Great Barrington Affordable Housing Trust Meeting Summary

Date: February 17, 2026

The Great Barrington Affordable Housing Trust held a remote meeting to approve minutes, hear reports, and discuss two major initiatives: the Rising Dale housing project and the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) program. The trust reviewed survey results, set next steps for Rising Dale, and debated proposed changes to the ADU program rubric and overview.

Consent Calendar & Minutes Approval

• Minutes of January 20, 2026 were approved unanimously (all present voting aye).
• Minutes of the January 22, 2026 subcommittee were approved with Garfield abstaining because he was not present at that subcommittee meeting (Peter, Fred, Ananda aye; Garfield abstained).
• The minutes were amended to include the schedule for quarterly reports (first report due in April) and to correct a statement about Chris recommending a housing coordinator (that point was deferred to the recording).

Reports

• Select Board Presentation: Fred and Ananda updated the select board on trust activities and Prosperity Way. Key questions addressed: infrastructure costs (Chris clarified), the ADU program (Vivian Orloski question deferred), the Prosperity Way application process (Habitat for Humanity provided an update), and the choice of frame construction (Habitat explained).
• Prosperity Way Open Houses: Two open houses are scheduled: Saturday, February 21, 2026, 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM at 385 North Plain Road, and Thursday, February 26, 2026, 2:00 – 4:00 PM. Currently, six houses are under construction—five with 3–4 bedrooms and one smaller frame house.
• Developer RFP: The RFP for the developer program was issued last week and is posted on the town website.
• Advertising Funds: $149 remains from the approved advertising budget; the mandatory Berkshire Eagle ad has been posted but not yet paid.
• Jim Bailey’s Public Comment: At the select board meeting, Jim Bailey expressed concerns about the infrastructure phase and foundation costs, suggesting a change order and procurement issues. He felt he had been lied to, but trust members noted that his concerns were addressed by town staff and that the procurement process is outside the trust’s purview.

Discussion Items: Rising Dale Project

• Survey Results Review: The trust reviewed updated survey data collected from October to November 2025. Key findings: 28% of respondents live in the neighborhood, 28% in Housatonic. Priorities for project design include safety (traffic, parking, lighting), green spaces, homes that match the scale of nearby buildings, shared spaces, and energy efficiency.
• Process and Next Steps: The trust agreed that further data collection is needed, particularly to reach Spanish-speaking residents and Black and Brown communities. The current survey did not collect demographic data. Members also discussed whether to involve the Planning Board early; the consensus was to wait until a draft RFP is ready.
• Feasibility and Parameters: The trust acknowledged that an engineering feasibility study is needed and that the property, purchased with CPA funds, must remain affordable at 100% AMI unless state law changes (a seasonal community designation could raise the limit to 250% AMI, but this would not apply to CPA-funded projects without legislative amendment).
• Adopted Path Forward: The existing subcommittee (Fred, Bill, and Jen) will develop a proposed process and timeline, incorporating feedback from tonight’s discussion, and return to the trust with a draft RFP and plan for additional community outreach (including translated materials). The timeline extends beyond the original June target.

Discussion Items: ADU Program

• The trust reviewed the ADU program overview and scoring rubric. Proposed changes and votes:
• Motion to eliminate Goal 3 (resident landlord financial need) and the corresponding rubric criterion: Failed 0–4 (all present voted no). Members argued that this goal distinguishes the ADU program from the developer RFP and that the rubric already allows applicants with low financial need to score well in other areas.
• Other changes adopted:
  • Changed “lean for indebtedness” from “may” to “will” (loan documents will include a recorded lien/promissory note).
  • Added a definition of “straightforward language”: language that can be easily understood by a reasonable person.
  • Set the maximum forgivable loan per applicant at $100,000 (in line with the current budget). The total program budget for this cycle is approximately $100,000.
  • The $5,000 administrative cost allocation was not finalized; Fred, Chris, and Ananda will continue working on subcontractor options and return with a recommendation.
• The trust noted that one ADU has been successfully built under the pilot program and expressed commitment to moving the program forward to an open application cycle.

Key Outcomes

• Minutes approved as amended.
• Rising Dale subcommittee will produce a process outline and timeline, incorporating additional community outreach and a draft RFP, to be presented at a future meeting.
• ADU program documents were updated with the agreed changes; further refinements (administrative costs) will be finalized next month.
• Trustees speak: Peter reported that Egremont successfully used a property tax exemption for affordable housing with minimal cost (approx. $9,800), and suggested exploring CPA-backed bonds to fund housing development. He also noted he cannot attend the March 17 meeting due to a ZBA conflict.
• Meeting adjourned by unanimous consent.