FRONT ROYAL — In the name of transparency, the Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority (EDA) Board of Directors during its Aug. 30 special meeting addressed term limits for elected officers, reactivated its Assets Management Committee, and agreed to bring historical documents into the 21st century.
EDA Director Marjorie “Jorie” Martin proposed changing the EDA’s bylaws to impose term limits on board officers, specifically the positions for chairman, vice chairman, secretary, assistant secretary and treasurer.
Pointing out that some EDA chairmen previously served in their positions for as long 15 years, Martin said, “I don’t think that’s healthy for any organization. I think there should be changes in term limits.”
She proposed a resolution to establish term limits for officers that would be temporary until the bylaws are revised. After some discussion, the board members unanimously adopted the resolution to amend the bylaws to limit officers to two-year terms and, while officers may move between positions, they would not be allowed to serve more than four years consecutively.
Martin called the action a good step toward rotating board officers, as well as increasing openness for the public.
“It’s an important reform,” said Jeff Browne, EDA Vice Chairman.
Warren County Attorney Dan Whitten said the action serves as the required 10-days notice the EDA must provide prior to revising its bylaws, which could be done during its Sept. 27 regular meeting.
In EDA action on another new business agenda item, board members reactivated the Assets Management Committee, which EDA Director Greg Harold said would handle the EDA’s physical — not financial —assets.
“I’ve developed a framework for the Assets Management Committee and that framework really revolves around clarifying assets because assets take many different forms,” Harold explained Friday morning. “This is really physical assets, such as any real property we might own or other physical assets.”
The committee, he said, has a “whole list of activities and responsibilities” for what it will be monitoring, including physical asset acquisition, inspection and disposition, as well as site inspections, risk mitigation, and ensuring that current EDA assets are in compliance with the authority’s strategic plan, among others.
“This is really a needed committee in this organization,” said Harold. “It would behoove the board to approve this committee as it is presented.”
And the members did approve its reactivation, with Browne asking to “tag along” during committee site inspections to learn more about the properties.
For the sake of increased transparency in EDA actions, Harold also publicly stated the goal of the Assets Management Committee, which he will chair.
“I want the community to understand that as we review these properties for acquisition and disposition that there is absolutely a process in place,” he said. “There is a due diligence period and there are due diligence activities that this committee will be performing to make a recommendation to the board to make sure we’re dotting our i’s and crossing our t’s.
“I also want the public and the board to be aware of the fact that when we dispose of an asset, it’s not always about the purchase price; it’s not always about the disposition price,” Harold said.
“It’s about the long-term return on investment for the community and that involves many factors.”
Some of those factors, Harold said, involve the type of industry; the stability of the industry; the number of employees that will be brought in; “the income tapestries” that the employees are going to be bringing to the community; the machinery and taxes; and the expansion opportunities, etc.
“We’re taking the long position on some of these assets,” said Harold. “We have to make sure that as we entertain offers on these properties, that they’re the best fit for the community and they’ll provide a great return on the investment that’s not only reflective of the sales price.”
The sales price is strictly a data point, he said, adding that “there’s so much more behind it that needs to be evaluated.”
As its first order of business, EDA Chairman Edwin “Ed” Daley requested that the Assets Management Committee review both the EDA’s Afton Inn and proposals for its Baugh Drive property.
In other action, EDA members unanimously confirmed an approved $7,365-expenditure to ScansAmerica, which scanned and digitized 36 boxes of EDA historical documents.
“We’re just confirming what we already told Doug [Parsons] to do for the sake of transparency,” Daley told members, referring to the EDA’s executive director.
Parsons said the documents now will be searchable by optical character recognition, or OCR, which is the electronic conversion of typed, handwritten or printed text images.
Such enhanced searchability, Parsons said, will help the EDA comply with a subpoena from a Warren County special grand jury related to the investigation and lawsuits around the alleged financial fraud and embezzlement by former EDA members. Fulfilling Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests also will be easier, added Parsons.
“We can now provide these documents in a timely fashion,” said Parsons.
