HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-19-19Minutes of the Pulaski Town Council Work Session held at 5:00 p.m. Tuesday, February 19, 2019 in the
Council Chambers of the Town Municipal Building at 42 First Street, N.W.
In attendance were:
Mayor: David L. Clark, presiding
Councilmen Present: G. Tyler Clontz, Brooks R. Dawson; Gregory C. East,
Joseph K. Goodman, Lane R. Penn, James A. Radcliffe
Administration: Shawn M. Utt, Town Manager
Nichole L. Hair, Deputy Town Manager
Legal Counsel Spencer A. Rygas, Town Attorney
Press: Melinda Williams, Southwest Times
Mike Williams, PC Patriot
Staff: Capt. Andy Anderson, P.P.D.
Chief Robbie Kiser, P.F.D.
Bill Pedigo, Town Engineer
David Quesenberry, Clerk of Council
Rebecca Reece, Finance Director
Others Present: Cherie Adams Luke Allison Frank Austin
Dana Bishop Lisa Choate Chris Conner
Sherri Gallagher Amy Hopkins Preston Lloyd
Adam Marion Jackie Morris Cody Pennington
Bob Strenz Catherine Van Noy Jordan Whitt
1. Call to Order.
The meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by Mayor Clark.
2. Roll Call.
Following the call to order, the roll was taken. Present were: Mayor Clark, Mr. Dawson; Mr. East, Mr.
Goodman, Mr. Penn, and Mr. Radcliffe. Mr. Clontz was absent from roll call. Given that a majority of Council
was in attendance, a quorum of members were present for the conduct of business.
3. Modification of the Agenda.
Mayor Clark requested a motion to modify the agenda to add one item to the Closed Session under Va. Code
2.2-3711 (A) 8, consultation with legal counsel concerning an Americans with Disabilities Act accommodation
request. Mr. East moved to add the agenda modification as requested. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Goodman and approved on the following roll call vote:
Lane R. Penn -Aye
Brooks R. Dawson -Aye
Gregory C. East -Aye
4. Guests and Visitors.
Mayor Clark welcomed all persons attending the meeting.
5. Consent Agenda.
a. January 15, 2019, Council Work Session Minutes.
Joseph K. Goodman -Aye
G. Tyler Clontz -Absent
James A. Radcliffe -Aye
Page 1 of 17/February 19, 2019
Mayor Clark moved on to the Consent Agenda and requested a motion to approve the minutes of the January
15, 2019 Council work session. Mr. Goodman moved to adopt the minutes as corrected. The motion was
seconded by Mr. East and approved by unanimous voice vote of Council.
Council then moved to the Introduction of New Staff.
6. Public Hearings.
There were no public hearings scheduled for this meeting.
7. Presentations.
a. Introduction of New Staff
Mayor Clark asked for introductions to the new staff. Ms. Hair introduced Mr. Jordan Whitt, part-time social
media and marketing assistant; Ms. Amy Hopkins, part-time Senior Center assistant; and Mrs. Sherri Gallagher
the new Building Official. Mr. Utt added that a formal appointment of Mrs. Gallagher as Building Official by
Council would be on the March 51 agenda.
Chief Kiser introduced Mr. Cody Pennington, a new firefighter, to the Council. Chief Kiser noted that Mr.
Pennington had been a volunteer for five years and joined the Fire Department full-time in December.
Next item on the agenda was a presentation by Pulaski Medical, Inc.
Mr. Clontz joined the meeting at 5:08 p.m.
b. Pulaski Medical, Inc.
Mr. Adam Marion, Vice -President of Outpatient Services for Pinnacle Treatment Services, Management
Corporation for Pulaski Medical, thanked Council for the opportunity to speak. He then introduced Preston
Lloyd, legal counsel, and Cherie Adams, executive director of Pulaski Medical, Inc. Mr. Marion thanked Council
for their inquiries in understanding what was involved in an Opioid Treatment Program. He added that his goal
was to go more in depth about treatment vs. medication.
Mr. Marion distributed handouts about the three medications approved by the federal government for
treatment: methadone, buprenorphine and naltrexone (suboxone). Pulaski Medical he continued, used
methadone and a combination of buprenorphine and naltrexone. He added that he wanted to answer the most
frequently asked questions about: the "disease of addiction"; the use of methadone; the length of time patients
are on methadone; the issue of simply quitting opiates; and the question does methadone really help the
patient.
With respect to the operations of Pulaski Medical, Mr. Marion noted that in 2017-18, there were no overdose
deaths among persons using the clinic. Since 2013, Pulaski Medical served over 2200 persons with no deaths
due to opioid overdose. Approximately 280 persons served by the clinic were residents of the Town of Pulaski.
Operations of Pulaski Medical were overseen by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA); the Board of
Pharmacy; the Department of Behavioral Health and Disability Services; and the Department of Medical
Assistance Services (Virginia Medicaid).
Concerning referring to addiction as a disease, Mr. Marion said that addiction was seen as a primary brain
disease, recognized by the American Medical Association and the American Society of Addiction Medicine.
Use of opiates resulted in the drug going to the pleasure center of the brain (nucleus accumbens) and
releasing dopamine at two to ten times the level of a natural release. While the pleasure center of the brain
was stimulated, the prefrontal cortex, the center for logical decisions, was shut down. An individual's continued
use of drugs, etc. despite consequences was irrational, because the prefrontal cortex was removed from the
decision making progress.
Ten percent of the population he continued, had the disease of addiction. The disease of addiction he
continued was preventable and like other diseases, if not treated appropriately became chronic and deadly.
Page 2 of 17/February 19, 2019
Also with proper intervention and proper treatment, addiction could become manageable allowing persons to
live a prosperous life.
Regarding methadone use, Mr. Marion spoke to the questions of why it was used and was it trading one
addiction versus another. Methadone he stated was the most effective treatment for opioid use disorder, but
was most effective when used with other therapies. Persons at the clinic he continued participated in groups or
in individual counseling to supplement their therapy or with self-help groups such as NA. Methadone differed
from suboxone in that methadone was an opiate replacement which "tricked" the brain into thinking it was
getting the opiate. However it did not interact with the pleasure center producing euphoria. Suboxone did have
some euphoria, but it went away with continued use. Methadone was also the safest drug to use with pregnant
women and was listed as the safest course of treatment for pregnant women addicted to opioids.
As to the length of treatment with methadone, the bare minimum of effective treatment was 12 months with
some treatment extending seven years or longer. The length of treatment Mr. Marion continued, varied with the
large number of factors unique that are hard to pinpoint for each person.
