Regarding Templeton CPC Funds:

Funds are raised locally through imposition of a voter-authorized surcharge on local property tax bills of 3%. Several exemptions to the CPA surcharge can also be authorized by voters at the time of adoption. Local adoption of CPA by a community triggers annual distributions from the state's Community Preservation Trust Fund, a statewide fund held by the Massachusetts Department of Revenue, which the law also establishes. Deed recording fees charged by the state's Registries of Deeds are the funding source for the statewide Community Preservation Trust Fund. Revenues from these two sources—the local CPA property tax surcharge and annual distributions from the state's Community Preservation Trust Fund—combine to form a city or town's Community Preservation Fund.

CPC funds are not free money, it is tax dollars and fee dollars paid by you.

Communities may spend their CPA funds for projects in the following broad programmatic areas: Open Space, Historic Preservation, Affordable Housing and Outdoor Recreation. The CPA requires each adopting community to annually appropriate, or reserve for future appropriation, at least 10% of its estimated annual CPA fund revenues for open space projects (excluding recreational uses), 10% for historic preservation projects, and 10% for affordable housing projects. The remaining funds each year can be used on projects in any CPA programmatic area. The CPA statute describes in detail allowable uses of the funds within the four broad programmatic purpose areas, determining what projects are eligible for CPA funding.

Note: There are no CPC funds automatically designated for recreation use or for recreation commission.

As of November of 2019, 176 cities and towns (50% of the state's municipalities) have adopted the Community Preservation Act, and no community has ever revoked the program. Because of the rising number of communities participating in the program, legislation was passed in 2019 to increase the recording fees at the Registries of Deeds which provide revenue to the statewide CPA Trust Fund. This increase is expected to raise an estimated $60 million annually for CPA communities each year. (Communities that adopt CPA with the full 3% CPA surcharge are eligible to participate in two additional annual CPA fund distribution rounds each year, and the funding formula within the CPA law governing these rounds allows some smaller, less resource-rich communities to often receive a dollar for dollar annual match for CPA funds raised locally.)

As anyone can see, things change, and this program like many other things involved in government, requires much continual reading to keep up with changes in laws, funding, regulations and keeping local documentation and records up to date.

Maybe this is why the article for 230 thousand for Gilman Waite failed, it was past the deadline. Now posted on town website under community preservation community: What is the timetable of the funding cycle?

Applications may be submitted between December 7, 2008 and January 31, 2009 for proposals to be considered at the May 2008 Annual Town Meeting.

Unless an applicant can demonstrate that a significant opportunity would otherwise be lost, applications will not be accepted after this date.

 In case you missed it, at town meeting held November 3, 2021, it was stated by member of advisory committee that advisory is the only group who works for taxpayer, the only group who looks out for them. Why was there an item under article 1 for $4,500.00 to pay for road repair, because advisory had already voted against a transfer from town reserve fund, which they oversee per MGL. in advisory reserve fund transfer, one criteria for approval is To approve a transfer request, "the Advisory Committee should be of the opinion the request would be approved by a Town Meeting." Well, the spending of $4,500.00 was approved by town meeting vote (original reserve fund request was $4,000.00) Advisory was wrong in their conclusion that the taxpayer money was not needed and town meeting would not approve. One conclusion of this situation could be advisory (at least some members) are out of touch with town residents.

Also, as a result of article 4, amend town bylaw regarding advisory committee, it was made public that advisory had been discussing things outside of a public meeting and appeared to be trying to convince a town elected official to do their bidding, that is deny appointing a town resident to advisory because either advisory members do not like the resident, did not trust resident or whatever combinations of reasons they came up with, the committee was still talking amongst themselves on how to keep a resident off the advisory committee, even as it is touted as the only group that works for residents, interesting view, work for residents, looking for volunteers and when volunteer residents come forward, advisory tries to find ways to keep them off based on what? Time for some serious changes?

 Since recommendations of DOR matter in the instance of say a PILOT, then recommendation concerning size of advisory should be considered and perhaps it is time, go from 7 to 5 members, once upon a time, there were 9 members of planning board, but due to being hard to find members to run for election, number was reduced to 7. Advisory once upon a time had 9 members, reduced to 7 because difficulty in getting enough members for a quorum. Considering what happened right after our last annual town meeting, not enough members to have a quorum for a 7 member group, maybe time to consider going to 5, there are many communities with 5 member advisory committees. By the way, state law and our town bylaws state we have an advisory committee, NOT an advisory board, sometimes facts matter!

1951 town bylaw, there shall be an advisory committee of 9 legal voters . . . . section 1 of article IV in 2010 Templeton town bylaw book, sections 1-4, 5, 6 passed 3-5-1951. Massachusetts General Law chapter 39, section 16, advisory, finance or warrant committee, so fact is from 1951, town bylaw and state law cited it as advisory committee, some people just decided to call it something else, sort of the cemetery and parks commission, town never accepted MGL on parks commission - facts do matter.

Then - Annual Town Meeting, May 2011.

Article 28. To see if the Town will vote to amend Article IV – Advisory Committee,

Section 1., first sentence, and Section 2., first sentence: as follows the text to be deleted stricken and the text to be inserted underlined as follows:

“Section 1. There shall be an Advisory Committee consisting of seven ( strike nine) legal voters of the town who shall be appointed by the Moderator as hereinafter provided.”

“Section 2. The Moderator of the town meeting when this By-Law is adopted shall, within thirty days after such by-law becomes effective, appoint 2 (strike 3) members of said committee for a term of one year, 2 (strike 3) members for terms of two years, and 3 members for terms of three years.”

or to take any other action relative thereto

 One view of Advisory Committee:

The function of the Advisory Committee is to act as an advisor to town meeting of Templeton, with whom, ultimate appropriating authority rests. The Town Administrator, who reports to an elected Select Board, administers municipal functions. The Superintendent of Schools, who reports to an elected School Committee, administers the operation of the School Department. The Advisory Committee is not elected but is appointed by the Town Moderator. Because of this fact, the Advisory Committee functions on an advisory basis and does not set policy. Advisory Committee is not part of either of the two general functions: (a) Municipal Operation and (b) Education, and therefore should remain deliberative in its recommendations. Their job is to study the budget and each warrant article in detail and make recommendations to Town Meeting. The better it's report is, the more irrelevant debate can be eliminated and save time of the meeting. That said, a good report does not relieve the rest of the meeting from thinking and asking questions for themselves.