HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-06-201
. - ' f
Minutes of the Pulaski Town Council meeting held at 7:00 p.m., May 6, 2020 in the Council Chambers of the
Town Municipal Building at 42 First Street, N.W. A live cast of the proceedings through the Town's Facebook
page and Zoom digital audio/video communication software was made available to on-line viewers.
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
Staff Attending
On -Line
Chief Robbie Kiser, P.F.D.
Rebecca Leeper, Finance Director
Bill Pedigo, Town Engineer
David Quesenberry, Clerk Council
Chief Gary Roche, P.P.D.
1. Call to Order
Mayor Clark called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. Pledge of Allegiance
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Dawson.
3. Invocation
The Invocation was given by Councilman East.
4. Roll Call
After the Invocation, the roll was called. Present were: Mr. Clontz, Mayor Clark, Mr. Dawson, Mr. East, Mr.
Goodman, Mr. Penn and Mr. Radcliffe. Since all Council members were in attendance, a quorum was present
to conduct business.
5. Modification of the Agenda
Mayor Clark asked for a motion to modify the agenda to add the following items to Item 7, "Presentations":
Item 7a, Resolution 2020-13 in Recognition of National Hospitals Week; Item 7b, Resolution 2020-14 in
Recognition of National Nurses Week; and Item 7c., Resolution 2020-15, Resolution Urging Governor
Northam to Reopen the Commonwealth Regionally.
Mr. Goodman to modify the agenda. 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
Page 1 of 12/May 6, 2020
6. Recoanition of Guests and Visitors
Mayor Clark extended a welcome to those in attendance. Council then considered three resolutions under
"Presentations" for National Hospital Week; National Nurses Week; and, a resolution calling for the reopening I of Virginia.
7. Presentations
a. Resolution 2020-13, Resolution for National Hospitals Week
Mayor Clark then read Resolution 2020-13, A Resolution Recognizing LewisGale Hospital -Pulaski and its
Employees in Observance of National Hospital Week into the record as follows:
WHEREAS, National Hospital Week is being observed from May 10th through May 16th; an observance
established in 1953, and,
WHEREAS, a hospital is more than a place where people go to heal, it is a part of the community that
fosters health and represents hope. From providing treatment and comfort to the sick, to welcoming new
life into the world, hospitals are central to a healthy and optimistic community. It is a celebration of the
history, technology and dedicated professionals that make our facility a source of confidence, care and
pride; and,
WHEREAS, LewisGale-Pulaski hospital, fulfills this important role in the Town of Pulaski through its
support of community health, primary care and specialized treatment administered by a core of trained
and dedicated physicians, nurses, therapists, engineers, food service workers, volunteers, administrators
and other workers; and,
WHEREAS, LewisGale-Pulaski is the cornerstone for health services and specialized treatment for the
Town of Pulaski and the surrounding area; and,
WHEREAS, the facility has expanded its operations and treatment capacity to include a state of the art
cancer treatment facility, a new center for psychological services, and a wide variety of community
outreach programs to enhance the health and well-being of our community along with a highly
professional and motivated staff whose services and work at all levels provide the high level of care and
treatment to the members of our community, and,
WHEREAS, LewisGale-Pulaski and its staff are the first line of our community's defense against the
current viral pandemic, placing themselves in harm's way to protect and provide care for our community,
NOW THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Pulaski, Virginia, sitting in
regular session this 6th day of May 2020, that in observance of National Hospital Week, the Council
hereby recognizes and commends Lewis Gale -Pulaski hospital and its staff for its success and hard work
in providing the high quality of care for the Town and surrounding area.
FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council extends its heartfelt thanks to the staff of LewisGale-
Pulaski for their professionalism, service and sacrifice in protecting our community from the COVID-19
viral pandemic and ministering to those who may be affected by this disease.
This resolution is effective upon adoption and is hereby adopted this 6th day of May 2020 by the duly
recorded vote of the Town Council of the Town of Pulaski, Virginia as set forth below.