As to why persons can't just quit, Mr. Marion referenced the disease model and said that persons could not
quit due to the rational decision part of the brain being "looped out" and the pleasure center of the brain
becoming conditioned to provide levels of dopamine to the brain. Methadone he added could be used
immediately, even if opiates were present, since it does not require detoxification and it does not cause
withdrawals.
With respect to the clinics location in Pulaski, Mr. Marion noted that local industries were reaching out for
referrals for their employees. Nationally, 76% of methadone patients were unemployed; locally 45% of
methadone patients at Pulaski Medical were employed (twice the national average). Following the
presentation, Mr. Marion offered to answer questions.
Mr. Radcliffe, referring to the number of patients (600) treated by the clinic (referred to at the previous meeting)
asked what happened to the 400 patients, who were not Town residents, when the clinic is through serving
them. He clarified his question by asking who deals with the patients once they leave the clinic. Mr. Marion
responded if the patient left and left successfully there was no dealing with them. Mr. Radcliffe asked about the
other patients bused in. Mr. Marion responded that the patients were not bused in that most patients drove
themselves to the clinic. There were Medicaid transportation services available for clients to return them to
where they live.
Mr. Radcliffe said his point was the percentage of clients that stay are the ones that the Town deals with for the
rest of the day. The clients who stayed occupied the Town's time. This situation was not a win-win he
concluded, because when they left the clinic, the clinic's involvement ceased, but society had to pick up the
rest. Mr. Marion suggested that was not quite accurate. He said that the majority of clients were being treated
in the County and they were driving in, then proceeding on to somewhere else. He said that certainly there
may be a contingent that may eat at local establishments and a contingent that may cause trouble. If these
people were not being treated he asked, what would they be doing? Statistics suggested the Town would be
engaging with them at a higher amount involving incarceration, emergency room visits, and required
resources. Mr. Marion suggested the positive far outweighed the negative especially looking at the number of
clients employed or looking for employment.
Mr. Radcliffe said he understood that there had been zero deaths. Mr. Marion responded that during 2017-
2018 there had been zero opioid related overdose deaths. Mr. Radcliffe said he was referring to deaths related
to clients who were sent home with the medications which were left lying around.
Mr. Marion then reviewed the procedures for "take home" medications. There was a strict practice he said for
how clients earn take home medications. Medications were prepared by pharmacists and were sealed. Clients
were subject to random call backs so that at any point in time, clients could get a call from the clinic having
them to report to the clinic and produce to the staff, empty medication bottles and bottles which were sealed
Page 3 of 17/February 19, 2019
and unused. If the totals didn't match, the take home privilege was revoked. Take home medications were
earned by clean drug screens that showed no illicit substances including alcohol. The drug screens provided
proof of progress by the patient through the program.
Mr. Marion noted that there were other five other prescribers outside of Pulaski Medical in the Town of Pulaski
prescribing suboxone. In the Commonwealth, an individual does not have to register with an entity that
supervises them as Pulaski Medical is supervised. A provider must be registered and also be registered with
the Drug Enforcement Administration. In addition, they must take extra training with no other oversight. A client
could go to a treatment clinic, get a prescription for suboxone and go to a pharmacy and retrieve it. Pulaski
Medical he continued treated suboxone the same as methadone. The right to "take home" had to be earned.
Mr. Marion suggested that not all things that may have happened in the history of the Town came from Pulaski
Medical. He maintained that it was more than likely that it was not Pulaski Medical due to the level of regulation
it had. Mr. Marion said that there certainly would be some patients that may not monitor their take home
medications as they should. If something happened, they lost the right (to take medication home). The
requirement of a clean drug screen also included legal drugs. In Pulaski County in 2017, there were three
deaths from alcohol which was recognized as a big issue. Patients in treatment he added were not allowed
alcohol since it can counteract the medications being administered. It was, he added a very strict process.
Mr. Radcliffe noted that a local businessman made a statement at the last hearing that he saw a need for the
service, but not next to his business. In recruiting businesses, Mr. Radcliffe said that he had never known one
to say they would come as long as there was an addiction clinic there. Mr. Marion replied if you were attracting
industry and if you were to ask them one of their major issues in attracting workers, they would say that they
were having a hard time hiring people that could pass a drug test. He suggested that an industry, having a
hard time getting people, could be attracted if a place to treat, monitor and partner with people were available.
He further suggested that manufacturing was being provided an avenue, if they are struggling with these
employees, to partner with the clinic.
Mr. Goodman asked how many of the 600 clients were Town or County. Mr. Marion responded that the clinic
was in the 400+ range in Pulaski County. Mr. Utt asked if the 24301 zip code was used or were town
boundaries. Ms. Adams replied that they looked at the 24301 zip code and within the town boundaries. The
400+ persons were considered in the entire County area.
Mr. Goodman said one of the concerns was that the location was in a retail area. He asked if Mr. Marion could
speak to the impacts to the retail area with respect to issues, problems, and tenants moving out to other retail
space nearby. Mr. Marion responded "yes and no" and that it came down to how people viewed what they
(Pulaski Medical) were doing.
There being no further comment, Council then heard from Mr. Preston Lloyd, legal counsel for Pulaski Medical.
Mr. Lloyd introduced himself as a land use attorney with Williams Mullen in Richmond. His role, as he
described it, was to work with applicants to find a way to accommodate the needs of the community, as well as
advance the application that is sought to be authorized by Council. He said that he was not present to take an
antagonistic position and reiterated that the Council had taken a thoughtful, deliberative approach on how to
make a determination on the application before them. Mr. Lloyd said the application was only the Opioid
Treatment Program (OTP) application. There had been some discussion that there were two companion
applications submitted to the County concerning the Pulaski Medical facility. Mr. Lloyd emphasized that Pulaski
Medical was only seeking to advance the OTP application at this time. The other applications were not "on the
table" in any way.
Mr. Lloyd said his role was to educate and offer information to the extent it would be productive to the Council
members as they rendered a decision. Not only, he continued, was this a unique application in terms of its
nexus with a public health crisis in Southwest Virginia, but it was also directly related to a very specialized use
Page 4 of 17/February 19, 2019
under Federal law which makes it unique and distinguished it from other applications that come before the
Council using its zoning power granted by the Commonwealth.
Mr. Lloyd then highlighted some of the legal issues involved. After following the conversation of the Planning
Commission, he ventured that this information would be of benefit to the Council. He reiterated the he and
Pulaski Medical were present because they valued the ongoing engagement that Council He added that
Council had indicated it was open to continuing the dialog on how the application could be approached in
addition to any conditions that Council might see fit to attach to make the application more suitable.
