Council divided on move toward second, Town-controlled EDA

‘Should we stay or should we go? If we go there could be trouble; if we stay it could be double’ – perhaps council and the interim mayor were humming the old Clash song ‘Should I Stay or Should I Go’ during their discussion of a future EDA direction … maybe. Royal Examiner Photo/Roger Bianchini. Video by Mark Williams, Royal Examiner.

A new strategy on handling the EDA situation emerged from the Front Royal Town Council Work Session Monday night, September 23 – that strategy was a move from the “we don’t have anything to do with the EDA anymore” philosophy of self-imposed exile from EDA oversight into a “let’s start our own EDA separate from the one the County has allowed to go rouge” while we were just giving $10 million “bridge loans” to facilitate an allegedly fraudulent project inside the town limits.

The initiative appeared to gain momentum after Gary Gillespie broached the idea by expressing a fear that continued involvement with the EDA might make the Town liable for some of the EDA’s debt. First Chris Holloway, then Jacob Meza and Letasha Thompson jumped on the bandwagon giving the idea an apparent council majority.

Meza, who is council’s representative on the EDA Reform Committee that was scheduled to meet the following afternoon, suggested a two-year trial run to see how the dueling EDA system was working out and to revisit the existing EDA’s legal and financial situation after two years.

The notion of totally abandoning the EDA ship at this crisis point of efforts to right that ship under the guidance of a new executive staff and largely new board of directors drew criticism from an unexpected source, longtime councilman, former mayor, and current mayoral candidate Eugene Tewalt.

Tewalt has long been the primary seller of the notion that since the County took over the Town’s portion of the EDA’s annual operational funding as part of the ongoing North Commercial Corridor compensation negotiation, council “has nothing to do” with EDA operations and oversight. It is a questionable notion at best, in that many EDA projects including Royal Phoenix/Avtex and Afton Inn redevelopment, the new police department construction project, and marketing of other properties occur within the town limits and often with the direct assistance of Town funding, permitting and tacit council approval – perhaps Councilman Tewalt is catching on.

“I think we need to sit down and spend a lot of time on this. We make too many spur of the moment decisions – wrong decisions. I think we need to ride it for awhile as is,” Tewalt cautioned council’s younger generation about an abrupt change of economic development direction.

Vice Mayor William Sealock, a former EDA board member, joined Tewalt in urging caution.

He said he shared a concern the Town had taken on the role of “second fiddle” to the County in overseeing EDA affairs, but insightfully observed, “It could be because we’ve withdrawn, rather than be proactive in it. So my point is we need to be proactive into the EDA in whatever goes forward.”

Sealock also pointed to the potential cost to the Town of establishing its own economic development entity. He noted council’s reluctance to fund things it pursues like a building maintenance code, even the dilapidated building enforcement aspect of such a code.

Interim Mayor Tederick took a middle ground, saying, “I agree with everyone – how about that.”

But Tewalt and Sealock’s cautionary comments did appear to sway Holloway from his initially outright support to the separate EDA idea.

“I agree with Gene, that we take our time and make sure we do it right. We don’t have to jump right in and start our own IDA, we can take our time and make sure everything is in place,” Holloway said of avoiding a knee-jerk reaction to the situation.

Despite EDA Executive Director Doug Parson’s past promise to work with town officials to reach a mutually satisfactory end to the Town-EDA financial situation, Tederick summarized his perception of the council majority stance, a stance voiced by Meza, as one of avoidance of direct interaction with the EDA due to the Town’s civil suit seeking recovery of as much as $15 million in alleged misdirected town assets from the EDA.

Tederick also suggested council extend an invitation to State Legislative representatives to become involved in setting the legal stage for the Town’s creation of its own IDA/EDA independent of any County involvement.

However Tewalt led the discussion back toward increased Town involvement in the existing EDA – “Why can’t we have a representative (on the EDA board), we’re part of the county?”

“I like the idea of having a seat at the table of the EDA – our involvement brought everything to light … to begin with,” Meza suggested of a point perhaps more accurate if he was referring to the town’s finance staff and police, rather than any initial impetus from council itself. Of course Town Finance Director B. J. Wilson was exploring the Town’s financial status seeking a source for an internal, interest free loan to pay for a half million dollar Town Police radio upgrade at council’s direction when he discovered the years of debt service over-payments to the EDA, so there is that.

Watch this exclusive Royal Examiner video to hear council’s work session discussion of an economic development plan of action, including a seeming move away from a cooperative effort toward economic development reform. Perhaps a sign of that move was cancellation of Tuesday’s EDA Reform Committee meeting scheduled for 5:30 p.m., according to staff at the Town’s request.

Maybe the Town’s committee reps didn’t want to be in the same room with all those criminally indicted County officials.

[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qsm2WCAsM0[/embedyt]