Following the reading of the resolution, Mayor Clark called for a motion. Mr. Goodman moved to approve
Resolution 2020-13. The motion was seconded by Mr. Radcliffe 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
b. Resolution 2020-14, Resolution for National Nurses Week
Mayor Clark then read Resolution 2020-14, A Resolution Recognizing the Service of Local Nurses in
Observance of National Nurses Week into the record as follows:
Page 2 of 12/May 6, 2020
WHEREAS, since 1991, National Nurses Week is celebrated annually from May 6th through May 121h, the
birthday of Florence Nightingale, the founder of modern nursing, and,
WHEREAS, nursing comprises the largest component of the healthcare workforce with over 4.0 million
registered nurses nationwide; and,
WHEREAS, nurses are the primary providers of hospital patient care and deliver most of the nation's
long-term care: and,
WHEREAS, with more than three times as many registered nurses than physicians, nurses deliver an
extended array of healthcare services including primary and preventative care by nurse practitioners,
obstetrical services by certified nurse -midwives and nurse anesthetists, as well as care in cardiac,
oncology, neonatal, neurological and other advanced clinical specialties; and,
WHEREAS, nurses most often must provide their care under adverse circumstances caused by high
stress, heavy patient load and long hours which place the life and health of nurses at risk, and,
WHEREAS, nurses touch the lives of all of us from birth to the end of life;
NOW, THEREFORE be it RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Pulaski, Virginia, sitting in
regular session this 6th day of May 2020, that the Town Council, in recognition of National Nurses Week,
does hereby commend and express its thanks and gratitude to the members of the nursing community of
the New River Valley and commends them for their dedication to their patient's welfare and perseverance
in the face of challenges in providing for the comfort and care of their patients.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Council wishes to remember and recognize those nurses, who in
the course of their duties, have lost their lives as a result of the current viral pandemic, giving their last full
measure to their patients, their duties and their profession.
This resolution is effective upon adoption and is hereby adopted this 6th day of May 2020 by the duly
recorded vote of the Town Council of the Town of Pulaski, Virginia as set forth below:
After the reading of the resolution, Mayor Clark called for a motion. Mr. East moved to approve Resolution
2020-14. His 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
c. Resolution 2020-15, Resolution to Reopen Virginia
Mr. Utt thanked Council for adding the three additional resolutions to the agenda and noted that this
resolution was in a different vein from the others. He informed Council that the managers from the New River
Valley had discussed at their Monday meeting of putting together a resolution of support encouraging the
Governor to reopen Virginia again. Mr. Utt said he expected that every locality in the New River Valley would
consider some form of this resolution.
Mr. Utt said that the resolution summarized a timeline of actions involving the pandemic as well as the
number of cases in the area. Mr. McKlarney of Giles County had compiled data which showed that in a line
west of Bath County, that there were only approximately 200 cases out of a population of one million. The
hope was that the reopening would be conducted in an orderly, not haphazard manner.
Mr. Radcliffe strongly moved to accept Resolution 2020-15. The motion was seconded by Mr. East and
approved on the following roll call vote:
Page 3 of 12/May 6, 2020
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 action on the resolution, Council moved on to a series of public hearings dealing with: amendment
of the FY 2019-2020 budget; a water utility service rate increase; a refuse rate increase; and the FY 2020-
2021 budget.
8. Public Hearings
a. Budget Amendment for FY 2019-2020
Mr. Utt said this was the second budget amendment of the current fiscal year. The first dealt with "rolling
over" funds into the budget that had not been spent or other discretionary funds needed to be budgeted. This
amendment was needed to make revisions in line with budget realities. Mr. Utt explained the budget
amendment would lower the revenue expectations to be more realistic as to what was actually received. The
expenses would increase to account for the purchase of the fire truck and the repairs to the Train Station. A
bond was approved for those items, but the funds were not incorporated into a budget amendment, which this
action would do. Any increases would be because of the $420,000 amount of the bond.
Mr. Utt noted the hearing had been advertised as required and that there would be a narrative correction that
he would highlight when the resolution was considered. He then asked if Council had any questions. He also
noted that written comments would be accepted from the public until May 22nd and that links were available
for comments on the Town's website and its Facebook page. The amended budget was also available for
downloading. Any comments received would be compiled concerning the amendment and other items for
Council's review at the June 2nd meeting.
