2005-09-28 SRA Special Meeting MinutesSRA Minutes
September 28, 2005
Page 1 of 3
MINUTES OF THE BOARD MEETING
OF THE SALEM REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HELD ON SEPTEMBER 28, 2005
A Special Meeting of the Salem Redevelopment Authority (SRA) Board was held in the third floor conference
room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, September 28, 2005 at 1:30pm.
Chairman Michael Brennan called the meeting to order and on roll call, the following members were present:
Michael Brennan, Michael Connelly, Christine Sullivan, and Russell Vickers. Lynn Duncan, Executive
Director, and Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner, were also present.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Appointments – Appointment of Christos Christoudias to the Design Review Board.
Mr. Brennan introduced the item to appoint Mr. Christos Christoudias, owner of Digital Bungalow to the
Design Review Board (DRB). Ms. Hartford provided background on Mr. Christoudias and his qualifications
to serve on the DRB. She also stated that the process for appointment to the DRB, which is an advisory
body to the SRA, was that the SRA would vote to appoint Mr. Christoudias and then the City Council would
have 30 days to confirm the appointment.
Ms. Sullivan stated that she thought this was a great appointment. She knows Mr. Christoudias and feels he
and his company are a huge asset to the City of Salem.
Ms. Duncan welcomed Mr. Christoudias to speak and provide the Board with his background. Mr.
Christoudias spoke on his background and his commitment to Salem.
There being no further discussion, Mr. Brennan asked for a motion. Ms. Sullivan moved to appoint Mr.
Christoudias to the DRB. Mr. Vickers seconded the motion. Motion passed (4-0).
2. Old Salem Jail – Review and approval of an amendment to the Scope of Services for The Cecil
Group and Peter Smith Associates. The amendment will include services by the consultant to
provide financial review and analysis of the proposals selected as finalists.
Ms. Duncan explained that she would like to move ahead with hiring The Cecil Group and Peter Smith
Associates (PSA). It would be an additional service to their original contract. The review would include the
following: financial, market feasibility and developer capabilities review; reference and credit checks; and
review of design and architectural issues. At the conclusion of this review, The Cecil Group and PSA will
complete a memorandum for each proposal. Following the submission of this evaluation, the Cecil Group
and PSA may be asked to meet with the SRA to present the results of this evaluation. She noted that the
SRA staff would do the reference checks using a framework of questions provided by Peter Smith. The
consultants may also come to a meeting, if requested by the SRA.
Ms. Sullivan made a motion to approve an amendment to the Scope of Services for The Cecil Group and
Peter Smith Associates for an amount not to exceed $5,000. Mr. Vickers seconded the motion. While the
motion was under discussion, Mr. Vickers stated that he wanted to the consultants to comment on the pro
forma submitted by each finalist and determine whether they can reasonably accomplish the project within
their listed pro forma. The Board agreed. The motion passed (4-0).
3. Old Salem Jail – Review and discussion of the proposals to redevelop the Old Salem Jail Complex.
Ms. Duncan stated that she did a review of the proposals submitted by the nine respondents and also heard
feedback from her staff and representatives of Historic Salem, Inc (HSI). She commented that HSI will
SRA Minutes
September 28, 2005
Page 2 of 3
continue to review the proposals for historic content. She further noted that t he Massachusetts Historic
Commission (MHC) received copies of the proposals and is awaiting their comments.
Ms. Duncan proceeded with the staff recommendation on the finalists. She stated that first she eliminated
those proposals that did not meet the threshold requirements stated in the RFP. Based on this she eliminated
GLM and Medieval Days & Knights because they did not have the funds to support the project. The
proposal submitted by ISNEA for the Cooler Museum was creative but it was unclear that they had the
means to move the project forward. The proposal submitted by JUDGE Development was not extensive
and lacked information about the qualifications of the development team. Further, this pro forma submitted
by JUDGE Development did not seem workable.