With respect to Federal law, Mr. Lloyd highlighted specifically the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) which
had specific language that read as follows: "no qualified individual with a disability shall by reason of such
disability be subjected to discrimination by a public entity." The anti -discrimination provision he stated,
prohibited zoning decisions to the extent that a locality discriminated against drug and alcohol rehabilitation
programs. The clients of those programs were deemed "qualified individuals with a disability by law. According
to Mr. Lloyd, there were a number of Federal cases that made this clear. These cases he claimed, showed that
if a local government took action that could potentially, adversely affect persons suffering from opioid addiction,
then local governments were arguably violating those federal statutes possibly opening them to liability. He
mentioned a case, MX Group vs. City of Covington, Kentucky which was decided by the United States Court of
Appeals for the 61h Circuit in 2000. The case involved a decision by that city to completely "zone out" treatment
facilities as a permitted use or as a special permit in the town entirely. It did so in response to a specific
application made by a business. The Court he continued, ultimately concluded that action was evidence of a
discriminatory intent by the town even though they were acting pursuant to their lawful zoning authority.
In summation, Mr. Lloyd said his client desired and strongly hoped that Council had seen its desire to work with
the Council to address concerns related to this facility. He added that it was important to keep in mind the
application was for a modest expansion of the facility. The applicant valued its role in the community and
hoped to continue to engage with Council and be seen as a partner and productive ally in the fight against
opioid addiction. Specifically he concluded, the applicant believed that granting the special exception and
application would be best for everyone, including the locality, the patients, and neighboring businesses. He
thanked Council for the opportunity to present this information.
Mr. Goodman asked for a copy of the remarks.
There being no further comments or discussion, Council moved on to consider a social media policy draft.
8. Public Operations
a. Social Media Policy Draft
Mr. Utt reported to Council that the draft policy was taken from policies presented earlier from Campbell
County and the Police Department and asked for comments from Council. He added that he envisioned the
policy being an update to the Town's Personnel Policy.
Mr. Goodman suggested that the Town Manager alone should administer the policy and that there should be
no "grandfathering" so that any current uses should comply with this policy. He also felt that this would be a
good time to review any current uses of social media.
Mr. Utt said that Mr. Dawson had asked questions about what may not be covered in this policy concerning
conduct of employees. In the Personnel Policy, Mr. Utt said referring to a handout, there was a section
governing employee conduct. If an employee, on duty or not, was charged with a felony or misdemeanor there
were be ramifications at the job site. If they were charged generally they would be placed on administrative
leave. A conviction offered the potential for termination. This was how employee conduct was governed he
explained, over and above what a social media policy would cover.
Mr. Goodman commented that one of the concerns raised involved public comments, especially speech which
impacted the Town as a governing agency. Mr. Utt used an illustration of derogatory statements of disfavor
Page 5 of 17/February 19, 2019
against town officials that was not protected. Complaints seeking services (Council should build a bridge) were
protected. Mr. Goodman added that speech that was inflammatory was not protected to which Mr. Utt agreed.
Mr. Goodman said the concern was postings by employees on their personal Facebook pages. He asked
where the line was to which Mr. Utt replied it was "very, very fine".
Mr. Dawson said he didn't know if a policy on social media addressed what initially started the conversation.
Reading passage 11 of "Employee Behavior" from the Personnel Manual prohibiting employees from making
critical, derogatory, false statements, etc. against the Town, Mr. Dawson commented that the handbook
specifically spoke to employees making these statements against the Town.
Mr. Goodman ventured that how "critical" was defined could render the policy unenforceable under
Amendment One. He thought it may be better to further explain that clause. Mr. East asked Mr. Utt for his
suggestion. Mr. Utt asked if the policy was what Council wanted and what changes needed to be made. If
there were no changes, an ordinance could be prepared updating the personnel policy. Mr. East asked if the
personnel manual addressed the issue with individual employees making negative statements on their
personal Facebook pages. Mr. Utt replied it was a fine line and suggested getting with Mr. Rygas to clarify the
terms used.
Mr. Dawson said that protected speech as an employee and citizen were two different things. Mr. Goodman
said his research indicated that free speech rights were not checked in at the door. Mr. Goodman asked if Mr.
Rygas could review the matter. Mr. Dawson felt it was most important that the appropriate language be in the
employee policies for conduct to give Mr. Utt the amount of control needed to address the issue. Mr. East said
other entities had a social media policy and the Town needed one. The Council needed to know what type of
social media policy could be drafted in the guidelines they are given. He concluded that the Council needed a
legal opinion as to what could be drafted.
The matter was referred to Mr. Rygas for review.
Discussion having concluded, Council then moved on to landscaping options for the cemeteries.
b. Landscaping Options for Oakwood and Pinehurst
Mr. Utt referred Council to the Engineering drawings in the packet showing the proposed number, type and
placement of trees in Oakwood and Pinehurst cemeteries. He asked for feedback from Council to take to the
Cemetery Board of Trustees for a future meeting.
Mr. Goodman expressed appreciation for the work done and wanted to make sure that the Town was trying to
bring back the evergreens for their year-round color. He added it was a good start and looked forward to
hearing from the Cemetery Board. Mr. Utt ventured that the Board would like what was presented and would
probably want more.
Mr. Goodman also suggested that given the Cemetery Boards' limited finances that the Town work with the
high school or other organizations to do plantings of trees. He added that families or churches might be willing
to sponsor a tree to help reduce the fiscal impact.
Mr. East asked about the cost of the plantings. Mr. Utt replied the cost would be approximately $15,000 for the
trees.
There being no further discussion, Mayor Clark moved on to the Industrial Revitalization Fund grant
application.
c. Industrial Revitalization Fund (IRF) grant application
Mrs. Catherine Van Noy told Council the grant was offered annually through the Department of Housing and
Community Development (DHCD) and was intended to move unused blighted structures that might be in
Page 6 of 17/February 19, 2019
downtowns into use. Applicants could get up to $600,000 which was a grant if the applicant was a locality.
Non -profits and other entities may apply, but the Town could convert the grant into a loan.
Mrs. Van Noy noted that this grant had been watched relative to 67 & 69 W. Main Street for several years.
Thirty percent of the grant score involved readiness and in the past it was felt that the Town had a proposal
that was not quite there. She said that she was confident after reviewing the proposal for a couple of years that
the Town was in a very good competitive position. She added that she would like to submit the grant. The
match for the grant was a one to one with a proposed grant request of $550,000 for a $1.1 million rehabilitation
of the property. The match would be provided by the developer with the Town then doing a loan for $550,000
to the developer. This particular grant she noted was highly competitive but the Town had been encouraged to
submit this year.