Mayor Clark then opened the public hearing on the budget amendment for FY 2019-2020 with the
understanding that people would be able to comment on the Town's website through May 22"d. Following a
brief interval, Mayor Clark closed the public hearing and moved on to consider water utility service rates.
b. Proposed Water Utility Service Increase
Mr. Utt said that as part of the Brookmont/Virginia Department of Health project, the Town had agreed to
raise water rates 3% a year for three -years. This did not seem to be a major issue since the Town had
committed under the Davenport study to raise rates 3%-4% each year for five years. This year he continued,
the Davenport requirements were paused, however the Brookmont requirements could not be. A public
hearing was required for a proposed 3% increase in water rates. Mr. Utt reiterated that there were no
increases proposed for sewer rates, but something had to be done for water rates. He added that the same
allowances for public comments until May 22nd were in place.
Mayor Clark then opened the public hearing on the increase in water rates, emphasizing that public
comments would be received as previously stated until May 22"d. Following his comment, Mayor Clark closed
the public hearing.
Mr. Penn asked since there was now a pause in water rates (Davenport), after the Brookmont project, would
the town go back and raise water rates again. Mr. Utt responded that he did not think so and added that the
increase could not be postponed due to the Va. Dept. of Health requirements. On the sewer side he felt the
increased revenues would work themselves out anyway. He felt there might be a need to look at it but since
he thought the Town was in year 4 of 5 of the Davenport recommendations, he did not think it was needed.
Mr. Penn interjected that this year was the fifth year (Davenport recommendations). Mr. Utt suggested it
might be looked at midway through the fiscal year to see what the revenues were, but he thought things
would continue as they are now.
There being no further discussion, Council next considered a proposed increase for residential garbage rates.
Page 4 of 12/May 6, 2020
c. Proposed Residential Garbage Rate Increase
Mr. Utt said the Town was following the lead of the Public Service Authority (PSA). The Town did not collect
refuse but did bill for refuse collections, retaining 5% of the amount collected with the balance going to the
PSA. The PSA had proposed a $1.00 increase in service for which the Town would have to follow suit.
The PSA's public hearing he said would not be until May 11th. Mr. Utt felt he would have an idea of what their
final decision would be before the June 2nd Council meeting so that Council could take appropriate action. As
with the other public hearings there would be the same process for receiving public comment until May 22nd
Mayor Clark then opened the public hearing concerning the residential garbage rate increase. With no
comments received, he then closed the public hearing.
Mr. Penn asked what would happen if the PSA had a different version from what the Council approved
tonight. Mr. Utt replied there would not be anything approved tonight and that nothing would be approved until
the PSA had taken action; so the Town would know what they did. PSA may or may not raise the rates Mr.
Utt said, but they did advertise 5% increases for both water and sewer.
Mr. Goodman ventured that if PSA did not raise the rates, the Town would not do so. Mr. Utt and Mayor Clark
both said yes. Mr. Goodman opined that the most PSA could raise the rates was $1.00 and if they raised it
fifty cents, the Town's increase would be fifty cents. Mr. Utt responded that the Town would follow suit with
what the PSA did. Mr. East asked when the Town would have that information. Mr. Utt said he was told he
would have the information before June 2"d, but he was not given an actual date.
With no further comments or discussion, Council moved to consider the proposed budget for FY 2020-2021.
d. Proposed Budget for FY 2020-2021
Mr. Utt said he had good news for the Council regarding his review of revenues for the March -April
collections compared to the previous four years. Concerning the two revenue items that there were shortages
in, Mr. Utt said his review of the meals tax indicated that it was on track to reach the expected budget level of
$940,000 while the lodging tax was low about $5,000 out of $30,000 projected revenue. For reasons that Mr.
Utt was unsure of, sales tax was trending higher than last year. The March -April collections were significantly
higher than last year's or in previous years. Mr. Utt thought it might be linked to grocery purchases, while Mr.
Goodman suggested that it was due to the collection of sales tax from the Internet or internet vendors
becoming more compliant with collecting sales taxes. He felt that when Internet sales took off, more revenue
would be realized. Mr. Utt said the decreases in these revenues looked like they would not be as big a
decrease as was expected.
Mr. Utt then referred to the draft budget in the packet and observed that the proposed budget was just over
$8.8 million and included the "set asides", which were positions from several departments and a sizeable
portion of capital improvements for the General Fund. These "set asides" totaled approximately $438,000
which was equivalent to a 5% budget reduction. Capital improvement for the Water and Sewer funds were
proposed to be fully funded since they were not as affected by the pandemic.