Ms. Duncan stated that she is recommending three groups move ahead as finalists. She stated that each of
these three groups met all the threshold requirements and ranked highly advantageous or advantageous on
the evaluation criteria. The three she is recommending be advanced are: New Boston Ventures, Old Salem
Jail Partnership, and Diamond/Sinacori, LLC.
Ms. Duncan noted that two groups remained in question: The Classic Group/Boardwalk Enterprises and
Raymond Properties. She stated that The Classic Group submitted additional information based on her
question of whether Phase II was necessary. The team responded that they could move ahead with the
project without Phase II by revising their pro forma (Ms. Duncan handed out the additional information to
the SRA members). Ms. Duncan commented that this was a creative proposal that included much of what
the SRA, and the community, were looking for in the redevelopment. She stated that the development team
asked for 30 days to secure financing. Ms. Duncan told the members that they have three choices to move
forward: 1) they could designate the team as a finalist; 2) they could not designate the team as a finalist; or 3)
they could request additional information and make that a condition of designation.
Ms. Duncan deferred to Mr. Brennan to discuss the status of Raymond Properties. Mr. Brennan stated that
the proposal submitted by Raymond Properties stated that the site was difficult and if it were going to be
developed, it would have to be housing; therefore they incorporated the neighboring church property into
their proposal. Mr. Brennan stated that he spoke with the Archdiocese of Boston and they were clear in a
letter they wrote to Raymond Properties that they had no interest in selling or leasing the property to
Raymond Properties. Mr. Brennan noted that he thinks the property is actually going to be leased to another
Polish school being relocated. He said that it begs the question of whether Raymond would move ahead with
the project with just the Jail Complex site without the church property.
Mr. Connelly stated that The Classic Group proposal has given the City the more “buzz”. He questioned
whether they could give the team 15 days to get us the information needed to move forward. He also
suggested that the same time be given to Raymond Properties. He stated that they could be perhaps called
“tentative finalists” until they get the information necessary to the board. Mr. Connelly further stated that all
the proposals were quality proposals.
Mr. Vickers asked whether Peter Smith Associates could review the basics of The Classic Group proposal
without the financing piece seeing as there was something for him to look at and analyze.
Ms. Sullivan stated that she was happy to include The Classic Group as a finalist. She stated that The Cooler
Museum proposal had a great team and she thought it was a great proposal. She suggested that it would be
great if someone else could pick up the proposal to help make it happen.
Ms. Duncan stated that the process from this point forward would be that the finalists would be asked to
come in to make presentations and be interviewed by the SRA on October 19.
Mr. Brennan commented that a lot of the proposals submitted had a letter of interest from t he bank because
they had done something in the past with the bank and the bank knows they can get the job done. He stated
that a simple letter of interest from a bank would suffice.
SRA Minutes
September 28, 2005
Page 3 of 3
Ms. Duncan clarified that the SRA was ready to designate the three groups recommended as finalists and wait
on the other two groups for additional information.
Mr. Brennan stated that in the case of Raymond Properties, they have thirty days to provide the SRA with a
strong proposal on the existing site now that the church property is off the table.
Mr. Connelly made a motion to designated three teams – New Boston Ventures, Old Salem Jail Partnership,
and Diamond/Sinacori, LLC – as finalists in the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail; these three finalists,
along with The Classic Group/Boardwalk Enterprises will be sent to Peter Smith Associates for evaluation;
the three finalists will be interviewed on October 19; and The Classic Group/Boardwalk Enterprises and
Raymond Properties will be designated as conditional finalists and given 30 days to get back additional
information on their proposals. Mr. Vickers seconded the motion. Motion passed (4-0).
Mr. Brennan stated that if the board had specific questions for Peter Smith, they should get them in writing to
Lynn Duncan as soon as possible.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mr. Connelly motioned to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Vickers seconded the
motion, and the motion passed (4-0).
Meeting stands adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Tania Hartford
Economic Development Planner