Mr. Utt said the intent was to apply for the grant and in essence expand the UDAG fund by $550,000. The
match was provided by private funds so there would be no funds from the Town. He thought that the
application could be geared so that the loan payments would go back to the Town to be loaned out again.
Basically Mr. Utt said the Town was looking to add to the UDAG fund.
Mr. Goodman asked what were the "strings" involved in loaning the money back out and was it subject to
DHCD restrictions. Mr. Utt replied that it would constitute a third loan fund in addition to the UDAG and RBEG
funds. Mayor Clark said it worked similarly (to the UDAG). When the money was loaned out he said, the
payments that returned went into that fund to build up and be loaned out again. Mr. Goodman felt it was
important to recognize that it would have a separate set of "strings" to be adhered to.
He then asked if DHCD could change those rules after the funds were loaned. Mrs. Van Noy responded no,
that there was a contract. Mr. Goodman ventured that if a loan was made and was paid back in ten years,
would the rules at that time be different, Mrs. Van Noy said she did not know.
Mrs. Van Noy said the grant was due March 1s'. Following some conversations, the Town would see if it made
it to the next round of decisions, followed by a live negotiation process with DHCD to see what the project
would look like. The deadline for closing the agreement would be January 1, 2020.
Mr. Goodman noted the amount to the developer would be $518,200 since $31,800 would come from the
Downtown CDBG fund. Mrs. Van Noy said he was correct. Mr. Goodman then asked if using the CDBG money
was taking anything away from what was planned to be done. Mrs. Van Noy said it would not since the funds
were already committed.
Mr. Dawson asked if there was a requirement that the match money be available, or the developer show they
had approval for the loan. Mrs. Van Noy responded that was part of the grant application documents which
required a letter from the developer committing to the loan. A meeting was scheduled Thursday morning she
added to finalize that. Mrs. Van Noy mentioned the letter might be applied to the qualification for readiness.
Mr. Goodman asked about inquiring to other communities to see what such a letter would look like. Mrs. Van
Noy said she would look into it. At this point she said a resolution was needed from Council which was a
requirement of the application.
Mr. Goodman moved that Council adopt Resolution 2019-05, Resolution Authorizing a Grant Application to the
Industrial Revitalization Fund, as presented. Mr. Clontz seconded the motion which was approved by the
following roll call vote:
Lane R. Penn
-Aye
Joseph K. Goodman
-Aye
Brooks R. Dawson
-Aye
G. Tyler Clontz
-Aye
Gregory C. East
-Aye
James A. Radcliffe
-Aye
Council then considered a grant application for a forensic nurse facility.
Page 7 of 17/February 19, 2019
d. DCJS Grant Application Partnership for Forensic Nurse Facility
Ms. April Bennett, RN, Forensic Nurse Examiner, presented the proposal for a grant application to Council.
She said that they were looking at a Federal grant for victims of violence under the Victims of Crime Act
(VOCA). The proposal was to start a program with Giles Co., who agreed to lead the program by covering the
costs of the first year of the program. A satellite program would then be placed in Pulaski in the grant's second
year.
The primary goal was to support delivery of direct services to victims of violence. Direct services meant the
program personnel would be working "hands on" with victims of violent acts. The program would work with
victims of violent acts such as sexual assault, child abuse, child neglect, elder abuse, assault and battery, and
any form of violence that affected the patients they would be seeing.
Available grant funds totaled $750,000 in one category and $250,000 in another. Both categories required
matches, approximately 20%; $150,000 for the first grant and $50,000 for the second one. The proposal was
that Giles would apply for the entire $1 million grant each year for two years. Giles would cover the match in
the first year, then Pulaski would contribute $100,000 towards the match in the second year along with Giles'
contribution of $100,000. Matches could consist of improvements to the building housing the program within
reason. The location suggested by Mr. Utt (72 East Main Street), she continued needed a new roof, which
would qualify as a match. Mr. Utt added that the building in question had been donated to the Redevelopment
and Housing Authority. Ms. Bennett added other things (e.g. volunteer labor, equipment) could qualify as a
match.
Ms. Bennett said the intent was to have enough nurses to cover the facility 24/7; although at the beginning that
would not be possible due to the need for training and orientation to get them qualified to see patients.
Procedures involved the collection of medical evidence and performing medical exams outside of the hospital.
Clients having emergency needs would be referred to the hospital. Another goal was that hospitals would
partner with the facility in sending patients to the center who arrive at the hospital or would receive patients
from the center who require immediate care.
Referring to handouts given to the Council, Ms. Bennett said many victims do not go in because they do not
want to report to law enforcement and believe that is the only way they can be seen. Victims would receive
compassionate care following assault or abuse and would get support and referrals for care beyond what the
facility could provide. Evidence would also be gathered for law enforcement for prosecution.
Ms. Bennett, distributing another handout detailing crimes, said the facility was needed here due to the number
of victims that did and did not report to law enforcement. It was estimated that only about 20% of sexual
assault victims reported to law enforcement. For the Town of Pulaski in 2018, there was a total of 336 persons
possibly requiring forensic services. In the County, a total of 558 persons were listed which did not include
child abuse victims.
Mr. East asked if it was safe to assume that the County would use these services as well. Ms. Bennett replied
that it was and that it was hoped to get a partnership with the County and Dublin. In addition the facility might
be used by other counties outside Pulaski, for example Wythe County, which did not have forensic services.
Ms. Bennett also reviewed data on referrals from Social Services on child abuse and neglect. Noting that
getting evidence from children was hard, Ms. Bennett suggested that the forensic nurse program would be of
assistance. In addition, there were over 100 cases of elder abuse in the Town and County.
Ms. Bennett said the grant was for two years starting July 1, 2019. The Town would become a participant
starting on July 1, 2020. Referring again to the handout, Ms. Bennett noted that there was an estimated $5.2
billion in direct medical cost and lost productivity from employee absences from work in just in Tennessee. The
amount included only medical costs and did not include any costs associated with jail, courts, etc.
Page 8 of 17/February 19, 2019
Mr. Goodman asked about where funding for continuing years would come from. Ms. Bennett said
sustainability had to be addressed in the grant application in case funds went away. Since grant funding
typically continued, the hope was that in two years, there would be another application. For patients who had
evidence collected, Virginia Victims Fund could be billed (only for evidence collected) along with their federal
insurances such as Medicare and Medicaid. There were Ms. Bennett said two years to search for new funding
and grant sources to continue the program.