During a closed session, EDA members discussed several items, including considering whether to acquire real property “for a public purpose,” according to the agenda, or to dispose of a publicly held property. The discussion was to be limited to properties located on Main Street, in Stephens Industrial Park and Happy Creek Industrial Park, and on Fairgrounds Road.
Those same locations also were discussed during the closed session and concerned “a prospective business or industry or expansion of an existing business or industry where no previous announcement has been made … in locating or expanding its facilities in the community,” according to the agenda.
Another EDA special meeting is slated for Sept. 10.
The Royal Examiner’s camera was there to capture this special meeting:
Town notifies EDA of Afton Inn issues – opts out of discussing responsibility
While there was no representative of the Front Royal Town government at Friday morning’s Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority Board of Directors meeting despite the presence of a “Town Manager Update-Matt Tederick” on the agenda, the subject of town government interaction with the EDA did not take long to enter the February 28 meeting discussion.
“I thought you might want to know about this as soon as possible,” EDA Executive Director Doug Parsons told his board soon after the 8 a.m. convening of the meeting by Board Chairman Ed Daley.
“This” was a Thursday, February 27 email from Town Attorney Doug Napier to Afton Inn redeveloper 2 East Main Street LLC attorney Kelly Bundy, copied to Parsons, noting that Town Councilwoman Letasha Thompson had informed him “that she saw a few minutes ago on Facebook that the roof of the Afton Inn building next door to Town Hall and across Main Street from the Warren County Courthouse is flapping in the wind.”
Parsons continued to quote from the email, “The wind today is extremely gusty at times and strong, as you know pieces of wood soffit have already fallen onto the public sidewalk. The Town is worried that part of the roof, which appears to be metal, might be blown off onto the public streets.”
Parsons pointed out the town attorney continued to write “in parenthesis” that, “(The Afton Inn is at the intersection of the two busiest streets in Front Royal),” continuing that the situation had the potential of “highly dangerous results,” at which point the town attorney pivoted to the legal sphere.
“Because of the outstanding lease/contract to purchase status between 2 East Main and the EDA, the Town does not want to get in the middle of and opine a legal opinion as to who has the predominant obligation to repair and maintain the building; but the Town does want to draw this to your immediate attention.”
Daley responded that Parsons should work with EDA counsel Sharon Pandak, who was present for the meeting, “To respond to Mr. Napier and remind him of the Town’s responsibility.”
That the Town has the legal responsibility to pay for maintenance and repair of the Afton Inn in the wake of its 2014 transfer of ownership to the EDA for marketing and redevelopment purposes has been a hot-button topic of discussion lately. That is due to the Town’s mid-December pivot from seeming agreement expressed in writing by Napier that it was the Town’s financial responsibility, as well as its province as a matter of public safety, to fund physically stabilizing winterization of the Afton Inn as a “priority”.
In fact, the town attorney included a copy of June 23, 2014, Afton Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Town and EDA as part of his November-December 2019 correspondence with the EDA on the winterization project. That MOA reads in part, “The Town agrees that during ownership of the Afton Inn property by the EDA, the Town shall not require the EDA to perform any repairs, maintenance or demolition of any part of the Afton Inn building unless the Town agrees to bear the costs of such repairs, maintenance and/or demolition.”
In a December 6, 2019 email to EDA Executive Director Doug Parsons and EDA Asset Committee Chairman Greg Harold, Napier wrote, “Under the terms of the MOA … the EDA is responsible for repairs to the Afton Inn, at the expense of the Town. Regardless of any contract, the Town has an overriding duty as a municipal government, to the public to prevent injury and loss of life or limb. The Afton Inn is literally falling to pieces as I write this. It is not a defense in the public’s eye whether or not the Town can assert ‘sovereign immunity’ if a person’s vehicle, or far worse, a person’s body, is injured by something falling or collapsing from the building – the public will demand to know why the Town did not take immediate steps to secure the building, and rightfully so.”
Best laid plans
However, in that December 6 message, Napier also notes that an inspection by one of the Town’s “most experienced and responsible workers” revealed complications, and likely added expense, that could impact the Town’s original plan to perform the winterization work in-house.
