OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Peekskill, New York/Meeting Portal
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Peekskill IDA and PFDC Meeting - September 23, 2026

Meeting Portal — Wednesday, September 23, 2026
BodyPeekskill, New York
SessionMeeting Portal
DateWednesday, September 23, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 59:57

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:00

It's 708, and I am going to open both the Peak Skill Industrial Development Agency meeting and the PeakSeal Facilities Development Corporation meeting on Tuesday, September 22nd, 2026.

0:15

And we'll start with the IDA correspondence.

0:19

So if I can just add, um, with regard to our streaming, we have a Zoom call that's in session.

0:27

The Zoom link was published with the agenda.

0:30

And if any member of the public signs on to that meeting, Abby will be controlling the waiting room, and would let them into the waiting room and and when and if they want to speak, would let us know or raise their hand or something.

0:43

No, we don't usually have that.

0:44

No, not you.

0:51

Okay.

0:52

Brian Howard letters.

0:55

So that is just um we know that we've had presentations about Broad Howard, the 57 unit project at Broad and Howard, uh, and have with two properties on Maine.

1:05

And they did not get their tax credit uh award last year, so they resubmitted again in September 10th, and of course they needed new letters.

1:14

Part of the reason they didn't get the award last year, among other reasons, was that the pilot proposals that the city made were very not detailed enough.

1:25

And so this year uh they made a more the city sort of led the negotiations, they made a more detailed pilot presentation.

1:32

Uh the city uh commented that that pilot appropriation structure was okay.

1:39

The city wrote a letter stating that this was reported at the last month's IDA board meeting.

1:45

Uh the IDA authorized the writing a similar letter, and so these are both letters that got submitted to the state.

1:51

And the arrangement is that he's making a one-time uh impact fee um payment when and if he builds the project, and between that fee and the our city's share of the pilot amount, the city will be getting the level of taxes that it would have gotten were it not taxed exempt.

2:07

So that's really sort of our new pilot policy, which is pretty sound in a way.

2:12

And that's what happened with 901 Maine and 41 Roth Division, so that's continuing.

2:16

And we'll hear when he finds out about his pilot application, excuse me, his tax credit application, and then he will come back before this board to uh submit and have reviewed his uh pilot application.

2:27

Do we need to um change our uniform tax exemption policy?

2:32

I think that that's a good question to ask with Justin.

2:36

Uh oh well, not that it has to be offline, but I'd want to really discuss with him in more detail, but I don't think so because that doesn't really say anything about what we can what the city can do regarding impact fees, and we are uh in this particular case got a per unit pilot payment, which is well above what uh uh previous ones have been.

2:55

It's a it's starting at $3200 a unit, which is sort of a reasonable number going up to 4,800 a unit after only 15 years of pilot.

3:04

So it seems like it was uh a good arrangement for the city, a real step forward in terms of being a better economic deal for the city.

3:12

So that's sort of getting created that the new projects that are coming will have to live with that precedent because that's how we've been doing it for the last three.

3:22

Is it 30 or 28?

3:24

Because I thought the letter is in 2000.

3:26

Yeah, 20.

3:27

48.

3:28

2800 starting.

3:29

Oh, that's right.

3:30

Starting at 200, ending at 4200, I think it was.

3:33

Thank you, Dean.

3:34

Can I just again I'm just trying to learn something here, but is that sort of a standard now for like each unit is 2800 per unit?

3:42

Well, that's we've gotten it up from that because it wasn't that high for the prior projects.

3:47

And so we've were sort of inching up to that level.

3:50

In fact, when we were negotiating this one, the developers were telling us, oh, down in White Plains, it's a thousand dollars a door.

3:56

You know, like as if they were making our request for a higher number be completely unrealistic, which it isn't at all.

4:03

So uh so it's not really a standard wide variety wide variation.

4:06

And Justin, of course, who's a uh uh uh uh lawyer to other IDAs in Westchester County could comment further on that if if you want a little bit more detail on what other IDAs are doing.

4:16

No, I was wondering if that's kind of a ballpark.

4:21

No, it's hard all over the place.

4:23

And it depends on what it also depends on the project, the specifics of the project to a large extent.

4:30

But for the history of PeakScale, that's high.

4:32

That's we've moved up to that number now.

4:38

So that was just an update on uh Patreon.

4:48

Hello, we've got an audience tonight.

4:53

All right.

4:54

Um okay.

4:56

Um let's move on.

5:00

Does anybody have any other questions or comments about those letters?

5:02

No.

5:02

Justin, was there anything you wanted to add to that?

5:07

No, not a first time.

5:09

Okay.

5:10

Um so uh let's do the uh minutes, the August 25th, 2026 minutes for the IDA.