Mr. Dawson asked if Radford was the closest place that did the same. Ms. Bennet replied that New River
Valley Medical Center was the closest center with the next locations in Roanoke and Lynchburg. There were
no facilities from the NRV on through Southwest Virginia.
Mr. Utt commented on the possibilities for the match noting he had shared his concerns about the match. He
felt confident that he could document 50% with the building, the up fits, and a potential vehicle. However, he
challenged the group for the other 50% either thorough partnerships with the hospital, Social Services or by
other means. Mr. East asked if the amount in question was 50% of the $100,000 to which Mr. Utt replied that it
was. Mr. Utt wanted to make sure that it was understood that the Town was not going to come up with $50,000
cash today. He challenged the group as part of their commitment to the project, to come up with the additional
$50,000 through partnerships or other means to make sure the Town would not have to commit additional
cash. The Town's portion of the match would be the contribution of the building and work on the building to
make it ready.
Mr. Dawson asked if the County had been engaged in the conversation. Ms. Bennett replied that it had not. Mr.
Utt added that the Town was engaged because of Ms. Bennett's relationship with the Town's Police
Department.
Mr. Radcliffe asked if the program could also accommodate a nurse practitioner for Town employees in a
partnership. Mr. Goodman expressed concern over privacy issues and victims not using the service because of
the presence of Town employees. He also mentioned the possibility of privacy issues involving HIPAA (Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996). Ms. Bennett said she had considered doing something
with Social Services but that there were a lot of people who did not want to go through those entities which
would keep a lot of victims from coming forward.
Mr. Dawson asked if the building itself was suitable. Mr. Utt said that if the program grew it would require more
space, but that it was a good size to get started in and besides, was free. The roof estimate was slightly less
than $20,000 for a full replacement. Mr. Utt ventured that the building needed cleaning, new carpet and
painting. Ms. Hair said that some of the drywall had to come out and that she had noticed the walls were
covered by mold. Ms. Bennett noted that mold abatement was covered by the grant. Mr. Radcliffe asked about
using the former Safe Haven/School Board building on Third St. N.W. Ms. Bennett said she had been advised
that the structure was not habitable and possibly had structural issues.
Mr. Rygas asked if the grant would block having an alternative use. It seemed that a place could be structured
to give the anonymity needed. Safe Haven he mentioned was structured so that the parties would not meet.
The main concern would be that the grant would prohibit an alternative use. Ms. Bennett replied it wasn't
prohibited, but it would reduce the match. If the building was not used 100% for the victim service, then only a
percentage of rent could be claimed for the grant, thereby decreasing the match.
For the match, Mr. Utt said he preferred to use the value of the building and the up fits which would give more
"bang for the buck. Mr. Goodman thought the cost could be spread over a couple of years. Mr. Utt said that
work could not start until the grant year, so everything could be lined out or the refits done before the grant
year to charge a higher rent for the value of the building.
Mr. Goodman asked if it was possible to get Ms. Bennett on the Board of Supervisors agenda for the coming
Monday night. He also asked about contacting the hospital's CEO. Mr. Utt suggested that the County could
use inmate labor to clean the building out to get it ready for occupancy.
Page 9 of 17/February 19, 2019
Mr. East asked who sought out these services in the event of an incident. Ms. Bennett said some walked in off
the street to the ER, others contacted the Women's Resource Center, and some were brought in by law
enforcement or Social Services. There were she said multiple ways to access the service. Mr. East then asked
if there were capacity issues at the other facilities. Ms. Bennett said some of the issues were with patients not
wanting to go to a particular hospital. Capacity she ventured did not seem to be the issue but driving time,
transportation and hospital preference were. Patients brought in by Social Services did not have a choice of
hospitals but went to assigned hospitals. An advantage to keeping the service local was that law enforcement,
who could spend several hours with a patient, would not have to leave their jurisdiction and could leave and
come back later.
Mr. East asked about program sustainability beyond grants and inquired if there were no opportunities for
reimbursement for seeing a patient. Ms. Bennett said the grant did not allow patients to be billed for the
service. However, Federal insurance (Medicare & Medicaid) and the Virginia Victims Fund could be billed. If
the grant ceased, then insurances, etc. could be billed. Mr. East said his concern with sustainability was that
the program required a sizeable investment for a two year period for what sounded to him was an excellent
service. Ms. Bennett said that there were some "stand alone" clinics that did get buy -in from local hospitals.
Some of these arrangements involved hospital contributions to a clinic, where clinic personnel would come to
the hospital to see patients. Another arrangement would have patients, if they were stable, referred to the clinic
by the hospital which would require the hospital's agreement. The local hospital she added was not receptive
to having a program at the hospital at this time. Mr. Goodman asked about the length of time to see patients.
Ms. Bennett responded it could take from two to eight hours depending upon what the patient is there for.
Mr. Utt said that he felt that $50,000 was a feasible amount some to come up with in a 12 month period or with
in-kind services as suggested by Mr. East. Mr. Goodman wanted to see the County have some degree of buy -
in and learn what their long term funding thoughts would be. Mr. Utt responded that there could be some in-
kind contributions from Social Services that would count as a County contribution.
After a short discussion on getting the matter to the Board of Supervisors, Mrs. Van Noy said the grant
required some sort of confirmation of a commitment from participants. Ms. Bennett added that she confirmed
earlier that day that nothing more formal that a cooperative agreement was sufficient. Mr. Goodman added that
he wanted to get some commitment from the County.
After more discussion, Mr. East suggested Council have a called meeting on the matter. Council then decided
to have a called meeting on Wednesday, February 2711 at 6:00 p.m.
Discussion having concluded, Council moved on to the special exception request from Pulaski Medical.
9. Finance
No issues were scheduled for consideration.
10. Legislative
a. Special Exception Request -Pulaski Medical, Inc.
Mr. Utt noted that Council had been presented with quite a bit of information from the presentation (Pulaski
Medical) and felt it was appropriate, with Council's agreement, for him to consult with Mr. Rygas. While there
was a recommendation from the Planning Commission to deny the request, he wanted to discuss with Mr.
Rygas, what was brought up in the presentation before Council took action. He recommended that the matter
be tabled until the March 5th Council meeting.
Mr. Goodman said that given the packet of information from and the comments made by Pulaski Medical's
attorney, he would like to hear Mr. Rygas' thoughts before Council acted. Mr. Goodman then moved to table
the request from Pulaski Medical, L.L.C. until a future meeting. Mr. East seconded the motion which was
approved on the following roll call vote:
Page 10 of 17/February 19, 2019
Lane R. Penn -Aye Joseph K. Goodman -Aye
Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye
Gregory C. East -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye
Council next considered an update on the blight elimination incentive.
b. Blight Elimination Incentive update.