Mr. East ventured that the Town had a very conservative budget with a 5% buffer if needed. Mr. Utt said yes.
Mr. Goodman asked if he was correct in assuming that the budget included the funds that previously were
applied to the James Hardie debt service. Mr. Utt again said yes. Mr. Goodman said the challenge when
Council reconsidered the budget this summer or considered the budget for FY 2021, was to make sure that
cash was freed up to be applied to the reserves or to the new emergency services complex. He said the
funds (Hardie) were a sizeable portion of monies intended to pay for the debt service. Placing the funds into
the budget created a "bigger hole" to fill. Given the current situation with its unknowns, he said it made sense
to put it into the budget. But he added, it had to be agreed this was temporary so there would not be a search
for these funds next year.
Mr. East agreed, feeling it was Council's responsibility to get the reserves to the 15%-20% range as
recommended by the Town's accounting firm. Mr. Goodman concurred stating the reserves had to be a
Page 5 of 12/May 6, 2020
priority moving forward. Mr. Dawson felt it was important to restate to the public that it was intended to come
back to the budget, since in its current state, there was no part with which all were comfortable without further
decisions. The budget was not finalized he added but would be approved to get a budget on the books.
Council then would immediately begin work to complete the final actions necessary to more forward the way
that was needed.
Mr. Utt said he called the budget "the Bookmark Budget". Mr. Goodman said it was about the deadline set by
the state when a budget had to be completed. If it was not done, the town could not pay its bills or its staff.
Hopefully by summer he said, better numbers would be available.
Mr. Radcliffe acknowledged the budget was not perfect. In looking at the surrounding counties and towns, he
felt the staff and Council needed to be commended. Some jurisdictions he emphasized were looking at huge
staff cuts. Mr. Radcliffe credited "belt tightening" by the Council in previous years for the good position of the
Town. While more work needed to be done, he was proud of the budget and urged that it be passed to set a
good foundation for the employees and citizens to keep everything moving forward. He also emphasized that
there was no tax increase in the budget and that surrounding jurisdictions were having a hard time fiscally.
Mr. Radcliffe again commended Council and staff for a great job. While there was work to do, he said he was
proud of what had been done.
Mr. Penn asked what the deadline was for budget approval. Mr. Utt responded that it was June 30th at the
latest but there were only two meetings left in the fiscal year, this meeting and June 2"d. Mr. Goodman added
the reason we were looking at the budget in May was the notification requirements. If the budget was
adjusted and ended up higher than proposed, then the Town would have to go through the advertising
process again. If it was cut or less than proposed that was fine.
Mr. Penn expressed concern that it was unknown what would be coming down from the state and that there
could be big cuts that would have to be absorbed. Mr. Utt replied that the good news was the Town got state
money for the streets and the police. The street maintenance funds were financed by the gas tax. Mr. Utt said
his research indicated that the street maintenance funds were usually the last funds cut when gas tax
revenues were reduced. Before street maintenance funds were cut, other funds such as construction funds,
grant funds and other funds were reduced. Mr. Utt ventured the Town was well buffered on the VDOT side of
the issue.
The police funding had remained the same for the last 15 years and was only one-tenth what the
Compensation Board paid sheriffs, which he felt, would not be affected. The Town got most of its revenue
from local taxes. Mr. Utt felt that if businesses could get back in operation and return to the growth of the
January -February timeframe, the Town would be pretty safe. He did agree that this was a "bookmark budget"
and there were discussions that needed to be had in the coming months.
Following the discussion, Mayor Clark opened the public hearing at 7:44 p.m. mentioning again that there
were opportunities to comment on the Town's website until May 22nd. This being said, Mayor Clark closed the
hearing at 7:44 p.m.
With the public hearings concluded, Council next entered the "Public Comment Period".
9. Public Comment Period
No comments were received from the public.
90. Consent Agenda
a. Consideration of the April 7, 2020, Council Meeting Minutes
b. Consideration of the April 29, 2020 Council Budget Work Session
Mayor Clark called for a motion to approve the Council Meeting minutes of April 7, 2020 and the April 21,
2020 Council Budget Work Session minutes. Mr. Goodman moved to adopt the minutes as proposed in the
Page 6 of 12/May 6, 2020
Consent Agenda. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dawson and approved by unanimous voice vote of the
Council.