Napier asks the EDA for immediate contact with Interim Town Manager Tederick to arrange a mutual inspection by all three involved parties “to determine what can be done to secure the building to ensure its integrity and ensure the safety of the public …It is a violation of Town Code to obstruct or place an obstruction, which would include the permitting of an obstruction, upon a Town street or sidewalk.”
Napier then added, “The Town would be derelict in the extreme in its responsibilities to the public if the Town knowingly allowed a violation or violations of its own Code, in addition to allowing a public safety hazard.”
Then, in perhaps a hint of things to come, Napier concluded that December 6 correspondence by stating, “If the Town, the EDA, and 2 East Main are unable to reach a very prompt mutual resolution of this pressing problem, the Town will have no choice but to take such legal measures, without limitation, as are necessary to protect the rights of the public safety.”
On December 13, 2019, as part of his report on Town business at the EDA Board meeting, Tederick informed the EDA that any previous correspondence indicating the Town’s willingness to fund the winterization costs was a “mistake”.
And as noted above, the Town-EDA MOA on Afton maintenance notes the EDA is not required to perform any repairs, maintenance or demolition “UNLESS the Town agrees to bear the costs of such repairs, maintenance and/or demolition.” One is left to ponder the reason funding stabilizing maintenance of the Afton Inn went from a Town public safety “priority” to NOT a priority within a month as winter approached.
As the Afton turns
Following the February 28 EDA morning meeting, we asked Harold what the EDA’s response was to that December 6 request for the mutual inspection by the three involved parties. He said he contacted Tederick to inform him he would be out of town on business that week, and suggested a meeting the following week with two representatives from each party, the Town, the EDA and 2 East Main, but without attorneys.
There was no response from the interim town manager, Harold said.
In response to a FOIA request, the Royal Examiner received documents indicating a January 8 letter from EDA Board Chairman Ed Daley to Tederick providing an estimate of $13,200 to $15,700 from 2 East Main Street for winterization costs it would contract for. Daley asked the interim town manager to seek town council approval of covering those winterization costs.
In a January 16 response, Tederick informed the EDA Board Chairman that council took the matter up at its January 13 meeting and instructed the town attorney to reach out to the EDA attorney “to determine the best path forward”.
“Like you, we all hope to find an expedient resolution to the former Afton Inn and the safety hazard it has become,” Tederick wrote Daley.
According to Harold, the gist of that subsequent conversation between the Town and EDA attorneys was that the Town would accept ownership of the Afton property back at no cost.
But with no guarantees on a final outcome of such a transfer and the EDA still in negotiations with 2 East Main Street to resurrect a highly desired renovation project, the EDA declined that offer.
And now the Front Royal Town Council is a second vote of approval away from implementing a Dilapidated Property Abatement Code that would force property owners to develop a structural repair plan or accept the Town’s abatement plan to be implemented, at the owner’s cost. Failure to comply would result in the Town’s legal right to seize the property as they would if a back-tax lien had been issued.
Wonder how the lawyers will be able to bat that one around the civil courtroom – and at what cost to town taxpayers, who again will face the double jeopardy of funding both sides of that legal battle, were it to occur.
Following an almost two-hour closed session, the EDA readjourned to open session and unanimously approved three motions. Those motions were:
1 – approval of an agreement for the reacquisition of the 3.5-acre workforce housing parcel from the Aikens Group for $26,722.54. EDA board members explained the difference in the reacquisition price from the $10 the property was transferred to the Cornerstone LLC branch of Aikens as covering preliminary engineering and other costs incurred by the Aikens Group since the late November 2019 transfer of the property. The EDA purchased the parcel for $445,000 following its initial gifting to the EDA for $10 by relatives of former EDA Executive Director Jennifer McDonald. The purchase decision was made after an undisclosed tax credit deadline for the gift was missed.
2 – acceptance of a tentative agreement for the sale of the apartment building at 514 East Main Street on the Stokes Mart property for a price of $130,000.
3 – and approval of filing an FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request to the Front Royal Town government for all communications with the Virginia Department of Historic Resources related to the Community Development Block Grant or the Afton Inn.