Ms. Hair said she had previously presented to Council language for an ordinance update to the Town Code
concerning incentives for blight abatement. She added that she was requesting to set the public hearing for
March 5, 2019.
Mr. Dawson asked how much of the proposed ordinance already existed. Ms. Hair, referring to the Council
packet, replied that underlined portions were new. She then reviewed various changes throughout the
proposed ordinance. Mr. Dawson asked about the review process for applicants to be considered for the
$5,000 incentive. Ms. Hair responded there would be an application process with evaluation and determination
done by the staff. She added that either she or Mr. Utt would have the final approval. Mr. Dawson asked about
what was considered appropriate use of the money. Mr. Utt said the $5,000 was to be applied towards
demolition. The expense for 95% of demolitions he added usually exceeded that amount. Mr. Dawson then
asked if the money would be used for a structure that stayed. Mr. Utt said the money was intended to be used
to increase the taxable value of the property. This tied it back to State Code which provided that revitalization
incentives to show an improvement to the taxable value.
Mr. Goodman asked if there was a "claw back" provision in the event of failure to perform the agreement. Ms.
Hair said that would be in the agreement and the application process. Mr. Utt suggested that a performance
agreement could be used or a lien placed on the property. In case the full amount of the incentive was not
used, Ms. Hair stated that only the amount used would be paid and that would be determined by actual
invoices to prevent abuse.
Following additional discussion on the matter, Mr. Goodman moved to schedule a public hearing on March 5th
for the blight elimination ordinance for Chapter 38 "Environment" in the Town Code. Mr. Radcliffe seconded the
motion which was approved on the following roll call vote:
Lane R. Penn -Aye Joseph K. Goodman -Aye
Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye
Gregory C. East -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye
Council next considered scheduling a rezoning request.
c. Rezoning Request -37 South Washington Avenue
Ms. Hair notified Council that the Town had received a rezoning request for 37 South Washington Avenue for
multifamily residential use. Staff requested that Council set the date of the Planning Commission public hearing
for March 11, 2019 and the Town Council public hearing on April 2, 2019. Mr. Utt noted the structure in
question was located directly behind the VFW and was a multi -family house whose grandfathering had expired.
Mr. Goodman said there was a question of reconsidering allowing homes that lost their multi -family use to
return to a multi -family use. He stated that he was not in favor of it since he felt that multi -family homes were
responsible for the growth of blight. Ms. Hair said the applicant was only asking for the rezoning. The request
met the Comprehensive Plan for multi -family use therefore it would be up to the Planning Commission and
Town Council to determine if the proposed R-3 designation was appropriate. Mr. East added there should be
some reference to the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Hair responded that the staff report noted that the
Comprehensive Plan was met with respect to multi -family use.
Page 11 of 17/February 19, 2019
Mr. Clontz asked if the applicant owned other similar properties. Ms. Hair said she was not sure and that the
Town did not ask those questions as part of the rezoning. Council she added could ask those questions during
the hearing on the rezoning.
Mr. Utt said the request would be to schedule the public hearings. Following the discussion, Mr. Goodman
moved to schedule the public hearings as requested. The motion was seconded by Mr. Clontz and approved
on the following roll call vote:
Lane R. Penn -Aye Joseph K. Goodman -Aye
Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye
Gregory C. East -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye
Council then proceeded to discuss scooters and mopeds.
11. Public Utilities
There were no items under this topic scheduled for discussion.
12. Safety
a. Discussion Concerning Scooters/Mopeds
Mr. Radcliffe told Council that he had received complaints from citizens concerning noise from scooters using
cut mufflers. He wanted the matter referred to the Police Department and asked that if there was anything the
Town could do to help the situation.
Mr. Utt said he discussed the matter with Chief Roche, who had researched the State Code and pulled those
provisions pertaining to mopeds for the packet. Under Sec. 15.2-919 of the State Code, Mr. Utt told Council
that the Town could pass an ordinance regulating muffler noise. He added that Chief Roche had strongly
recommended the ordinance as a minimum action to take. Mr. Utt also told Council that there were additional
provisions under the state code concerning mopeds, skateboards, etc. under which persons could be charged.
Mr. Goodman asked about what speed zones were mopeds allowed to travel. He mentioned that he got a lot of
complaints of commuters being held up by scooters, which backed up traffic and created serious safety issues.
Mr. East asked what staff was requesting. Mr. Utt replied authorization to schedule a public hearing to consider
regulation of motorcycle, moped, motorized skateboard, or foot scooter noise relative to muffler noise. Council
then discussed the current noise ordinance and how it could be applied to the scooter complaints. Mr. Utt
suggested that Council might want to wait and get some feedback from the Police Department before
scheduling a public hearing. Mr. Radcliffe and Mr. Goodman agreed. Mr. Goodman noted that the ordinance
had to be carefully crafted given the number of motorcycle riders who could be hurt by such an ordinance. Mr.
Utt said he would have a report from the Police Department for the March work session.
Council next considered the amended organizational chart.
13. Human Resources
a. Amended Organizational Chart
Mr. Utt noted that he prepared seven charts to summarize the Town organization as a whole and each
individual department so Council could determine where the leadership roles were. The charts also showed the
redistribution of duties from Parks and Facilities. He noted that under General Properties there were two crew
leaders, one for facility maintenance and one for park maintenance. He asked Council if they had any
questions or comments.
Mr. Goodman had a concern with Human Resources placement under Finance. Mr. Utt said the position was
formerly known as payroll clerk but was changed to Human Resources when Ms. Palmer was hired. Mrs.
Bishop added that Ms. Palmer went from Payroll Clerk to Payroll/HR. Mr. Goodman suggested that given its
importance, a dotted line from HR should not go to the Deputy Town Manager but to the Manager.
Page 12 of 17/February 19, 2019
Mr. East challenged Council to consider the chart which pictured the current state of the Town and asked was
it the way the Town wanted to be as it moved forward. He asked if the chart were done for a future state, how
would it be. He added that in his experience, the Human Resource Manager reported to the chief
administrator.
Mr. East then discussed the position of a community development director, whose primary job would be
recruiting business given the importance of revenue to the Town. In looking at the current chart, he ventured
that there was a lot there that had nothing to do with community development (e.g. the Senior Center and the
Ratcliffe Museum). While both were of importance to parts of the community, they were semi -autonomous. He
asked if they needed to be under community development.