Next item for review was the Project Summary Sheet.
11. Proiect Updates
a. Project Summary Sheet
Mr. Utt asked Council if they had any questions regarding the projects.
Mr. East mentioned a notation regarding a need for a subdivision plat in connection with the Dora Highway
Convenience Center and asked if that was something that could be done immediately. Mr. Utt replied that it
could, since the Town had a surveyor on retainer. The property in question encompassed Pump Station 4A
and the current drop site in one parcel. The previous agreement with the County for the drop site stated the
County would operate it and the Town would own it, which would require an operations agreement that would
require actual boundaries. Mr. Utt felt it would be completed before the brownfield assessment was finished.
Mr. East asked about the timeline for the environmental operation. Mr. Utt responded that it could take 90
days or so.
Mr. Goodman said the public had been asking him what the plans were for the old dumpsite and was there a
plan to turn it into parking for the trail. Mr. Utt felt that would be the best use along with adding some
landscaping and beautification. Mr. East felt that would be a good spot. Mr. Goodman asked if that would
cause any issue with the Town's free parking and the trailhead where they charged for parking. Mr. Utt said
there had not yet been an issue. People parked at the Train Station and he did not see an issue moving
parking two miles closer. Mayor Clark said he had seen people parking at Heritage Park and riding also. Mr.
Utt suggested waiting to see if the state park brought it to the Town's attention. Otherwise he felt the Town
should proceed with the parking which would be the best use for the site.
Mr. Clontz asked about the deadline for the Downtown Revitalization Grant. Mr. Utt said the deadline had
been extended while Ms. Hair added DHCD had extended it to December 31St. Mr. Utt said the mindset was
still to finish in October.
Mr. Goodman then asked about the status of the "pocket park". Ms. Hair said the park should be completed
about the last part of May and that the project was moving along rapidly. The site agreement and contract'
agreement had been completed by Mr. Rygas. She ventured that work would begin on the facades very
shortly.
Mr. Radcliffe asked once the park was complete, was the wall going to be scraped or something put on it. Ms.
Hair said that the property owner did not agree to participate in the facade program. She had been looking at
funding for either scraping or pressure washing it as part of the beautification process with the blight
elimination program.
Mr. Dawson asked for an update on the Filter Treatment Plant. Mr. Utt reported that the demolition work had
been completed and that the equipment was still on order. Since there was a three month lead time on the
equipment, he said it might be mid -summer before the project was completed. Mr. Dawson suggested it
might be more like the fall. Mr. Utt responded that once the equipment arrived the actual work took about
three weeks.
Mr. Goodman ventured that once the filter was certified for use the other filters would be taken off-line and
inspected. Mr. Utt said that would be part of a future CIP with one filter being done each year. Since the plant
could operate on three filters and the new filter would have higher operating efficiency that was the plan for
the other three. This project would set the filter plant up with more backwashing capability and a better
backwashing system than before which should result in a better plant overall.
Mr. East asked about the timeline for the boundary adjustment study taking note that in conjunction with it
there was to be preparation of a draft agreement with the County. He asked how those two items would
Page 7 of 12/May 6, 2020
coincide. Mr. Utt reported that the Tichler-Bise study was completed and had been presented to the Board of
Supervisors by conference call at their March meeting. He added he was working with Mr. Sweet on a list of
items that would go into an agreement. The attorney's timeline had proposed that a draft agreement be ready
at the end of June or early July. This would be followed by development of the legal documents that would go
before both bodies and the state later in the fall. Final review was still scheduled for October of next year
(2021).
There being no further discussion, Council moved on to consider Resolution 2020-11 concerning a general
obligation bond and a performance agreement.
12. Old Business
a. Resolution 2020-11, Authorizing Issuance of a General Obligation Bond
Mr. Utt told Council that a public hearing on the bond was held in January and at that time he sensed that
Council was not comfortable with the terms of the bond as proposed. After talking with other banks, Mr. Utt
said the Town negotiated a better rate and loan package with National Bank.
Referring to the term sheet for the $290,000 bond, Mr. Utt noted that the proposal was for a 15 year bond
with an adjustable rate in five year terms with 3.9% interest to start, with increases of no more that 1 % each
five year,term. The expectation was that the bond would be paid off before the first 5 year term was up. There
was no penalty for prepayment of the bond.