5:18

Do uh anybody have any comments or questions?

5:22

Concerns?

5:24

Uh do I have a motion to approve?

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Economic Development█████████████████████████████████████████41%
Facility Management███████████████████19%
Budget Equity Analysis██████████████14%
Procedural████████8%
Public Engagement███████7%
Insurance████4%
Community Engagement███3%
Affordable Housing██2%
Workforce Development██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Peekskill Industrial Development Agency and Facilities Development Corporation Joint Meeting - September 23, 2026

The Peekskill Industrial Development Agency (IDA) and Peekskill Facilities Development Corporation (PFDC) held a joint meeting on September 23, 2026, starting at 7:08 PM and adjourning at 8:08 PM. The meeting covered financial reports, budget presentations, updates on the kitchen incubator project, and various economic development initiatives. Key decisions included approval of minutes, a draft 2027 budget for the IDA, and a strategy to submit a commitment letter from Community Capital to the Economic Development Administration (EDA) to avoid grant termination.

Consent Calendar

  • IDA Minutes (August 25, 2026): Approved unanimously. Motion by a member, seconded. All in favor, none opposed.
  • PFDC Minutes (August 25, 2026): Approved unanimously. Motion and second, all in favor, none opposed.

Discussion Items

  • Broad Howard Project Update (Correspondence): The IDA received letters for the 57-unit Broad and Howard project. The developer had resubmitted a tax credit application on September 10, 2026, after a previous denial. The city negotiated a more detailed PILOT proposal including a one-time impact fee. The per-unit PILOT payment starts at $2,800 and rises to $4,200 after 15 years. Board members discussed whether this sets a precedent and noted that previous projects had lower per-unit payments. The letters were submitted to the state.
  • PIDA Financial Report (September 2026): Abby presented the report. Interest income was $2 for the month (due to quarterly interest posting on savings). Operating expenses were $1,400. Total cash: $1,000,000 (restricted: $650,000; unrestricted: $433,000). The board noted that interest is paid quarterly.
  • PFDC Financial Report (September 2026): Total cash: $64,000, of which $45,000 is restricted for workforce development, leaving $19,000 unrestricted.
  • Kitchen Incubator License Agreement: Discussion on formalizing a license agreement with the city for use of the building at 701 Washington Street. The city uses the space for storage and file storage. Topics included sharing utility costs, insurance premiums (currently $10,000/year for PFDC policy), and the need to move quickly before winter. The board agreed to quantify historical utility costs and prorate insurance for a license payment. The goal is to have a draft agreement for the next meeting.
  • PIDA 2027 Draft Budget: Presented by Abby. Total revenue budgeted at $700,000, including $100,000 in application/administrative fees, $25,000 interest, $5,500 appropriated fund balance, and $36,300 rental income. Expenses: $13,000 personnel (Matthew’s stipend), $45,000 professional services, $4,000 audit, $30,000 insurance, $2,005 membership dues, $295 conference, $1,800 QuickBooks, $250 postage, and $600,000 for kitchen incubator project. Budget is due October 31, 2026; final approval in October.
  • PFDC 2027 Draft Budget: Total revenue: $3,400,000, including $3,000 interest, $65,000 appropriated fund balance, and reimbursements from EDA and state for kitchen incubator (amounts TBD). Expenses: $10,000 professional fees, $45,000 workforce development, $1,800 QuickBooks, $12,000 insurance, and $3,300,000 for kitchen incubator project.
  • PFKI (Kitchen Incubator) Update: Matthew reported that the EDA set a September 27, 2026 deadline to show positive movement on financing. After exploring federal and state grants, the board pursued private financing through Community Capital, a Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI). Community Capital provided a letter of commitment for a bridge loan to cover the funding shortfall (approximately $1.5 million). The letter will be submitted to EDA before the deadline. The board discussed options: requesting authorization to award contracts, asking for more time, or requesting a project extension. A reimbursement request for all eligible expenses (about $2 million, though architectural costs are non-reimbursable) will also be submitted. If EDA does not accept the letter, the board will request termination for convenience to preserve eligibility for future grants.
  • Destination Peekskill Update: The formation of a new nonprofit (LLC, not C6) is ongoing. Activities include maintaining the Destination Peekskill website, trademarking the logo, and hiring a consultant to develop an online merchandise store.
  • Children’s Village / 41 North Division Update: Justin reported that the project is seeking HCR approval in late October, with a closing expected in November or December 2026.
  • Store Gardens Update: The bond reduction and lease restructuring closed on September 1, 2026 as planned. However, HUD approval of housing assistance payment contracts delayed the bank closing (Birchadia loan). Closing expected by end of September 2026.
  • Downtown Revitalization Fund Round Three: $62,000 is available for a new round of grants (matching share 10% from owner). Eligible uses include interior/exterior renovations, fixtures, and mechanical systems. Applications due October 9, 2026. An information session was scheduled for September 24, 2026 at the Chamber office.
  • Comprehensive Plan Update: A public information session on September 16, 2026 was well-attended. The consultant team is gathering input through surveys and stakeholder meetings. The IDA will have a role in the economic development stakeholder group. Board members were encouraged to share the survey with residents and business owners.