In moving forward he continued, if the future state of the Town was to be understood, an understanding of the
responsibilities assigned to each area was needed. Department Heads, in addressing efficiency, would need to
identify where they wanted to be, to benefit the future growth of the Town.
Mr. Dawson noted that the Marketplace and Pulaski on Main started out together but now were separate. Was
that intentional he asked or was it where the Town was currently at, but not where the Town wanted to be. He
asked if this was this appropriate use of individual's time or should duties be changed so they would work on
what Council wants them to work on.
Mr. Utt responded that his original vision was for the community development department to be focused on the
quality of life for citizens, whether it was jobs, restaurants or things to do after work.
Mr. East said his concern was that there was no focus on growing the community. Programs, such as the
Senior Center, museum and Marketplace, would take away from community development resulting in loss of
focus. Focus was needed to get the Town where it needed to go. Mr. Goodman said it needed to be
determined what the focus would be for community development. He added that his concept was not just
growth but retention also. A lot of this he noted fell on Ms. Hair and thought there was a staffing shortage for
someone more involved with retention.
Mr. Utt suggested as part of the budget, to have a vision proposed to Council for the community development
department and to move that forward with more focal points (e.g. outreach) that Council could see what was
happening. If more staff was necessary, that would be part of the budget conversations.
Mr. East said the Marketplace and the Ratcliff were important, but the growth side of the community was where
the focus should be along with active recruitment. The only way to achieve this he continued was to have a
stated goal and a strong focus. Mr. Goodman said that Council had requested a recruitment plan that had not
come about. As part of the budget plan, Mr. Goodman envisioned, a year from now, a report on recruitment,
etc. being presented to the Council. Mr. Clontz suggested that Onward NRV could be of assistance and had
resources and contacts for recruitment.
Mr. Utt said his conversations with Mr. Solomon at the County indicated that they were interested in
recruitment and had suggested a partnership between Town and County. Ms. Hair mentioned there was data
available to begin and develop a recruitment plan.
There being no additional discussion, Council next considered the Compensation Study Implementation
Strategy.
b. Compensation Study Implementation Strategy -Phase 3
Mr. Utt said, Phase 3 implementation would cost of $120,000 with the current staffing. In looking at the original
study, the cost was estimated at over $700,000, with no allowance made for retirements or savings from
replacements. Mr. Utt emphasized that the actual cost had not been close to the original estimate.
Page 13 of 17/February 19, 2019
The proposed timeline for the study he continued, was intended to be implemented on January 151 at mid -fiscal
year. Looking at mid -fiscal year, the cost he said would be $60,000. Positive factors for the upcoming budget
were approximately $150,000 to $175,000 in new revenues. Sources of the new revenue included
approximately $70,000 from the General Fund; approximately $12,000 to $70,000 from the Water Fund, which
was dependent upon developments with the rates; and approximately $65,000 to $120,000 in the Sewer Fund.
The overall budget Mr. Utt continued, was looking quite positive because of no increases in health insurance.
The savings could be used as one time buys for the CIP or for investments. He added that there would be
some recommendations regarding that in the budget process. Mr. Utt said he expected to have a final,
approvable budget by mid-April because of the extensive groundwork that had been done.
Mr. Penn asked where the rebate from Pepper's Ferry would go. Mr. Utt responded it was not really a rebate
and that the year was much wetter than anticipated. What would prove a problem was that Pepper's Ferry
worked on a five year moving average of flows, which led him to expect a drastic increase in costs next year
due to the heavy rain fall this year that would raise the moving average. Due to a decrease in revenues, the
Town would not net very much.
Mr. Goodman asked what portion of the $120,000 for pay raises came out of the Water and Sewer funds vs.
the General Fund. Mr. Utt responded that he could determine that using a summary of employees from
documentation used in earlier discussions on the Compensation Study. Mr. Goodman ventured that if the
$60,000 was covered for this fiscal year, it still left an appropriation of $60,000 needed for the next fiscal year.
While not all of the $120,000 was General Fund, he ventured that taking one-third of that amount would leave
$80,000, which left a $10,000 needed for the next fiscal year.
Mr. Utt responded that the Town did not have the final numbers for VDOT or 599 funding. A 1% increase in
VDOT funding, which he hoped for, would be $25,000 which would cover the street employees. Mr. Goodman
said in looking at the raises over the long term, he wanted Council members to be comfortable with the raises
without having concerns where funding would come from in the long run. Mr. Dawson mentioned that the
increases in Water and Sewer were intended to allow work to be done, which he felt should not be included in
discussions, since those funds were earmarked for another purpose.
Mr. Utt responded that the reason he did the salary cost ranges for utilities was to allow for no increases in
rates and increases in rates. Mr. Goodman noted there was over $200,000 in increases and ventured if
salaries accounted for $40,000, that left approximately $160,000 remaining. Mr. Utt felt that the cost of the rate
increases would be tied back to one-time CIP investments and costs of water usage. He agreed that increases
in rates should lead to an increase in reserves and capital improvements, which could be discussed at the
March 12th budget meeting.
Mr. East asked if the March 12th meeting would be a good time to discuss the vision for the Community
Development. Mr. Utt asked if that could be put on the work session for March 191h since some preparations
had already been made for the meeting on the 12th. Mr. East agreed noting that Community Development
would be part of the overall conversation.
Discussion having concluded, Council moved on to the Round Table Discussion.
14. Round Table Discussion
Mr. Penn asked if the contractors working at the intersection of Jefferson and Main had permission to dump
gravel and sand on the street. Mr. Pedigo replied that they did and Mr. Utt observed the clean-up was not yet
finished. Mr. Penn expressed concern that the sand would get into the down -well. Mr. Pedigo said he would
have it checked.
Mr. Dawson said he felt that conversations on the transportation situation in the Town should be continued for
change and improvement in meeting the service level the citizens needed. He added there was a gap in
Page 14 of 17/February 19, 2019
transportation, due to changes and that the Town needed to find a solution. Buses were running empty, yet
prominent areas where citizens lived were not being served. Mr. Dawson said the Town needed to ask for
better service for the citizens and assist in finding a solution. Another issue he mentioned was the lack of cab
service which contributed to a gap in service. Mr. Dawson suggested looking at how the present service could
address the issue.
From a business standpoint, Mr. Dawson related that riders had told him it was easier to get to Dublin than wait
to get to shopping in Town. Mr. Goodman, noting that cab services left partially on account of the bus service,
suggested that existing cab companies could be contacted to see if they would open up here. Mr. Penn said he
had talked to one operator who said he would not do it because there was too much hassle. As an example,
Mr. Penn mentioned the inspections required by the state and the Police Department. Mr. Goodman suggested
that the Town talk to the operator to see if there were problems the Town could resolve before recruiting a cab
company. Mr. Dawson said he would like to see greater effort from PAT to solve the issue. Ms. Hair said that
they were working to resolve the issue. She offered to take suggestions to PAT officials and mentioned that
PAT was fortunate not to have lost their funding for their previous mode of operation.
