:06 am

January 17th, 2018, 3:30 pm #798

Karly wrote:In case you missed it...LTE from developer...

http://www.gloucestertimes.com/opinion/ ... 06b21.html
"....ongoing tax revenues that we anticipate...."  - sound familiar, anybody?!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

January 17th, 2018, 3:49 pm #799

"The RFP was silent about affordable housing."  - Lee Dellicker

The RFP does state:

"The Selected Respondent agrees the development of the property shall be in compliance with all applicable Federal,State and Municipal Laws and Regulations."

And the tax thing:  The RFP states:  "Acknowledgement of PILOT Agreement: Provide acknowledgement of the fact that if the Selected Respondent is a non-profit organization whose ownership entity qualifies as exempt from local taxation, then it shall enter into an agreement with the City for payments in lieu of taxes for both real and personal property."

FMUV, the respondent, is not a non-profit so no PILOT Agreement required.  However, the parcel will be divided after the permits are secured and viola - no property tax for the Y.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 15th, 2006, 1:02 am

January 18th, 2018, 11:08 am #800

Cathy (Admin) wrote:
FMUV, the respondent, is not a non-profit so no PILOT Agreement required.  However, the parcel will be divided after the permits are secured and viola - no property tax for the Y.
You could see that coming a mile away
You think you know it, but you haven't got a clue!!
Quote
Like
Share