Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-16-21Minutes of the Pulaski Town Council Meeting held at 5:00 p.m. Tuesday, March 16, 2021 in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building at 42 First Street, N.W. The meeting also featured a general live cast to the public via the Town's Facebook page and participation of one person in the meeting via Zoom. In attendance were: Mayor: Shannon Collins, presiding Councilmen Present: G. Tyler Clontz; Brooks R. Dawson; Greg East; Lane R. Penn; James A. Radcliffe; Michael P. Reis Administration: Darlene L. Burcham, Town Manager Legal Counsel Spencer A. Rygas, Town Attorney Staff: David Quesenberry, Clerk of Council Jordan Whitt, Social Media Manager Others Present: Janet Hanks Justin Sanders (via Zoom) 1. Call to Order Mayor Collins called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call of Council The roll was then called. Present for roll call were Mayor Collins; Mr. Clontz; Mr. Penn, Mr. Radcliffe and Mr. Reis. Absent from Roll Call were Mr. Dawson and Mr. East. With a majority of Council members present, a quorum existed for the conduct of business. 3. Modifications to the Closed Session Agenda Mayor Collins noted there were no modifications to the Closed Session agenda. 4. Closed Session Mayor Collins then asked for a motion to enter Closed Session for four matters: two items under Va. Code 2.2-3711 (a) 1, discussion of personnel matters concerning a committee appointment and a performance review; and two items under Va. Code 2.2-3711 (a) 7, consultation with legal counsel concerning pending/probable litigation regarding a zoning violation and a contractual matter. Mr. Reis moved to enter Closed Session on the stated items. The motion was seconded by Mr. Clontz and approved on the following roll call vote: Lane R. Penn -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye Brooks R. Dawson -Absent G. Tyler Clontz -Aye Gregory C. East -Absent Michael P. Reis -Aye Council entered Closed Session at 5:02 p.m. Mr. Dawson and Mr. Reis arrived at 5:06 p.m. and joined the Closed Session. 5. Certification of Closed Session Council returned from Closed Session at 6:30 p.m. Mayor Collins then requested a motion that Council discussed only those fou_ r matters for which it went into Closed Session: two items under Va. Code 2.2-3711 (a) 1, discussion of personnel matters concerning a committee appointment and a Page 1 of 9/March 16, 2021 performance review; and two items under Va. Code 2.2-3711 (a) 7, consultation with legal counsel concerning pending/probable litigation regarding a zoning violation and a contractual matter. Mr. Dawson moved to certify the Closed Session. The motion was seconded by Mr. East and approved on the following roll call vote: Lane R. Penn -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye Gregory C. East -Aye Michael P. Reis -Aye 6. Modification to the Public Session Agenda Following the Closed Session certification, Council took action on two resolutions regarding appointments. Mr. Reis moved to approve Resolution 2021-11 appointing Luke Siegfried to the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. East and approved on the following roll call vote: Lane R. Penn -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye Gregory C. East -Aye Michael P. Reis -Aye Mr. East then moved that Council adopt Resolution 2021-12 appointing Darlene Burcham to the Virginia First Authority. The motion was seconded by Mr. Radcliffe and approved on the following roll call vote: Lane R. Penn -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye Gregory C. East -Aye Michael P. Reis -Aye 7. Welcome to Guests and Visitors. Following the vote, Mayor Collins welcomed all guests attending either in person or on-line. 8. Consent Agenda. a. Consideration of March 2, 2021 Council Meeting Minutes Mayor Collins then asked for a motion regarding consideration of the March 2, 2021 Council meeting minutes. Mr. Dawson moved to approve the March 2, 2021 Council minutes. Mr. East seconded the motion which was approved by a roll call vote of Council as follows: Lane R. Penn -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye Gregory C. East -Aye Michael P. Reis -Aye Council next heard a presentation concerning approval of the ARB Historic Preservation Guidelines. 