Mr. Dawson noting the drop in ridership, asked where the riders were going now. Mr. Penn noticed that the
buses ran empty on certain routes. Mr. Radcliffe questioned the dispatching of the buses and felt that a
discussion should be done with PAT. Mr. Penn added that some citizens could not get to the bus stops. Mr. Utt
suggested that there were many ways that citizens could qualify for transport.
Mr. Dawson felt there was a gap in making new businesses feel welcome to the community. He asked how
prepared the Town was to assist new businesses. Ms. Hair said that she had learned techniques from another
community and thought of getting in touch with the Chamber of Commerce to build the effort.
Mr. East, mentioning the new social media assistant, asked for a report on current activity on social media. Ms.
Hair said that information was included in the monthly report. Mr. Utt noted that since the assistant started,
social media use had shown marked increases. Ms. Hair said she could get with the assistant to get data on
usage.
Mr. East also asked for information on Vuhvanagon. Mr. Rygas said the Town was waiting to get a response
on the Fire Marshal's inquires. He reported that there was still no service on the zoning matter and that the
Town had issued a notice stating Vuhvanagon needed to get into compliance with the Fire Code. Unlike the
zoning matter, the Fire Code letter did not need to be served. The letter had been mailed as a certified letter to
five addresses as well as emailed. At this point, the goal was to open the conversation and get the matter
moving. The owner, Mr. Rygas added, had not been seen.
Mr. East stated that at a previous meeting, Mr. Radcliffe had mentioned vehicles abandoned on the side of the
road and asked if the Town had recourse. Mr. Rygas said he would look into it.
Mr. Goodman thanked Public Works for their recent efforts and that he appreciated it.
Mr. Clontz had no comment.
Mr. Radcliffe said he had received a complaint that PAT did not stop at the Daily Bread. Mr. Utt said PAT
stopped at Community Action and that he had asked them to stop on the corner. Mr. Radcliffe then asked for a
map, showing PAT's stops and the time when the stop would be made. Mr. Utt suggested the Town could
erect maps at each stop. Mr. Radcliffe added that he appreciated the work that was being done.
Mayor Clark then moved on to the Closed Sessions.
15. Closed Session
Mayor Clark then asked for a motion to go into Closed Session for five items as follows: one item under Va.
Code 2.2-3711 (a) 1- a personnel matter regarding early retirement incentive; and four items under Va. Code
Page 15 of 17/February 19, 2019
1
2.2-3711 (a) 8-consulation with legal counsel concerning a UDAG loan application; an Information Technology
maintenance agreement; a boundary adjustment request; and an Americans with Disabilities Act
accommodation request.
Mr. Goodman moved to enter Closed Session. The motion was seconded by Mr. Clontz and approved on the
following roll call vote:
Lane R. Penn -Aye Joseph K. Goodman -Aye
Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye
Gregory C. East -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye
Council entered Closed Session at 7:48 p.m. and returned from Closed Session at 8:48 p.m.
Mayor Clark asked for a certification motion that the Council discussed only those five items for which they
went into Closed Session: one item under Va. Code 2.2-3711 (a) 1- a personnel matter regarding early
retirement incentives and four items under Va. Code 2.2-3711 (a) 8-consulation with legal counsel regarding a
UDAG loan application, an information technology maintenance agreement, a boundary adjustment request;
and an Americans with Disabilities Act accommodation request.
Mr. Goodman made the certification motion which was seconded by Mr. Clontz and approved on the following
roll call vote:
Lane R. Penn -Aye Joseph K. Goodman -Aye
Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye
Gregory C. East -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye
Mayor Clark then requested motions from the Council.
Mr. Goodman moved to approve the retirement agreement and general release and authorize the Town
Manager to execute it if the other party agrees. The motion was seconded by Mr. Penn and approved by the
following roll call vote:
Lane R. Penn -Aye Joseph K. Goodman -Aye
Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye
Gregory C. East -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye
Following the vote Mr. Goodman moved to approve the UDAG loan to Foxhound Food Truck and S & J Cafe,
L.L.C. in the amount of $30,000 with a repayment term of seven years at an interest rate of 2.5% conditioned
on clear title and a first e loan. lien on the The motion wroperty and as seconded by Mr. Penn and approved oe the Town Manager oexecute any n the following rocall pertinent
documents related to the loan.
vote:
Lane R. Penn -Aye
Brooks R. Dawson -Aye
Gregory C. East -Aye
Joseph K. Goodman -Aye
G. Tyler Clontz -Aye
James A. Radcliffe -Aye
Mr. Goodman then moved to approve the memorandum of understanding between the Pulaski County Board
of Supervisors and the Town of Pulaski for information technology services with the understanding that a
service level agreement must be agreed upon within the next 90 days. The motion was seconded by Mr. Penn
and approved on the following roll call vote:
Lane R. Penn -Aye
Brooks R. Dawson -Aye
Gregory C. East -Aye
Joseph K. Goodman -Aye
G. Tyler Clontz -Aye
James A. Radcliffe -Aye
Page 16 of 17/February 19, 2019
Mr. Goodman moved to approve the proposal for fiscal impact analysis of boundary adjustment areas for the
Town of Pulaski and the County of Pulaski and hereby move that we transfer up to $30,000 of funds from
reserves to pay for said process dependent upon final review and approval from the Town Attorney and
authorize the Town Manager to execute any necessary documents. The motion was seconded by Mr. Penn
and approved on the following roll call vote:
Lane R. Penn
-Aye
Joseph K. Goodman
-Aye
Brooks R. Dawson
-Aye
G. Tyler Clontz
-Aye
Gregory C. East
-Aye
James A. Radcliffe
-Aye
16. Future Meetinqs and Adjournment
Mayor Clark reminded Council of the Council meeting/legislative session scheduled for March 5th and a
budget work session on March 12th. Mr. Goodman also reminded Council of a called meeting on February 27tH
at 6:00 p.m. There being no further business, Mr. Goodman moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Clontz and approved by unanimous voice vote of Council at 8:50 p.m.
Approve
avid L. Clark
Mayor
ATTEST:
4,/�, '
David N. Quesenberry
Clerk of Council
7
L
Page 17 of 17/February 19, 2019