May 9, 2006 1

Final Report

Social Service PILOT and

Comparative Impact Study Committee

May 9, 2006 2

PILOT / Impact Committee

• Charge from Town Meeting June 9, 2005

On April 27, 2006• Vote on Committee Final

Report 6-3-0

May 9, 2006 3

Overview of Presentation• Background on service delivery• Findings on inventory of sites• Benefits services bring• Impacts on Framingham• Recommendations• Conclusions

May 9, 2006 4

Social Service Delivery in MA

• The State Hospital era

Today• State contracts private agencies for

service delivery• State provides funds and clients • Agencies responsible to state and

to their organizations• Agencies make siting decisions

May 9, 2006 5

MA Delivery System Findings

• State provides funds and clients• Siting is agency decision• Many recipients of services do not

originate in Framingham• Communities represent their interests• Local Officials Human Service Council

(LOHSC)• Framingham has not been engaged in

the system

May 9, 2006 6

Comparative CommunitiesGroup 1 – Contiguous Ashland, Marlborough, Natick, Sherborn, Southborough, Sudbury, Wayland

Group 2 – HUD PMSA and Population 40-100,000Arlington, Beverly, Brookline, Cambridge, Lynn, Malden, Medford, Newton, Peabody, Plymouth, Quincy, Revere, Somerville, Taunton, Waltham, Weymouth

May 9, 2006 7

Inventory of Sites

• A ‘site’ is a social service facility and may be a single family home, lodging house, condominium, office, or several buildings assessed as a single parcel

• Framingham had 34 sites in 1990, and 244 sites in 2006 (600% growth)

• Marlborough has 34 sites serving a population of 36,255

• Waltham has 46 sites serving a population of 59,226

May 9, 2006 8

Social Services in Framingham – 1990

8

May 9, 2006 9

Social Services in Framingham – 2006

9

May 9, 2006 10

Social Services in Marlborough – 2006

10

May 9, 2006 11

Social Services in Waltham – 2006

11

May 9, 2006 12

Inventory of Sites – Group 1 Private Non-Profit Social

Service sites per 1,000 people using 2000 U.S. Census

Population

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.7

0.7

0.9

3.6

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0

Sherborn

Southborough

Sudbury

Wayland

Ashland

Natick

Marlborough

Framingham

Source: PILOT research 2000 Census

Community Sites*

Sherborn 1

Southborough 2

Wayland 3

Sudbury 4

Ashland 10

Natick 21

Marlborough 34

Framingham 244

* The social service sites counted and listed are dependent upon the definition that has been used consistently throughout the study.

May 9, 2006 13

Inventory of Sites – Group 2 Private Non-Profit Social

Service sites per 1,000 people using 2000 U.S. Census

Population

0.4

0.6

0.7

0.7

0.8

0.8

0.9

1.1

1.4

1.5

3.6

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0

Brookline

Weymouth

Taunton

Peabody

Waltham

Malden

Salem

Quincy

Beverly

Lynn

Framingham

Source: PILOT research and 2000 census

Community Sites*

Brookline 22

Weymouth 30

Peabody 32

Salem 38

Taunton 41

Malden 43

Waltham 46

Beverly 53

Quincy 101

Lynn 132

Framingham 244

* The social service sites counted and listed are dependent upon the definition that has been used consistently throughout the study.

May 9, 2006 14

Benefits to Town

• Jail Diversion Program helps police, agencies and clients

• At least 198 qualifying 40B units• As many as 400 Framingham

residents may be agency employees• Agencies invest in renovation• Services available to town residents

May 9, 2006 15

Impact on Police

1543 40

76105

0

50

100

150

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year

I ndividuals providing Wet Shelter address at time of their booking

*From Chief Carl’s Presentation to Board of Selectmen, November 15, 2005

70% of wet shelter clients are from outside of the Framingham area*

May 9, 2006 16

Impact on Framingham Schools

• All data from Dr. Martes’ office and the School Benchmarking Study

• 155 students qualified under the McKinney-Vento Act (2004 count)

• Average expenditure per student is $10,518

• $1.63M total estimated impact • Costs associated with special

education cannot be determined

May 9, 2006 17

Impact on Fire Department

• 8,844 calls town wide (2005)• 549 calls (6.2%) from 144

social service site addresses• 16% (23 of 144) of the sites

were among the top 200 callers to the Fire Department

May 9, 2006 18

Financial Impact – Taxes Paid

• Agencies rent 38 taxed properties – Determination of taxes

difficult• Agencies pay $240,818 on

$13M taxed property owned (FY06)

May 9, 2006 19

Financial Impact – Tax Exempt

• $36.5M of tax-exempt property owned by agencies (FY06)

• Agencies rent $1.5M tax-exempt property

• Total tax waiver on these properties estimated to be $515,751 in FY06

• Impact on Tax Per Year about $15

May 9, 2006 20

What can Framingham Do?

It’s all about the power structure in the community. How does the community respond?How does the community act? -- Fred Habib Undersecretary of EOHHS

The issue is Urban Planning. What do we want Framingham to be? --Police Chief Carl

May 9, 2006 21

What Framingham can do• A community has the power to control

how an agency acts, thus indirectly affect siting decisions– Brockton has enforced a “ban” on

new shelters for 8 years– Worcester licenses wet shelter as a

lodging house• Leaders use “unofficial levers” -

licensing, permits, grants and site reviews - and strong relationships with agencies and state to control siting

• Local bylaws a must to enact this

May 9, 2006 22

RecommendationsCreate Human Service Coordinator

position reporting to Town Manager• Advocate for Framingham in the social

service delivery system– Assist Board of Selectmen in developing

appropriate social policy– Oversight of current and potential programs

and sites in Framingham– Liaison between town, agencies and State– Tabulate information and statistics

• Framingham has never had a town employee charged with addressing impact and growth of social services

May 9, 2006 23

Recommend a PILOT

• PILOT is voluntary• Agencies benefit from town

services• Town may negotiate services for

payment, as a trade• P in PILOT = approach

May 9, 2006 24

Other Recommendations

• Join LOHSC - lobby state for Cherry Sheet funding for host communities

• Engage state and federal reps to address grant and aid disparity

• Count all social service units towards 40B

• Regulate or close the wet shelter• Ensure any detox serves residents

May 9, 2006 25

Conclusions• Framingham's interests have not

been represented in this process• Framingham must change approach• Professional administrator is required• Transparency needed for effective

town governance

These steps will ensure that our leaders can effectively direct Framingham’s future

May 9, 2006 26

Motion

I move that town meeting accept the Final Report of the Social Service PILOT and Comparative Impact Study Committee, and that the PILOT-Impact Committee be dissolved at the end of the 2006 Annual Town Meeting.