See the meeting’s opening Afton Inn condition discussion, and various EDA committee reports on the marketing of properties, pending property closings, the status of the Town’s $8.4 million debt to the EDA for construction of the new town police headquarters, and other EDA business in this exclusive Royal Examiner video:
Town reversed initial commitment to cover Afton Inn ‘winterization’ costs
During an update on the status of various properties at a Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority Asset Committee meeting, Friday morning, the status of the on-hold Afton Inn “winterization” project two months into the winter of 2019-20 was broached.
In the agenda summary the project, described as once “a high priority” of the town government, was now observed to apparently be dead in the cold winter elements.
According to Asset Committee Chairman Greg Harold, Town staff apparently did an about-face on responsibility for, or the necessity of, covering the winterization costs.
Harold told those present that since the Town approached the EDA about working together with Afton Inn redeveloper 2 East Main Street LLC in November to get the stabilization project underway to prevent further deterioration of the 151-year-old brick and wood building shell, he had a record of communications with Town Attorney Doug Napier indicating Town responsibility for, and intent of, paying for the winterization work.
At various points in those communications a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dating to the 2014 transfer of ownership from the Town to the EDA for marketing and redevelopment purposes was referenced; as was Napier’s written expression of a “moral obligation” of the Town to provide for the “safety and welfare” of its citizens as pieces began falling off the building; and former Town Planning Director Jeremy Camp’s written notice of the apparent availability of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding for the Main Street façade improvement work that could be utilized by the Town to pay for its own staff to work on the winterization project.
Consequently, Harold noted the EDA spent $3,500 on an engineering report to get a cost estimate on the project to the Town. However, several subsequent emails from the Town indicated logistical complications discovered by its staff leading to the likelihood of increased costs.
Harold observed that Interim Town Manager Matt Tederick had stepped in at a mid-December EDA board meeting to state that earlier communications indicating the Town would cover the winterization costs were a “mistake”.
Harold noted that his response to Town Attorney Napier asking for substantiation to support the interim town manager’s assertion was forwarded to the Town’s outside counsel, Damiani & Damiani, handling its civil claims against the EDA with no further communications.
However, EDA Board Treasurer Jorie Martin interjected by phone hook up that she had one initial communication from Damiani & Damiani stating that they “would get back to us” after which there were no further communications.
In that December 19 email to Napier forwarded to the Town’s outside counsel, Harold wrote, “I have read the MOA, and I am not able to find any subordination clause or other languages that strips Front Royal of this requirement (of funding),” adding, “Contrarily, there are 2 paragraphs which explicitly detail and reaffirm the town’s commitment.”
One of those paragraphs from the MOU dated June 23, 2014, is quoted stating, “The Town agrees that during ownership of the Afton Inn property by the EDA, the Town shall not require the EDA to perform any repairs, maintenance or demolition of any part of the Afton Inn building unless the Town agrees to bear the costs of such repairs, maintenance or demolition.”
The following paragraph describes the Afton Inn’s close proximity to Town Hall at the head of the East Main Street Historic Downtown Business District, observing, “The Town has clearly identifiable interests in the use to be made and in the appearance, of the Afton Inn property … As such, the Town has an appropriate, identifiable interest in keeping the Afton Inn property in both a viable safe physical condition and an aesthetically pleasing condition.”
It was again noted that 2 East Main Street LLC continues to express hope of maintaining its interest in the Afton renovation project now stalled by the EDA’s financial dilemma tied to the financial scandal asserted in the County-EDA funded Cherry Bekaert forensic audit of EDA business in recent years.
And put up a parking lot?
However, it would appear in this season of the interim town manager and a new council majority committed to cost and tax reductions despite $29 million in capital improvement funding needs in the coming budget year, those steering the ship of Front Royal Town government have simply decided the Afton Inn’s appearance, condition and redevelopment are no longer fiscal priorities.