9 Public Hearing Concerning Approval of ARB Historic Preservation Guidelines Mr. Justin Sanders addressed Council remotely via Zoom and provided background information on the Commercial Historic District, the process in creating the new guidelines, and highlights of the document. Mr. Sanders said that the Commercial Historic District was added to the Virginia Landmarks Register in 1985; the National Register of Historic Places in 1987; and a historic overlay district added to the Page 2 of 9/March 16, 2021 zoning ordinance in 1987. The zoning ordinance references design guidelines which were adopted in July 1987, but since that time had not been revised. There were two other historic districts, the,North and South Residential Historic Districts, added in 1988 and 1991. Neither of these districts has an historic overlay so there are no applicable design guidelines and no Architectural Review Board. The review process in the Commercial Historic District has two channels for review. Upon issuance of a building permit a certificate of appropriateness is required. The Architectural Review Board (ARB) reviews the application if there are substantial changes to the look of the structure. If the changes are not substantial, staff may review and approve the application. The ARB had no review authority for the interior of a structure nor can it impose use restrictions. Appeals from the ARB or staff decisions are heard by Town Council. Mr. Sanders reviewed several reasons why new guidelines were necessary. In addition to the existing guidelines being 34 years old, there had been changes in preservation technology; introduction of new materials and techniques; and difficulties for the ARB in interpreting guidelines that were out of date. In addition there were no provisions for public art (e.g. murals, sculptures, etc.) and hazard mitigation/disaster preparedness. Funding for the guideline update was received through a grant from the Dept. of Historic Resources and the National Park Service. A steering committee was formed in late 2019, which prepared RFP's seeking firms for the update. In March 2020, Johnson, Mirmiram and Thompson was selected to create the update. Due to the COVID pandemic, an extension was given for project completion from August 2020 to December 2020 which included a series of advertised public meetings. The project came in under budget which resulted in full reimbursement which was received in January at slightly less than $23,000. Hearings were held before the ARB and the Planning Commission where adoption was recommended. Changes to the new guidelines included: detailed designs and images of structures; allowances for use of replacement materials; integration of new technologies and techniques; addition of guidelines for the ARB on public art; and provision of hazard mitigation techniques and strategies. The document had received favorable reviews from DHR and the Park Service. Three questions did come up in the public hearings. One was did the guidelines place an undue burden on property owners to fix up their buildings. Mr. Sanders said there was no mandate to upgrade buildings and only new work was subject to the guidelines and the ARB. A second question was if Town property was subject to the ARB, to which the answer was yes. A final question asked was why no Council members served on the ARB. The response was the Council served as the appeals board from decisions of the ARB. At this point, Mr. Sanders concluded his presentation. Council also heard comments from Janet Hanks, Chairman of the ARB. Mrs. Hanks told Council that the guidelines were necessary for the work of the ARB to be fair and equitable and to give options the old guidelines did not have. The older guidelines were described as "rigid and miserable" but had to be used until something new was adopted. The illustrations were beautifully done and used examples from Main Street which allowed decisions to be based on timely and useful guidelines. Over the course of the year, the ARB may have seven or eight cases come before it. Most decisions were made by staff. The slight expansion of the guidelines would allow the staff to make decisions without referral to the ARB as well as make it easier on the property owner. Mrs. Hanks then concluded her comments. Mr. East ventured rulings would be more consistent, with which Mrs. Hanks agreed. Mr. East then thanked those involved in the effort for all the work they did recognizing that updating such documents could be time consuming and tedious, since the work was necessary. Mrs. Hanks expressed gratitude that Mr. Sanders could render assistance to the effort. Page 3 of 9/March 16, 2021 Mr. Sanders emphasized the project was a group effort with the ARB, the Steering Committee, Janet Jonas and John White. He credited Town Manager Darlene Burcham and Zoning Administrator Brady Deal in being instrumental in getting the project "across the finish line". The group he added was able to "run with the challenges" and produce a great document despite the pandemic and expressed his gratitude for being allowed to continue work on the project and to make sure others involved in the project received recognition. Mayor Collins thanked the group for their effort and then opened the public hearing at 6:55 p.m. No comments being received, the public hearing was closed at 6:55 p.m. 10a. Consideration of ARB Historic Preservation Guidelines, Resolution 2021-07 Following the public hearing, Mr. Reis