Key Outcomes

  • Minutes Approved: IDA and PFDC minutes from August 25, 2026 approved unanimously.
  • PIDA 2027 Budget: Draft presented; final approval scheduled for October meeting.
  • PFDC 2027 Budget: Draft presented; final approval scheduled for October meeting.
  • Kitchen Incubator Financing: Board directed staff to submit Community Capital’s commitment letter and a reimbursement request to EDA before September 25, 2026. If EDA does not accept, staff will request termination for convenience.
  • License Agreement: Staff instructed to prepare a formal license agreement with the city for the 701 Washington Street building, including cost-sharing for utilities and insurance, to be presented at the next meeting.

Meeting Transcript

It's 708, and I am going to open both the Peak Skill Industrial Development Agency meeting and the PeakSeal Facilities Development Corporation meeting on Tuesday, September 22nd, 2026. And we'll start with the IDA correspondence. So if I can just add, um, with regard to our streaming, we have a Zoom call that's in session. The Zoom link was published with the agenda. And if any member of the public signs on to that meeting, Abby will be controlling the waiting room, and would let them into the waiting room and and when and if they want to speak, would let us know or raise their hand or something. No, we don't usually have that. No, not you. Okay. Brian Howard letters. So that is just um we know that we've had presentations about Broad Howard, the 57 unit project at Broad and Howard, uh, and have with two properties on Maine. And they did not get their tax credit uh award last year, so they resubmitted again in September 10th, and of course they needed new letters. Part of the reason they didn't get the award last year, among other reasons, was that the pilot proposals that the city made were very not detailed enough. And so this year uh they made a more the city sort of led the negotiations, they made a more detailed pilot presentation. Uh the city uh commented that that pilot appropriation structure was okay. The city wrote a letter stating that this was reported at the last month's IDA board meeting. Uh the IDA authorized the writing a similar letter, and so these are both letters that got submitted to the state. And the arrangement is that he's making a one-time uh impact fee um payment when and if he builds the project, and between that fee and the our city's share of the pilot amount, the city will be getting the level of taxes that it would have gotten were it not taxed exempt. So that's really sort of our new pilot policy, which is pretty sound in a way. And that's what happened with 901 Maine and 41 Roth Division, so that's continuing. And we'll hear when he finds out about his pilot application, excuse me, his tax credit application, and then he will come back before this board to uh submit and have reviewed his uh pilot application. Do we need to um change our uniform tax exemption policy? I think that that's a good question to ask with Justin. Uh oh well, not that it has to be offline, but I'd want to really discuss with him in more detail, but I don't think so because that doesn't really say anything about what we can what the city can do regarding impact fees, and we are uh in this particular case got a per unit pilot payment, which is well above what uh uh previous ones have been. It's a it's starting at $3200 a unit, which is sort of a reasonable number going up to 4,800 a unit after only 15 years of pilot. So it seems like it was uh a good arrangement for the city, a real step forward in terms of being a better economic deal for the city. So that's sort of getting created that the new projects that are coming will have to live with that precedent because that's how we've been doing it for the last three. Is it 30 or 28? Because I thought the letter is in 2000. Yeah, 20. 48. 2800 starting. Oh, that's right. Starting at 200, ending at 4200, I think it was. Thank you, Dean. Can I just again I'm just trying to learn something here, but is that sort of a standard now for like each unit is 2800 per unit? Well, that's we've gotten it up from that because it wasn't that high for the prior projects. And so we've were sort of inching up to that level. In fact, when we were negotiating this one, the developers were telling us, oh, down in White Plains, it's a thousand dollars a door. You know, like as if they were making our request for a higher number be completely unrealistic, which it isn't at all. So uh so it's not really a standard wide variety wide variation. And Justin, of course, who's a uh uh uh uh lawyer to other IDAs in Westchester County could comment further on that if if you want a little bit more detail on what other IDAs are doing. No, I was wondering if that's kind of a ballpark. No, it's hard all over the place. And it depends on what it also depends on the project, the specifics of the project to a large extent. But for the history of PeakScale, that's high. That's we've moved up to that number now. So that was just an update on uh Patreon. Hello, we've got an audience tonight. All right. Um okay.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com