The bond counsel had indicated that the public hearing held in January was in compliance with applicable
requirements. Mr. Utt said if Council wished to move forward with Resolution 2020-11, the bond could be
closed on in a week to ten days. The Town had spent over $100,000 for which it could be reimbursed; then
the Town would be ready for the final construction.
Mr. Goodman complemented Mr. Utt on his discernment regarding Council's concerns and felt the terms
were much better. He also felt it was great to work with a local bank (National Bank) and hoped to continue to
work with them as much as possible. Mr. Dawson felt that this process could be used in moving forward with
future loans. In the past the Town used services to get the information, but this time the Town Manager
procured the needed information without using an outside source.
Mr. East moved to adopt Resolution 2020-11 as written. 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 performance agreement for "Project Cow".
b. Performance Agreement -Project Cow
Mr. Utt reminded Council that "Project Cow" was the previously announced expansion of Calfee Park. Due to
the pandemic, the expansion had been put on hold for this season which would not affect the performance
agreement because a buffer for time had been included already.
The agreement documented a tax grant equal to the real estate tax they would pay for six years. The first
three years the grant would be at 100% and the last three years at 50%. Mr. Utt reminded Council when the
Town owned Calfee Park, it received no real estate taxes. Given the meals tax and other tourism related
taxes received, he felt the Town was still "ahead of the game".
Mr. Utt said the agreement documented maintaining at least 75 jobs and making a capital investment of at
least $3 million, in addition to what had already been done. The agreement was the same as adopted by the
County and County EDA for the County's portion of the agreement. Mr. East asked if that would be a $3
million investment by December 31 st, 2025, to which Mr. Utt said it would.
Page 8 of 12/May 6, 2020
Mr. Utt said the recommendation was to authorize the Town Manager to execute the performance agreement
on the Town's behalf. Mr. Goodman asked about the proper business name. Mr. Utt replied it would be a
performance agreement with Historic Calfee Park, L.L.C.
Execution of the performance agreement with Historic Calfee Park, L.L.C. was moved by Mr. Goodman,
seconded by Mr. East 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
There being no further discussion or action needed, Council then considered items under "New Business".
13. New Business
a. Resolution 2020-12, Amending the FY 2019-2020 Budget.
Acting on Mr. Utt's recommendation, Mr. Goodman moved to table Resolution 2020-12 until the June 2, 2020
Council meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Clontz 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
Council next received a report on the flooding of April 121h and 13tH
b. Report on April 12th/13th Flooding Event
Mr. Utt asked Chief Kiser for his report on the April 12th/13th flooding event.
Chief Kiser said the flood of April 13th was a six hour event that did a lot of damage. The Virginia Department
of Emergency Management (VDEM) arrived the next day with their assessment team to review the damage.
There were 47 total structures affected. Chief Kiser noted that VDEM rated damaged structures according to
a scale of affected, minor, major and destroyed. The Town had 22 commercial structures that were affected
or minor with none rated major or destroyed. There were 25 residential structures (Town and County)
involved with two destroyed in the County (Brookmont area). No breakdown of residential structures was
made between Town and County.
Regarding assessment, Chief Kiser said there was $176,000 damage to residential structures and $101,000
to commercial structures. He was currently working with VDEM to get assistance for the affected Town areas.
The main areas hit were: the Dora Walking Trail ($18,524); Gatewood Dam access road damaged by
washouts ($13,404.40); Lottier Street washout ($5,800); South Washington Avenue ($1,298.88); and a pump
station (Critzer-$8,479). Total estimated repairs for which the Town was trying to get assistance was
$49,930.02. Chief Kiser said he had talked with VDEM today and learned they had questions on how some
costs were determined. He added he would keep Council informed.
Chief Kiser mentioned that local residents had reported from 2.5 to 5.5 inches of rain which supplied a
sudden burst of water that made the creeks rise quickly. The water was four inches higher than the flood in
2010. Fortunately he added, the flood receded as fast as it rose. After his report, Chief Kiser asked if there
were any questions.
Mr. Radcliffe asked if the estimates included man hours. Chief Kiser said it did and that he had worked with
Mrs. Caudill at Public Works who had done a great job. VDEM he continued had its own rates for equipment,
man hours, and materials, such as shot rock and asphalt for damage in various parts of Town.
Mr. Radcliffe commended the Town Manager and Department Heads for a job well done observing that, the
Town still continued its operations in spite of the flooding and being short staffed. He added that he could not
Page 9 of 12/May 6, 2020
say enough about Public Works and again commended staff that operations continued as if nothing
happened. Chief Kiser said that it was a team effort from all departments of the Town and the County also. It
was a sudden rush of water that no one was prepared for that, as he described it, "came out of nowhere".
Mr. Goodman also complemented staff and mentioned on the same day as a major flood, he came upon a
Public Works crew repairing a water line break on East Main Street. He said staff was working really hard and
should be commended for their efforts.
Mr. Goodman also said he had been talking with business owners and citizens and learned that the flooding
would cost the community at least one business. He also mentioned that citizens were asking when the Army
Corps of Engineers was going to fix Peak Creek after being told that the Town could not fix the creek due to
the Army Corps having jurisdiction. Mr. Goodman said he understood it was a long process to get on their "to
do" list and longer to get funding. He felt Council should have some in-depth discussions concerning the
Corps and get some idea of scheduling. If there was a funding issue involved then our Congressman could
be contacted for assistance. Mr. Goodman, mentioning two flood events in ten years felt the issues should be
pushed since there were homes and businesses being affected.
Mr. East asked what the guidelines for the creek bed were. Mr. Utt said his understanding was that the
normal waterline had to be determined and that vegetation cuts or soil removal could be made down to that
waterline, but not below it. Mr. East said that being the case, in looking at Bell Avenue there were a lot of
"islands" and foliage that using those guidelines could be taken out. Mr. Utt responded that the area was
rather flat and there weren't many opportunities for getting the water out quickly. The channel itself flattened
out through the Honeywell property and became an issue when Tract Fork and Sproule's Run began feeding
into the area.
From the Corps perspective, Mr. Utt said a year ago the "Silver Jackets" came in and conducted some public
input and preliminary studies of certain buildings. The Town was in their next phase of funding options which
required documentation and a GIS setup of the storm water system to understand where the water was
coming from. The other goal was to figure out an upstream storage area west of Town that the creek would
feed into once it reached a certain level to delay its flow into Town.
Mr. Goodman asked if it was like a retention pond. Mr. Utt said yes, but several acres would be needed. That
was one recommended option. Mr. Utt ventured that the effort would be a ten year project. Observing that his
previous work indicated the Town had 19 floods over 90 years, Mr. Utt said the Town was probably at the
point of getting FEMA's and the Army Corps' attention.
Mr. East suggested pursuing a parallel path by first having the Town go in and mitigate some of the obstacles
and obstructions to get the water through. Then secondly, start the long-term process with the Corps
regarding the retention ponds and the long-term mitigation plan. He asked if that was a reasonable approach.
Mr. Utt said yes and felt the Town needed to very deliberate as what it could and could not remove. It might
not make sense to do work behind the Honeywell -Speedway area as opposed to work further downstream to
pull the water out quicker or do work upstream to slow it down. Mr. Utt said from the Army Corps visits he
remembered that the (Honeywell) area was terrible for projects except for trying to get the water out quickly.
With only an eight or nine foot fall from Peak Creek to Claytor Lake, it did not leave much of a slope to get the
water out.
Mr. Goodman said the businesses on Bell Avenue took a hit from the flooding. He noticed that there was a
storm water pipe at the end of Bell Avenue that emptied into the creek. He wondered if the creek was backing
up the pipe into Bell Avenue. He thought that needed to be looked at if that was the best approach for getting
the water out. Mr. Goodman also thought there were areas where dikes could be constructed along the creek
to prevent water from flowing into that area. He understood that would force the water to flow on down which
might cause more problems. On a cautionary note, Mr. Goodman said the Town had to be careful working
around Honeywell because of the "doodle dust" remnants that were in the bank which could not be disturbed.
Page 10 of 12/May 6, 2020
He wanted the Town to see how it could "self-help" to move this along rather than waiting on the Corps since
the floods averaged one every five years which was a serious problem that needed to be addressed.