moved to adopt Resolution 2021-07 adopting the 2020, Commercial Historic District Guidelines as submitted by the Architectural Review Board and as recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. East and approved on the following roll call vote: Lane R. Penn -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye Gregory C. East -Aye Michael P. Reis -Aye Following the presentation and vote on the preservation guidelines, Council next voted on a series of resolutions dealing with budgetary appropriations and amendments to the Town Code. 10. Budget Appropriation Cares Act Funds, Resolution 2021-08 First considered was Resolution 2021-08. Mr. Dawson moved to approve Resolution 2021-08 Budget Appropriations Regarding Reimbursements from Pulaski County to the Town of Pulaski Under the CARES Act. Mr. Radcliffe seconded the motion which was approved by the following roll call vote: Lane R. Penn -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye Gregory C. East -Aye Michael P. Reis -Aye 11. Budget Appropriation Utility Relief Funds, Resolution 2021-09 Council then reviewed Resolution 2021-09 concerning appropriation of utility relief funds to the Town under the CARES Act. Mr. Radcliffe moved that Council accept Resolution 2021-09 as written. Mr. Dawson seconded the motion which was approved by the following roll call vote: Lane R. Penn -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye Gregory C. East -Aye Michael P. Reis -Aye 12. Budget Amendment for FY 2020-2021, Resolution 2021-10 Concerning the budget amendment resolution, Mr. Reis asked about the basis for the resolution. Mrs. Burcham explained that the General Fund was budgeted to receive $94,998 from the Water Fund. Her recommendation was the Water Fund not make that contribution. To offset the loss in revenue, she indicated that the "set aside" expenditure line item would be reduced so the budget would stay equal. Mr. Reis then moved to approve Resolution 2021-10 as written. Mr. East seconded the motion which was approved on the following roll call vote: Page 4 of 9/March 16, 2021 Lane R. Penn -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye Gregory C. East -Aye Michael P. Reis -Aye Council next reviewed two ordinances amending Chapter 14 and Chapter 18 of the Town Code. 13. Amending Chapter 14 of the Town Code, re: Urban Aariculture. Ordinance 2021-04 Mr. Dawson next moved to approve Ordinance 2021-04, Ordinance Amending Chapter 14 of the Town Code to Permit Urban Agriculture. Mr. Radcliffe seconded the motion which was approved on the following roll call vote: Lane R. Penn -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye Gregory C. East -Aye Michael P. Reis -Aye 14. Amendments to the Rental Inspection Ordinance, Ordinance 2021-05 Concerning rental inspections under Chapter 18 of the Town Code, Mr. East moved to adopt Ordinance 2021-05 as written. Mr. Penn seconded the motion which was approved on the following roll call vote: Lane R. Penn -Aye James A. Radcliffe -Aye Brooks R. Dawson -Aye G. Tyler Clontz -Aye Gregory C. East -Aye Michael P. Reis -Aye Council next held a discussion on the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. 15. Discussion Concerning Five -Year Capital Improvement Projects Following distribution of a proposed five-year capital plan sheet, Mrs. Burcham asked Council to begin considering priorities. The process was not at a point where there was a dollar amount available for a cash or debt basis. She felt Council needed to go through an exercise as to what was needed first, second, and third. If there was only a certain amount of money available that would be the cut-off point in terms of the dollar amount. Each fund (e.g. General, Water, Sewer) would be dealt with first since they have different funding sources. For the General Fund, staff had worked with some project prioritization which in no way suggested what the Town's priorities were. The first seven projects listed were slated for expenditures in the upcoming fiscal year, while others were spread out over the remaining 4 years. She felt that Council had not looked at a CIP in some time, which was usually done for five years but which she felt could be extended to seven years. For any given fiscal year, only the first year of capital projects were adopted since that year's projects would be funded from that year's operating budget. Each successive year would be reviewed for changes that occurred with adjustments done at that time. In the past some items, usually vehicles and equipment, had been lease purchased on a five to seven year payout. She asked for Council's ideas on what they would like to fund first and see how much money they had moving forward. Mr. East noted that vehicles had been purchased by various means and asked Mrs. Burcham where she thought things stood. Mrs. Burcham replied that her observation was that Public