As the discussion moved to the collection of bad debts, EDA Board Vice Chairman Jeff Browne noted that since the involvement of the EDA’s contracted attorney, the first check from a debtor had been received – “We just have to pick it up … so, we’re already starting to see results,” Browne told the Asset Committee, leading Board Chairman Ed Daley to quip, “Was this a large check from a municipal corporation that owes us a very significant amount of money?”
“The answer would be no,” Browne replied, dashing the hope the Town had decided to make good on at least a portion of its undisputed $8.4 million debt to the EDA on the principal for the Town Police Department construction project, if not on Afton Inn winterization costs.
See this discussion just past the 38-minute mark of the linked Royal Examiner video, as well as other topics in the entire meeting video. Among topics discussed were bids received on removal of the solar panels on the EDA’s Kendrick Lane office complex; a pending closing date of February 28 on the Stokes Mart property sale; and re-acquisition of the Workforce Housing parcel, hopefully, at the same $10 price, it was inexplicably transferred to the Cornerstone LLC branch of the Aikens Group in late November 2018 for.
After initially being “gifted” to the EDA for $10, due to unmet, publicly undisclosed deadlines not being met, the EDA acquired the property at a cost of $445,000, with additional resources allegedly being committed to the project leading to the property being written off as a $600,000-plus loss.
In addition to Harold, Daley, Browne, and Martin, the latter by phone hookup, present at Friday’s Asset Committee meeting were EDA attorney Sharon Pandak, also by phone connection, EDA Executive Director Doug Parsons and South River Supervisor Cheryl Cullers.
Town, County, EDA join forces with commercial realty community
At 8 a.m. Wednesday morning, February 19, members of the local real estate brokers community gathered at the Kendrick Lane Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development office for a “Commercial Property Open House.
After some breakfast snacks provided by the EDA through the Shenandoah Valley Golf Club’s catering service and a briefing by EDA Executive Director Doug Parsons on economic incentives available locally and through the state economic development partnership, the group representing 10 realty companies, accompanied by EDA, Town and County officials began the tour close by.
First to be viewed of 28 properties were two vacant offices in the EDA office complex at 400 Kendrick Lane. Then it was on to the Town Trolley for a foray into the adjacent Royal Phoenix Business Park’s 117 vacant acres before heading into the Route 522/340 North Commercial and Industrial Corridor.
Royal Examiner caught up with Parsons and Administrative Assistant Gretchen Henderson shortly after noon following the Open House tour’s conclusion back in Front Royal. In fact, Parsons noted that of the 28 EDA overseen properties on the tour, all but seven were in the town limits.
On the Town side, Community Development Director Felicia Hart had taken the point, working with EDA Board Vice-Chairman Jeff Browne to propel the Commercial Property Open House forward. Following Hart’s January 29 termination with several other Town staff and department heads as part of the interim town manager’s Fiscal Year 2021 budget proposal, Browne worked with Interim Town Manager Matt Tederick to see things moved forward on the logistical side.
Planning Director Taryn Logan represented Warren County and Chris Brock, who identified himself as Interim Planning and Zoning Director, was present for Front Royal. Parsons and Henderson acknowledged the contribution of town staff in preparation of a properties’ booklet for the open house and the provision of the trolley for the tour.
“Everybody’s working together,” we observed to Parsons of the joint EDA-Town-County driven interaction with local commercial realtors.
“Yes, as always,” the EDA executive director replied.
“Or at least ‘almost’ always,” we suggested of certain litigious efforts of one participating municipal partner. However, Parsons declined to take the bait, preferring to accentuate the positives of the day. So, we asked for his assessment of the day and its impetus.
“The idea behind the event was to bring together the Blue Ridge Association of Realtors members and take them on a tour of 28 properties here in Front Royal and Warren County that we think are good, viable properties for both commercial and industrial development. So, we looked at 21 properties in town and seven outside of town.
“I think we saw a good variety of buildings, vacant ground that could be used for a variety of purposes. I think the realtors appreciated the information, and I think it was a good partnership effort between the Town and the EDA. I want to thank Chris Brock and Alfredo Velasquez for their help in collating and binding the materials. And Chris’s expertise was a big part of the day as he was able to talk to the group about planning and zoning and certain properties in town.