Mr. East asked Mr. Utt how soon he could come back with recommendations for a short-term immediate
approach and the long-term approach. Mr. Utt said he would do all the research he could to give a report at
the June meeting. Mr. East said he wanted to see something actionable. Mr. Goodman said while it was great
that VDEM had rendered assistance to the Town, he felt there should be an outreach to the Governor, along
with the County, in getting him to declare an emergency so citizens and businesses could also access funds.
Mr. Radcliffe asked Mr. Utt if he sent a letter to Norfolk Southern (NS) concerning the trestle. Mr. Utt replied
that he had. Mr. Radcliffe said if nothing was heard from NS, the Town should contact our delegate to the
General Assembly. He reminded Council that the NS trestle had only two pipes to permit the passage of the
creek, one of which was clogged easily by debris that contributed to the creek overflowing. He added that he
learned that NS would possibly redesign the trestle to allow better flow. Council was urged to go see the
trestle for themselves. Mr. Radcliffe felt the trestle acted as a dam and contributed to the flooding. He again
urged that if NS did not reply the Town should contact its delegate or senator for assistance.
After a brief discussion on visiting the site, Council moved on to consider a request from the Virginia
Outdoors Foundation.
c. Virginia Outdoors Foundation Request
Referring to the packet, Mr. Utt said the Virginia Outdoors Federation (VOF) was the state office that covered
conservation easements and historic property conservation efforts throughout the state. A new program
recently redefined "significant historic value" to include sites of less than 100 acres which would allow the
inclusion of the Calfee School and the T.G. Howard Community Center.
Mr. Utt highlighted a block of Town property at the intersection of Altoona and West Main, which because of
its location and tendency to flood, had no value to the Town. He said that the parcels did have value to the
T.G. Howard Community Center, because the amount of funding they would be eligible from the VOF was
based upon the land area. Mr. Utt proposed gifting the property to the T.G. Howard Community Center which
would require a public hearing. Staff from the T.G. Howard Center was working on the legal processes to
acquire the Pulaski Christian Citizens League and the Mary White Buford Women's Club properties for
donation to the T.G. Howard Center.
Mr. Utt recommended that Council schedule a public hearing for the proposed disposition of the Town
property to the T.G. Howard Center. After brief discussion of the past history of the various citizen
organizations that had ownership of the land, Mr. Goodman asked what was needed from Council. Mr. Utt
responded that he recommended that a public hearing be held at the June 2nd Council meeting concerning
disposition of the Town properties with the same provisions for public comment as outlined earlier. Potential
action could be taken at the July meeting.
Mr. Goodman moved that staff be directed to schedule a public hearing for the June 2nd meeting regarding
the disposition of property relating to the T.G. Howard Community Center. The motion was seconded by Mr.
East 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 next moved to go into Closed Session.
94. Closed Session
Mayor Clark then requested a motion to enter Closed Session for two items; one item under Va. Code 2.2-
3711 (A) , a personnel matter concerning appointment to the Architectural Review Board; and, one item
Page 11 of 12/May 6, 2020
under Va. Code 2.2-3711 (A) (3), acquisition/disposition of property regarding the Monte Vista Extension
right-of-way request.
Mr. Goodman moved to enter the Closed Session. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dawson 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 8:30 p.m. and returned from Closed Session at 9:00 p.m.
Mayor Clark asked for a certification motion that Council discussed only the two items for which it went into
Closed Session: one item under Va. Code 2.2-3711 (A) (1), a personnel matter concerning appointment to
the Architecture Review Board; and, one item under Va. Code 2.2-3711 (A) (3), acquisition/disposition of
property regarding the Monte Vista Extension right-of-way request.
Mr. Goodman moved to certify the closed session. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dawson 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 a motion from Council.
Mr. Goodman moved to authorize the Town Staff to create the necessary paperwork to acquire the right of
way for the Monte Vista Extension from the Claremont Corporation. Mr. East 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
15. Reminder of Future Council Meetings and Adjournment.
Mayor Clark reminded Council of their next meeting on June 2, 2020.
There being no further business, Mayor Clark called for a motion to adjourn. Mr. Goodman moved to adjourn.
His motion was seconded by Mr. Clontz and approved by the unanimous voice vote o Cet�c-i�at 9:03 p.m.
ATTEST:
David N. Quesenberry
Clerk of Council
Page 12 of 12/May 6, 2020
Mayor
L. Cla
1