Works equipment was in real need of replacement due to age. The Police Chief mentioned that Council decided to replace police vehicles every three years. Mrs. Burcham did not think that mileage (e.g. 100,000) was not an indicator for replacing a vehicle. Some needed to be replaced earlier due to maintenance cost, Page 5 of 9/March 16, 2021 while others could go longer. The Chief would like to replace three vehicles per year, as shown in the capital plan, but Mrs. Burcham said she funded two this fiscal year. Certain vehicles could be moved . around to lessen mileage. Mr. Radcliffe said when he first came on Council, the Public Works vehicles were pathetic. He added that he hoped to keep an affordable pace did not want to fall into having to buy 7 or 8 vehicles at one time because they weren't replaced as they went along. On police vehicles, he emphasized that those cars were run 12-24 hours per day placing more stress on a police vehicle than any other. He added he did not want that fleet to fall into disrepair either. Again mentioning the poor shape of equipment, Mr. Radcliffe felt it should be a priority to replace vehicles/equipment as the Town went along. Mentioning take home vehicles, Mrs. Burcham said that they tended to be better taken care of than a rotated vehicle and there was personal use of those vehicles in the County as well. One vehicle slated for replacement was put back into service, refurbished and assigned to Code Enforcement. Vehicles she thought needed to be evaluated on mileage and repair costs with a recommendation coming from the Fleet Maintenance Department. P.D. vehicles had been replaced with greater frequency and were in better shape that the Public Works vehicles. Mr. East agreed that vehicles be evaluated on an individual basis with Public Works vehicles prioritized first. Mr. Reis suggested a "census" of vehicles to help Council prioritize those in critical need. Mr. Dawson noted that there was not an understanding of the dollars involved which would dictate what was done. He noted the CIP was "front loaded" with things that needed to be replaced, but looking at later years in the CIP the appearance was that nothing needed replacing. Mrs. Burcham ventured that people had not been involved in an exercise of planning that far in advance which had proven to be a struggle to get this far because there was no expectation that if they went through the process that funds would be made available for equipment. It had been a challenge to get people invested in the process and whatever the results were for this year, next year's would be better because staff would see results and that longer range planning helped. Mr. Dawson, noting that funds were not available, said there was a need to be frugal, spending only when necessary. With respect to Public Works vehicles, the CIP's first year replaced all P.W. vehicles that needed to be replaced than in all the other years. Was that telling us that all of those pieces of equipment were of such a critical nature that they had been left behind and should have already been replaced and should we do them right now? If that was the case, we have to budget around it because it had to be done. If that fiscally was not the case, the basis for a decision as to what could and could not be done would have to made on the basis of "have to" and not "want to" until finances accumulated to consider "want to" items. Items should be replaced that were needed to run the Town the right way and nothing else until "disposable funds" became available. Mrs. Burcham said the items were in this fiscal year because they were seen as critical. One of the options open if certain vehicles were deemed a priority by Council was a lease finance for a shorter period of time. Some of the vehicles might qualify for long term financing based on their life. She said that the matching funds for the VDOT Main Street money was a priority because funds had been received. Repairs to 72 East Main was considered to make it more marketable, with 67/69 West Main put back one fiscal year. Regarding vehicles, data could be supplied on age and mileage and information could be provided regarding lease financing or other arrangements. Mr. East said he felt a brief justification would be useful in addition to a vehicle schedule for Public Works which would indicate they were looking ahead for vehicle/equipment needs. Mr. Reis suggested that all departments have a capital component that could be built into their budget with potential amounts set aside for capital items. Page 6 of 9/March 16, 2021 Using the example of a fire truck, Mrs. Burcham explained that she did not prefer splitting a capital project between two years, but to have the full amount available even though it was not to be paid out in one year. Her reason was she needed the authorization to enter in to a purchase order for that large of