“Taryn Logan was also a very valuable asset to help explain the planning and zoning in the county and some of the history of the properties.
“And a lot of the realtors that were on the tour, they knew a great deal about some of these properties because they’d either bought or sold them before; or had dealt with them in the past, so knew the history. There was a lot of knowledge on the bus which was shared amongst the group and hopefully, it’ll lead to some sales for some of the properties here in town – and out in the county,” Parsons concluded what he believes was a morning well spent.
Apparently the private sector participants agreed. A sign out sheet was punctuated with “Comments” including “Great Event”, “Good Idea”, “Thank you so much!!”, “Wonderful – very informative” and “Next Year?”
We asked Parsons about his pre-tour briefing on some financial incentives available through the Town, EDA and the Virginia Economic Development Partnership (VEDP).
“I know a lot of times the real estate community in states across the nation may not be as in tune with the local and state incentives that these job developers’ programs have to offer. So, I was hoping to make them aware of what is out there for them in that regard … Because if you’re a realtor and you are dealing with someone and maybe there’s a ten or twenty thousand dollar gap in being able to close the deal, if you can bring the Virginia Jobs Investment Program incentive to the table, or the tech zone incentive here locally to the table, it could be a deal closer for someone,” Parsons observed.
And deal closings on some commercial properties are what the EDA, its municipal partners, and private sector realtors are all looking to make happen.
EDA presents budget proposal to Board of Supervisors; delinquent taxes from contractors
On Tuesday, February 11 at the evening work session of the Warren County Board of Supervisors, the EDA Board and staff presented its budget proposal to get through the final 3 1/2 months of this fiscal year and to continue into FY 2021.
Also included on the agenda was a discussion with Building official David Beahm and Commissioner of the Revenue Sherry Sours on the payment of delinquent taxes and business license fees by contractors prior to issuance of building permits.
County Administrator Doug Stanley discussed the Department of Environmental Quality Financial Assurance requirements. Also, Stanley, along with County Attorney Jason Ham, discussed the management and lease agreements of the Front Royal Golf Club.
See the presentations, including discussion of the Town’s $8 million-plus debt to the EDA on the new police station and the status of the Front Royal Golf Club in this exclusive Royal Examiner video:
EDA report to County – long-time annual auditor withdraws from lagging 2018 audit process
During one of six operational updates from entities with which it is either directly or indirectly involved at its Tuesday, February 4 meeting, the Warren County Board of Supervisors got what Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority Executive Director Doug Parson called “bad” and “very disappointing” news.
That news was that long-time EDA auditor Yount-Hyde-Barbour had withdrawn from the EDA’s 2018 audit process. That process is running considerably behind as the EDA tries to get to the bottom of the final year of a number of years during which a contracted financial investigation by Cherry Bekaert, known for its forensic audit discoveries of criminal financial behavior, alleged a number of years of financial improprieties within EDA operations.
The Cherry Bekaert investigation conducted from mid-September 2018 into the spring of 2019 has resulted in a $21.3-million EDA civil litigation against what currently stands at 14 human and business entity defendants and multiple financial felony indictments by a special grand jury empaneled to investigate potential criminality tied to the EDA civil litigation. At the center of both the civil and criminal cases is former EDA Executive Director Jennifer McDonald.
It was Yount-Hyde-Barbour that was contracted by the EDA to conduct its annual audits during most, if not all of the years during which the EDA financial scandal is believed to have occurred. In recent months retired Warren County Finance Director Carolyn Stimmel and Heather Tweedie of the auditing firm Hottel-Willis have been pouring through the EDA’s 2018 financial records trying to ascertain what EDA assets went where, how, to what purpose and most importantly, were those purposes legitimate and authorized by the EDA Board of Directors.
Yount-Hyde-Barbour had been expected to take the result of Stimmel and Tweedie’s work to belatedly conduct their annual audit for 2018. Completion of that audit has been termed crucial to the
EDA’s future ability to function as it attempts to traverse the operational aftermath of the financial crimes alleged to have occurred under McDonald’s decade of executive leadership of the EDA.