an amount. Mr. Reis suggested each department set aside an amount for vehicles/equipment. Mrs. Burcham said the problem was that the funds could not be in the operating budget. The staff had been doing that but if the funds were not spent and further were identified as a reserve, they went into fund balance and did not go forward as a reserve. If certain items were identified for building funds over multiple years, they needed to be in the capital budget. That had proven to be a challenge and frustration for the departments, since various reserves had been established (e.g. Gatewood reserve, water line reserve, etc.) but were not spent in those years. They thought those reserves had been carried forward, when they were not. If they had been carried forward, the fund balance would be less. A way had to be found to "capture" these funds and make sure they were building until the time they were needed. Mr. Reis mentioned setting funds aside for future needs. Mrs. Burcham said a way would have to be found to put the funds into a capital budget and identify it as a reserve for a specific project. Mr. East asked concerning repairs to 67/69 West Main. Mrs. Burcham said one required repairs to the parapet and the other some internal repairs. Proposed repairs had been estimated at $15,000 for each, which she recommended be put off a year and paid for at the same time to obtain possible economies. It could be split out if Council wished to pick one of the projects. Mr. East then asked about sitting on the property for a year as opposed to the $30,000 for repairs. Mrs. Burcham said the issue was what property if repaired could move the fastest, which was why 72 East Main was selected. Mr. Dawson said he had no issue with the list's prioritization with reference to replacement of Public Works vehicles and the match for the VDOT grants. His issue was understanding how critical the vehicles were. Once the finances were understood, the list would shape itself based on what could or could not be done. He had no issue from a priority standpoint the way things were presented. Mr. East asked about the rebuilding of the filters (Filter Plant) under the Water Fund. Mrs. Burcham replied that Filters 1 and 3 remained to be done. Mr. East asked if there was any funding or,financing available worth pursuing. Mrs. Burcham said there were funds available through the Health Department with financing through VRA which was the source for the Brookmont Project. Financing tended to be a grant/loan package depending on project size. Sewer funds were available through DEQ which required that the design be ready. Financing methods from DEQ included zero interest loans and principal forgiveness. The real issue involving grants were (1) get the existing grants in order; and, (2) and staffing needs in terms of writing and managing grants. There was a need for a full-time grant writer/manager. Mrs. Burcham said grant management was difficult and referred to the three grants affiliated with the James Hardie project, with their different requirements and regulations. If the Town proceeded with grants, it needed somebody who had experience with grants and not a trainee. Mr. East agreed it sounded like someone was needed. Mrs. Burcham said it needed to be a staff person and not a consultant arrangement. Mr. Dawson asked if the water line replacement on Main Street ($670,000) was necessary to be done although the CIP list showed it as low priority. Mrs. Burcham responded if the Town wanted to take advantage of the opportunity to replace and upgrade the water lines in the street, the time to do it was when the street was being torn up. With anticipated growth, additional water capacity would be needed in those lines. Mr. Reis asked if it would make sense to finance the project (water lines). Mrs. Burcham responded use of financing or other sources could be done. Page 7 of 9/March 16, 2021 Mr. Reis then asked about the $40,000 for water lines. Mrs. Burcham said that was a reserve that had been previously discussed. Mr. Reis felt that water replacements should be done, while Mrs. Burcham said repairs were being made. If a section was repaired twice, she had instructed that a replacement I should be done. To Mr. Reis' question on a plan for line replacement, Mrs. Burcham responded that she did not believe there was a master plan for water line replacement. There was the issue of repair/replacements by other utilities coming into play bringing issues of scheduling and pavement repair. After a short discussion, Mr.Reis asked if a cost estimate for replacements could be done. Mrs. Burcham responded that she could get a cost estimate. She asked Council if they would like Mr. Pedigo to come to the next meeting to address some of their questions. Mr. Radcliffe asked Mrs. Burcham's opinion on leasing heavy equipment. Mrs. Burcham said for pieces of equipment that are not used on a regular basis, leasing was better. For equipment used daily she recommended in making an investment. Mr. Radcliffe asked if that was buying it straight out to which she replied it could be bought through a lease purchase arrangement. She added that outstanding debt was being reviewed, in light of finance charges, for consideration of refinancing. Council asked about various issues and equipment including I&I. After a short discussion Mrs. Burcham said she would have staff available at the next meeting to answer questions. 16. Council Comments Mayor Collins asked if Council had any comments. Mr. Penn said he had received a complaint from 201 Linwood Circle about vultures. Mrs. Burcham responded that she had received complaints along with reports that someone was shooting at them. Mr. East said a noise cannon had been employed with some success. Mr. Reis said the noise and fireworks just moved the vultures from one place to another. Mrs. Burcham said she would check that particular area and had received a complaint from another area. Mr. East also mentioned that a permit could be secured to "remove" some of the vultures. Mr. Dawson and Mr. East had no comment. Mr. Radcliffe expressed support for Mrs. Burcham especially in light of the upcoming budget and expressed appreciation for all of her work. Mrs. Burcham thanked Mr. Radcliffe and said that the staff was working really hard with her on this (budget) and were excited about being more involved in it. Mr. Clontz and Mr. Reis had no comment. Mayor Collins asked Mrs. Burcham to find out concerning the skate park, if the Town would match funds collected by the. proponents of the skate park. He had been asked by various people where those funds were. Mrs. Burcham said she did not believe they had been turned over to the Town and understood that statements were made that the Town would match the funds. She further thought whoever had started that effort had set up a separate account and as far as she knew, Council had not been asked to match what they had. Matching the funds the group had would not lead to the desired result. An article was posted that day on the Town's social media explaining exactly where the Town was with the project and that monies the Town had received was strictly for remediation of the property which had contaminated soils. In the soils present condition, the site could not be used for any recreational purpose. The intent was to use the grant money to remediate the site and put proper soil on it. If funds were left over, it might be applied to do minor concrete/paving work. That was why, she continued, there was an estimate from three years ago of the cost to do the skate park as it was Page 8 of 9/March 16, 2021 envisioned by the consultants at that time. The Town had no money set aside and to her knowledge none had been received. Mayor Collins then asked if donated monies were received, would the Town would put money in also. Mrs. Burcham replied that it needed to be sure that what money was spent would be spent in a way that furthered that plan. A look would have to be taken as to how much money was available and what could be done with that amount or, put it in a reserve and add the Town's match to it. The project was not going to happen until a certain amount of money was amassed or debt issued or other arrangements made to make the full vision happen. Mayor Collins wanted the public to know that the Town was not against the skate park, but when the funds were available, the Town could move forward. There being no further comments, Council next received the Manager's Report. 17. Manager's Report Mrs. Burcham said there were a number of high school teams of various sports that had brought significant recognition to themselves, the County and the school as a result of their performance at various statewide events. Staff was working on a plan, subject to what the coaches determined, to recognize those individual groups. She asked if Council would consider a special afternoon meeting where they could go to the school and recognize those various groups there rather than schedule bringing them to Council chambers in light of the current pandemic restrictions on gatherings. If Council was interested, Mrs. Burcham noted that recognition had been extended in the past. She said there were an unusual number of athletic groups that had excelled and she felt it would be something that Council might want to do. Council was agreeable and was positive about the suggestion. Mrs. Burcham added that efforts on the presentations would continue. 18. Adjournment With no further business on the agenda, Mr. Reis moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded by various members of Council and approved by unanimous voice vote at 7:55 p.m. Approved: , W hannon Colli Mayor ATTEST: David N. Quesenberry Clerk of Council 1 Page 9 of 9/March 16, 2021