One EDA civil case defendant’s attorney wondered aloud during a past motions hearing that if their client was a defendant for the financial actions alleged against them, why the EDA auditor that had rubber stamped the EDA’s finances annually through the years of alleged embezzlements and misdirection of assets, wasn’t also a defendant.
Could Yount-Hyde-Barbour’s withdrawal from the 2018 audit process be an indicator of potential legal issues between the auditor and the EDA? In response to media questions Sands Anderson attorney Dan Siegel, present with lead EDA civil case attorney Cullen Seltzer for a closed session discussion with County officials of the EDA’s civil case landscape, said only that EDA counsel continues to explore potential legal liability in many directions.
VDOT Revenue Sharing
In other business Tuesday, after a week’s delay to allow new supervisors to gather additional information, the county board unanimously approved the County’s contribution to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Revenue Sharing Program. It was explained that the program that runs through multiple municipal fiscal year budgets allows involved municipalities to get a 50% revenue match from the State on needed and desired road improvements throughout the county.
Numbers presented projected the County’s contribution in the coming FY 2021 budget at $250,000. It was a number projected to remain constant in FY 2021 through FY 2024. Six total involved road project costs were cited at $2.9-million over a number of years, with a 25% County contribution total of $753,312.50 and a 25% contribution from involved Sanitary District and POA fees at $703,313.50.
Short-term rental permit
By a 3-2 margin, a divided board approved a short-term rental Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Stephen J. Aron Jr. despite some objections from neighbors in the gated River Ridge Property Owners Association. Tony Carter and Archie Fox cast the two dissenting votes.
Carter cited neighbor concerns about security issues tied to the applicant’s efforts to recoup some of his residential property improvement costs in purchasing what he said at the earlier public hearing was the run-down home of what he described as the less than conscientious previous occupants. In explaining her vote for the CUP, Delores Oates noted that renters wouldn’t be given the code to the gate, but would utilize a locked key box key to activate entry to the gated community.
Carter replied that, that solution still allowed entry and access of strangers to a community that many residents may have located to for the additional security provided by locked access available only to residents and their guests.
During the January public hearing it was noted in favor of the request that many short-term rental operations do quite a bit of vetting of guests. The applicant indicated he intended to be conscientious about those allowed to stay at the residence he and his family plan to spend a great deal of time at themselves.
In addition to the EDA, other operational updates the county received were from VDOT, RSW Jail, the Virginia Cooperative Extension Service, Department of Social Services and the Town of Front Royal.
See a related story on the Town report; and see the full Warren County Board of Supervisors meeting – other than the 3-hour-plus closed session – in this Royal Examiner video:
Economic development proceeds amidst legal and Spotted Lanternfly threats
This reporter sat down with Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority Board of Directors Vice-Chairman Jeff Browne and Executive Director Doug Parsons on Friday, January 31, to discuss the work they do amidst challenges they face in the aftermath of the financial scandal that developed during the executive leadership of Jennifer McDonald and a previous EDA board majority.
In what we hope is the first of at least monthly video interviews on EDA business and affairs, listen as Browne and Parsons describe how their time is budgeted as they continue the EDA’s work of business retention and recruitment in an environment of dueling civil litigations. They continue to offer an olive branch to the Front Royal Town Council to work together in good faith to determine exactly what the EDA owes the Town in allegedly misdirected EDA assets generated by Town taxpayers, as opposed to an increasingly expensive attorney-driven civil suit filed by the Town against its existing co-created EDA.
It is litigation, as is pointed out in the interview, in which town taxpayers face the unhappy task of funding both sides, as Town taxpayers for the plaintiff and as County taxpayers for the defendant.
And speaking of olive branches, Browne and Parsons conclude the interview by describing the economic threat presented by the expanding presence of the fruit-tree and grapevine feeding Spotted Lanternfly in Frederick County to our north; and how Warren County citizens and businesses can be on the alert to spot, report and mitigate early signs of the destructive bug’s presence in our county.
Watch the discussion in this exclusive Royal Examiner video: