Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2023_tcwsmin0327Council Work Session March 27, 2023 Council Chamber, 25 West Market Street, Leesburg, Virginia, 7:00 p.m. Mayor Kelly Burk presiding. Council Members Present: Todd Cimino -Johnson, Zach Cummings, Kari Nacy, Vice Mayor Neil Steinberg, Patrick Wilt, and Mayor Kelly Burk. Council Members Absent: Ara Bagdasarian. Staff Present: Town Manager Kaj Dentler, Town Attorney Christopher Spera, Deputy Town Manager Keith Markel, Utilities Director Amy Wyks, Public Works and Capital Projects Director Renee LaFollette, Finance and Administrative Services Director Clark Case, Finance and Administrative Services Deputy Director/Treasurer Lisa Haley, Parks and Recreation Director Rich Williams, Planning and Zoning Director James David, Human Resources Director Josh Didawick, Information Technology Director Jakub Jedrzejczak, Plan Review Director Bill Ackman, Parks and Recreation Deputy Director Kate Trask, Finance and Administrative Services Management and Budget Officer Cole Fazenbaker, and Clerk of Council Eileen Boeing. Minutes prepared by Deputy Clerk of Council Corina Alvarez. AGENDA ITEMS 1. Item for Discussion a. Liberty Street Parking Lot — Remediation Ms. LaFollette provided background information on the Liberty Street Parking Lot and a suggested scope of work for a remediation study and its timeline. Council and staff discussed the item. It was the consensus of Council to move forward with a remediation study for the Liberty Street Public Parking Lot. b. Liberty Street Parking Lot Mr. Markel gave an overview of the Liberty Street Parking Lot Public Private Partnership Request for Proposals (RFP) that was issued in April 2022. He also described the components of the proposal the Town received in response to the RFP from Good Works LP, Waukeshaw Development Inc., Bowman Consulting, James G. Davis Construction, and DBI Architects Inc. Council and staff discussed the item. It was the consensus of Council to accept the redevelopment proposal of the Liberty Street Parking Lot and continue discussions on the project. c. Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 — Final Mark-up Session Council and staff discussed the item. The mark-up results are as follows: It was the consensus of Council to: • reverse its vote and add back the previously removed I% Cost of Living Adjustment • add $30K to fund three different erent studies (situational comparisons, funding availability, and economic impact) 11Page Council Work Session March 27, 2023 2. Additions to Future Council Meetings a. None 3. Adjournment On a motion by Vice Mayor Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Nacy, the meeting was adjourned at 8:•21 p.m. Clerk of Council 2023_tcwsmin0327 ?vetu? 2IPage March 27, 2023 — Town Council Work Session (Note: This is a transcript prepared by Town staff based on the video of the meeting. It may not be entirely accurate. For greater accuracy, we encourage you to review the video of the meeting that is on the Town's Web site — www.Ieesburgva.gov or refer to the approved Council meeting minutes. Council meeting videos are retained for three calendar years after a meeting per Library of Virginia Records Retention guidelines.) Mayor Kelly Burk: Let me call tonight's Town Council Work Session to order. If there's no objection from the Council, we have had a request to combine the Liberty Street Parking Lot Remediation Study with the Liberty Street Parking Lot Redevelopment Proposal. It's by Mr. Markel and if nobody objects, we will give them 20 minutes. All right, you don't look like Mr. Markel. Renee LaFollette: I'm not. Mayor Burk: Oh, okay. Renee LaFollette: You get me first. Mayor Burk: Okay. Renee LaFollette: Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of Town Council, I get the first part of Liberty Street Parking Lot and we're talking about the Potential Remediation Study. As a little bit of background, it's a 2.03 -acre site, there's approximately 123 parking spaces, and 11 metered spaces. Part of the lot is currently used as a Public Works satellite facility where our sign shop, our signal table shop, where we test all the traffic signals before we put them in the field, a small break room and storage for our Downtown events, equipment, barricades, and street signs, and it was the former Town dump. To give you a little bit of reference, the yellow highlighted part is Liberty Street Lot. It's bounded on the north by Royal Street, to the east by Wirt Street, on the south side is Town Branch, and the W&OD trail is on the opposite side of Town Branch, and then on the west side is the Chesterfield development of townhomes. From the 1940s to the mid -1950s, it was the municipal dump. That was closed in around '57 or so. Today, it is an asphalt -capped surface parking lot with the ancillary Public Works buildings there. In 2003, the DEQ performed a site screening report as part of the Brownfield program. That screening report was done at no cost to the Town and the intent was to promote clean-up and potential redevelopment. Fast forward 20 years, rules and regulations have changed on how municipal landfills can be remediated and what's allowed to go to a current landfill or what has to go to a specialized type facility. We are recommending a remediation study that would start with deep ground penetrating radar and electromagnetic surveys, some drilled shafts, soil borings, and water well installation, and then we have to dispose of those stockpile materials. Once we take them out of the ground, we can't put them back in. They have to be disposed of and our consultant will write a comprehensive report. The most important part of this remediation study is getting a cost estimate of what they think based on what we find in the ground it would cost to remediate that old landfill. Timeline. If we get approval to move forward with us and we give them the notice to proceed in the April timeframe, they would start the field work within 5 to 10 days. They would start with the non-destructive ground penetrating radar and the electromagnetic surveys. What that does, it gives us a surface view to depth of what is potentially below. The ground penetrating radar will indicate large tanks, cars, highly dense materials. The electromagnetic component is finer tuned and will then coalesce with that ground penetrating radar. After that, we would do drilled shafts, which are three-foot diameter shafts that would go down to 22 to 25 feet in depth. That is anticipated to take four to eight days. That will get us to what we are anticipating being the bottom of the landfill. We're expecting that to be 22 to 25 feet below surface. Then we would do soil borings that are smaller diameter. They're eight inches in diameter to do a little bit more subsurface work, little bit cheaper way. We can then poke a little bit more and confirm what the larger shafts show. That would be another two days approximately. We're going to put in four Page 1 1 March 27, 2023 water wells that would go below the 25 to 27 foot below the base of the landfill to check for which direction the water is migrating through that site and also to monitor the water quality as well. The testing of the soil samples that they bring up, that is expected to take most of the summer because they're going to be looking for the heavy metals, the pesticides, the herbicides, what needs to be quantified and qualified so we know which type of disposal facility it needs to go to. Once they get all of that information, they would provide us with a report and the cost estimation. We would anticipate that final report to be into us late September so that we can report back to Council in October. We are requesting Council to authorize this remediation study at their next Council meeting. It is $130,961 is the consultant's estimate for this. Would be asking for a total of $164K so that we have a contingency because, honestly, we don't know exactly what we're going to find or what type of disposal we're going to have of the materials that come up. With that, I will answer any questions. Mayor Burk: All right. Anyone have questions at this point? Mr. Cummings? Council Member Zach Cummings: Sorry. Any environmental concerns with the boring or anything that we need to be on the lookout for? Sorry. Obviously, they're going to be testing the runoff, it sounds like once they do these holes, but any concern at all environmentally? Renee LaFollette: No, because when they do the borings, they'll have a containment area set up around the boring area. All of the materials that come up will be put on tarps. They will take specific samples from different levels. Then they will also be monitoring for methane gas and doing tests related to that. They'll check also for where the groundwater table is. Everything that is done will be done in accordance with DEQ in Brownsfield-type studies. Council Member Cummings: In that same vein, any concern at all about the land. I don't think it's going to happen, but the land shifting or anything? Renee LaFollette: No. Council Member Cummings: Okay. That's it. Thank you. Mayor Burk: They're not that big at all. Council Member Cummings: Yes. Renee LaFollette: The holes will be backfilled with self -compacting gravel. Mayor Burk: Mr. Wilt? Council Member Patrick Wilt: Thanks, Renee. Just two questions on the cost estimate. Is the cost estimate to do what specifically to the site and what state will the site be projected at the end of that cost estimate? Renee LaFollette: Okay. The cost estimate that I just presented is just for the study. Are you talking about the cost estimate that's a part of the study? Council Member Wilt: Yes. Renee LaFollette: Okay. That cost estimate is to give us an order of magnitude for budgeting purposes if we would decide to remediate the site. How much material needs to come out, the type of facility that the material needs to go to whether it can go to the Loudoun County landfill or whether it has to go to a hazardous material type facility. Council Member Wilt: At that point, that site after remediation, is it in a usable condition or is it ready for redevelopment or what will the site's condition be? Page 2 I March 27, 2023 Renee LaFollette: That will be determined once we find out how much the remediation costs would be. The remediation cost would be taking all of the dumped material out and then it would be a determination by Council of how far you want us to take that for remediation. Council Member Wilt: Okay. Well, the study also give us some ideas of beyond just the cost to accomplish this. What some public funding or grant sources might be to pick up some of this cost? Renee LaFollette: We've asked for them to look into different types of grant funding, there are a number of different grants out there. Council Member Wilt: Okay. Renee LaFollette: We will be applying for a grant to help offset some of this cost. Council Member Wilt: All right, great. Thanks, Renee. Mayor Burk: Miss Nacy? Council Member Kari Nacy: Thank you. Well, a lot of my questions have been asked already so thanks guys, but just out of curiosity, while this is happening, are we allowed to come see it? Renee LaFollette: Yes. Council Member Nacy: Or is it too dangerous? Renee LaFollette: No. I would ask if you wanted to come to the site when the work is going on that you coordinate with me. It will be a hard hat, safety vest, work boot -type site when they're working. Council Member Nacy: Then thinking ahead to remediation and let's say all the stars align and this works out, is it just like in filter that we put back or how does that work to fill the big hole in the ground? Renee LaFollette: Well, part of that will be discussed with the second part of the presentation. Council Member Nacy: Oh, okay, I'm getting ahead of myself. Renee LaFollette: Hopefully, we would figure out what we're going to do with the site before we take everything out, so we don't leave a big hole in the ground and lose a parking lot before we need to. Council Member Nacy: Perfect, thank you. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor Steinberg? Vice Mayor Neil Steinberg: Oh, that's me. Thank you. Thanks, Renee. Can you explain what the excavation dewatering is, and why it's not included, or what that means when it says it's not included? Excavation dewatering. Renee LaFollette: The excavation watering - Vice Mayor Steinberg: Dewatering. Renee LaFollette: -dewatering. When they're doing the drilled shafts, if they come across water, they're not going to pump the water out of the holes. They'll keep going down through that water to bring the sample up. Once we bring the water out, we would have to put it in drums, and then it's a different set of disposal criteria for that. They also didn't account for water for the drill rigs so we will need to provide access to the fire hydrant there so that they have water for their drill rigs. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Okay, but the water, in the end, is just left for now. Page 3 I March 27, 2023 Renee LaFollette: The water is left where it is for now. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Okay. It looks like this will happen fairly quickly if we go ahead and prove this. Renee LaFollette: Yes. Vice Mayor Steinberg: How are we planning for the displaced parking and how quickly will we be able to notify about that? Renee LaFollette: It'll be section by section, so it won't be the entire parking lot. While we're doing this work, we will meet with the consultant and put together a plan on where they'll work on which day so that we only close a portion of the parking lot instead of the whole thing. Vice Mayor Steinberg: All right and it's funny when you actually read these reports, you start to learn things. Out of curiosity, are any of the water, sewer, gas, or electric lines been moved or attitudes since 2003? Renee LaFollette: None that I'm aware of go through the municipal landfill. They're skirting it. Vice Mayor Steinberg: When we say the southern half, I'm trying to understand. When this site was the dump, are we saying that only the southern half of the two acres was used as the dump? Renee LaFollette: Pretty much. If you look at the grade of Wirt Street as you're coming up the hill, about halfway up that hill, if you draw a straight line across, that's roughly where we think the landfill is. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Anything above that, basically is in theory -- Renee LaFollette: Either fill or natural materials. That's part of what the ground penetrating radar and the electromagnetic survey is for is to clearly define what that northern limit is. I'm only going by what was in the 2003 report that says it was the southern half of the site. Since I wasn't here back then, we're going to do the ground penetrating radar to really define what that northern limit is. Vice Mayor Steinberg: For the northern part of the property, which was used as the fuel depot, does this study include that so we understand if there are any byproducts or spills? Renee LaFollette: It does not. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Does riot. Renee LaFollette: The underground storage tank was identified in the 2003 report, and the disposal of that type of soil has not changed in regulation. Vice Mayor Steinberg: In the end, when we are referring to remediation, we're really only talking about the southern half of this property, not the property in its entirety. Renee LaFollette: The way it is proposed right now, and I will ask the consultant to look at the cost of remediation where the fuel tanks were. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Then finally, so there's a reference to a 14 -foot -thick silty layer, which contains glass, brick, et cetera. Are they referring to that portion that is the landfill or is there a silt layer throughout? Renee LaFollette: Every day, you still had to cap some of the landfill. A lot of the material that was put into the landfill got mixed with the soils. That's why you have the glass and the brick in that fill. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Okay. Thank you. Page 4 I March 27, 2023 Mayor Burk: In here, you mentioned that water wells will be installed. These are not wells. I want just make sure that everybody understands they're not -- Renee LaFollette: They're monitoring wells. Mayor Burk: They're not drinking water. We're not going to start —okay. Renee LaFollette: Monitoring wells. Mayor Burk: You will be looking at -- you'll be evaluating that water to test how clean it is? Renee LaFollette: Yes. Mayor Burk: Will you be looking at the PFAS, is that what they're called? The material that comes from Teflon and stuff that is evidently in everywhere and everybody. Renee LaFollette: There's an entire chemical panel that they'll run on the water. I'm not 100% positive, but I'll ask that question. Mayor Burk: Yes, would you ask that, please? I would be interested in knowing that. Well, thank you very much. Appreciate the information. Tomorrow, we will be voting on this, one way or the other. It most certainly is something that we have talked about for a long time. Thank you very much. Now, Mr. Markel. Keith Markel: All right. We'll transition over to the discussion of what brought the study to the forefront here, which was the proposal and Town's initiation of putting out an RFP or request for proposals for what could happen on the slot. For years, this has been identified as an underdeveloped parcel. Right now, the asphalt cap on this former dump site has served the Town well just by stabilizing the area. I think everybody recognizes there's a higher and better use for this site. That was something that was called out in the Legacy Leesburg adopted Comprehensive Plan last year. That's area six of enhancement areas. It calls for using this space for something to really support the Downtown and energize the Downtown. Included in that would be a public parking structure and other amenities, cultural, housing, other things that can boost the Downtown's presence. That's coming out of Legacy Leesburg. To just walk everyone through, for those of you who weren't on Council at the time when this was put forth by Council as being an RFP and then brought forward for discussion back in August, just wanted to give you a little bit of a history here. Council passed the Resolution back in November of '21, asking staff to develop and issue the RFP for proposals, public -private partnership proposals for what could happen on this site if the Town were to contribute the land. The issuance of that RFP was in May of '22, and one response was received by a partnership of firms made up of Good Works LP, Waukesha Development, Bowman Consulting, James G Davis Construction, DBI Architects. This group came together with a proposal that you all had received, and we discussed it in August. This group, I wanted to just point out, has been great to work with, very creative and very passionate about what could happen here on the site and what it could mean for the Downtown. Many of those representatives are here this evening, should you have any questions or want to discuss this further with them. As far as what the request for proposal called for, the initial, the base [unintelligible] of this was the Town to sell the Liberty Street Parking Lot to a developer. Then the developer would recognize the need that public parking was still needed on this site. As you know, we've got over 100 spaces there currently, which gets fairly high utilization and more so in recent years. The Town knew we couldn't lose any parking in whatever proposal came forward. The proposal also asked for commercial development on the first floor with a potential for residential development on the second floor. Special preferential treatment would be considered for those residential uses providing affordable housing. Here's just an illustrative provided by the proposing group showing the site and how it sits on the lot. You can see its orientation with the W&OD Trail, South Street, Wirt Street, Royal Street. Here, in that red box is a senior affordable housing. This would be that affordable housing units that would be in a continuous building that would be that buffer Page 51 March 27, 2023 between the Chesterfield Commons or Chesterfield Square townhomes to the west and the performing arts center they are proposing to the east. Here is the Performing arts center in the blue and you can see that nonresidential vehicle traffic, that would be traffic coming to the Performing arts center and the restaurant use would be coming in from South Street and Wirt Street and turning into the development. Access for the affordable housing into the structured parking would be coming from Liberty Street. There'd also be some public spaces, some public green spaces here, adjacent to the W&OD Trail and Town Branch as well as some space up closer to Royal Street. Here's a side profile of the site just to give you an idea of the topography. Illustrate here. Our pen does not want to play tonight. Let's go back here. Here, you can see that the multi -story affordable housing on the left side of the screen this would be backed up to Chesterfield. On the right side of the screen, you'll see that would be the performing art space. Underneath both of those structures would be one run of continuous structured parking, multilayered parking that would provide the parking for both residential use as well as the performing art space. What does their proposal include? It has the senior affordable housing component, 65 units. What I'm going on this evening is what was in the proposal. There have been a number of different conversations we've had with the proposing groups over the past several months as we've talked about this in more detail. These numbers have fluctuated a bit but generally speaking, we're talking around 60 to 70 units of affordable housing, individuals 62 years of age and older. This would share that structured parking. Their parking would need to be on the upper levels because residential parking needs to be outside of the floodplain. Transient parking for the performing arts center could be at the lower level. The second part, and I think that the part that was more spoken to in the RFP would be that cultural resource amenity. This would be the performing arts center and the restaurant use as proposed by the applicant. This would be a 450 -seat performing arts space. It'd be a flexible space with movable seating to allow for a variety of different uses and performance venue needs as well as a 4K -square -foot restaurant. There's a public parking proposal here. The existing lot as we talked about has around 120 spaces, 11 of which are those metered spaces up closer to Royal Street. The proposal as it was presented back initially had 175 spaces in total in the structured parking. Staff felt that this was below the need because it really doesn't accommodate all the needs of the proposed uses as well as the 100 -plus spaces, currently needed just by all the uses that surround this site. This was something when we did have community outreach meeting here when Russ Seymour hosted that out at the site. When we put the surveys out, public parking really was at the top of that list of what folks in the surrounding area really felt was important to keep on this site. Whatever happens on the site, we want to make sure that public parking is a key component of that. The other issue here is that the Town would be responsible for maintaining a number of these amenities. In the original RFP, it was thought that the Town would sell the land and the private developer would come in and construct these different facilities and manage these facilities. As the current proposal stands, the parking lot would be owned by the Town of Leesburg and managed and operated as such. There would also, again, briefly touched on this, the public outdoor spaces for the adjacent to the performing arts center, as well as the bridge that they're proposing crossing over the creek, over to the W&OD Trail. That would require Nova Parks approval. The proposed developer expenses would be covered only those senior affordable housing and some of the parking estimated $24M in private funds going into this, and that would be handled through loans and grants and the complicated formulas that go along with senior affordable housing. That's where Good Works comes in as the entity that would be able to manage that and develop that. They've got great expertise and a lot of proven success here in Loudoun County with operating these facilities and developing these facilities so that part would be taken care of. As well as the money from the purchase of that land, since they would need to own that land separately, that $2M. The Town could then use that money towards whatever it needed to do. We're proposing towards that remediation project, the landfill cost, and those sorts of things. The Town's Page 6 I March 27, 2023 expenses are significant, and that's where really staffs biggest concern is, as we've looked at the numbers. Site remediation, building of the performing arts center, operating the performing arts center, building the restaurant, leasing out, operating the restaurant, and those public parking spaces, all come at a significant cost. The proposer has estimated those costs around $31M. We have not done our own analysis yet. We have not hired any firms to verify those numbers. If we're going by the $31M number, we realize that some of this could be offset if there was a vigorous funding campaign, private donations, grant monies, all those things could bring that number down. Worst case scenario, you're looking at a pretty significant number. This would put amazing strain on our CIP. It would cause reallocation of projects, delaying of projects. We have debt ceiling issues. Ultimately, if we didn't have different revenue streams coming in and couldn't make adjustments, we're looking at issues that would jeopardize our Triple AAA Bond Rating. Just to break down what it would look like. We talked to our financial consultant here for an assumed interest rate. Right now, it's 3.75 going up so we're going with a 4% interest rate. If you're looking to finance that over 20 years as municipal governments do, the Town funding of $31M would equate out to $2.25M annual debt service. That would impact the real estate tax rate if you're looking to fund it through real estate tax of over 2 cents from where we currently are. If we were able to get half and half funding so a match from the private sector leaving the Town responsible for half of the development costs of those public amenities and the parking facilities at $15M, still at that 4% interest rate, you're looking at $1.12M in annual debt service or an impact on the real estate tax rate of just over a penny. These are significant costs to the Town. Our conclusions here simply the site capacity there is limited parking. We feel there's a greater need for parking on the site. We do have a need for Public Works to have space there as they currently do to facilitate Town operations in the Downtown core. Our operations, that's the risk because we haven't been in the business of operating a performing arts center or restaurants. These are new things that the Town would have to commit to in finding folks that we could contract out with. Then ultimately, affordability is our biggest concern here. That's where we really end up with being able to provide some draft motions to you. Our recommendation as it currently stands is to recommend denial and rejection of this proposal. I'm happy to answer any questions you have, and again, we've got the applicants here as well. Mayor Burk: All right. Thank you very much. I'll start on this. Mr. Cimino -Johnson, do you have any questions? Council Member Todd Cimino -Johnson: No. Mayor Burk: Okay, you're passing. Mr. Cummings? Council Member Cummings: Sure. I'll go first, I guess. I'll just start with, there's a lot of this that I like. It's World Theater Day so it's nice to be talking about a theater. My questions are basically, and I don't know, staff, if you can answer this or if we need to if we're allowed to have the applicants coming forward as well. It looks like we're getting a sense that it's $31M that the Town needs to provide for funding soup to nuts for this project as well as then what a year after year of running a theater, a restaurant, and the parking facilities. What is the number? I think $24M for the senior affordable housing. What other private funds are going to be put into the project beyond that $24M? Keith Markel: As it stands right now in the proposal, that's it. There's talk of grant funding, Federal dollars, State dollars. Those would all be great. Nothing is confirmed yet. You've got private fundraising that you could pursue but there's no mechanism for what that would look like. Is the Town going to create that fundraising arm? Is that going to be something that's going to be championed by the private sector where there's a commitment from local group, to go out and find these dollars, and make dollar -for -dollar match with public funds tied into this? Page 7 1 March 27, 2023 Again, we haven't gone in and done our math yet and gone into any detail evaluation until we get corporate direction from the Town Council as to is this something that you all feel strongly about? Do you want to pursue this? Is there a collective agreement that this is something that you all want to pursue further and that would require more study on our part. Council Member Cummings: Then I guess a question on public -private partnerships in general maybe for the Town Attorney. We've received a proposal; we're having a public discussion. We'll continue to have public discussions it sounds like. Do we have to accept all of the proposals, or can we try to work and say, "We like the senior affordable housing, the theater"? We're a little-- I don't know. I love big ideas. I think this is a great improvement on a parking lot right now but just the financials look dicey. Is there a back -and -forth that's allowed to happen or what's the process? Christopher Spera: Absolutely. I'll back up. This is meant to be an iterative process. It's not like you have to take what they offer. There's a back and forth and ultimately, you can do that as many times as you choose until you choose to make a final vote and say, "I can't make it work," or, "Yes, this is the right way to go forward." It can be iterative and as many iterations as until you are satisfied you have enough information to reach a decision. Keith Markel: Okay. I think those are most of the questions that I had now. Mayor Burk: Any on this side. Ms. Nacy? Council Member Nacy: I don't really have questions, per se. Just some thoughts that it's a great big idea like Councilman Cummings said, and I'm not saying I'm a no forever, but right now, there's too many question marks we got to figure out what's on the site remediation and how much that's going to cost all of that. That's going to cost Town dollars. Then we've got this $31 M number looming and we don't have a revenue source to cover that. I'm not a big fan of raising taxes to do that when we've got some other major things happening like our airport tower, and we need to be saving our pennies for a rainy day. Again, I think it's a great idea, and we desperately need senior affordable housing. I'm just not sure if right now is the best time for it. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor Steinberg? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Thanks. Thanks, Keith. The first thing I'd say is I appreciate staffs support, and I appreciate staffs concern but as Councilman Cummings said, this is a big idea kind of a project, and my feeling is before we dismiss it out of hand without all the necessary information that we should pursue acquiring more information that will help us inform a better decision. If this is a project we can make happen to our satisfaction, then I think it could be a great benefit to the Town from an economic standpoint, not to mention remediating a site that badly needs it. Again, given that there are so many unanswered questions, I think we should continue to pursue those answers. Then I'll be the first one to say it. If we can't make this work without putting the Town in financial jeopardy, then the project won't happen. Before we make that decision, I think we need to continue pursuing potential and see what we can come to. Thanks. Mayor Burk: I have some questions. The $31 M you said, that's just a guess, isn't it? Keith Markel: It's an educated guess from the proposer. We have not - Mayor Burk: From the proposer, it's not even - Keith Markel: -from us. Mayor Burk: -from us so it could be less, but it could be more. Keith Markel: It could be. Page 8 I March 27, 2023 Mayor Burk: That's a substantial amount of money that could have a huge impact on our AAA status, and our debt service and that sort of thing. We have to really take this very seriously. The idea as everyone has said is spectacular. It would be very exciting to be able to make this happen, but we do have to be realistic at the same time. I will go on the record to say that I do not think the Town should be running a restaurant that competes with other restaurants. It is not our business as a Town to be in competition with other businesses. I would, right off the bat, be opposed to us being involved in that. I also have real heartache about the performing arts center being run by the Town. I called a number of towns, and they aren't very many that have a performing arts facility and none of those are run by the town. They have a private nonprofit, arts community -driven management company that really manages it, makes sure it works or it doesn't work, and makes the changes that needs to be made, but it is not the towns that do that because they found that first off, they had a strong arts community. Secondly, the town did not have the capacity, the expertise, to be able to run a performing arts facility. That's a very different need than a park or something along those lines. I'd have real heartburn with those two components, but that doesn't mean that it couldn't be worked out and we couldn't find a group to do it or whatever else. Most certainly, the senior affordable housing is very attractive, it's most certainly something that Leesburg is lacking, and of that you said, the group development or developer, it would cost $24M for the developer to do that with a number of grants, low-income housing tax credits, tax exempt bonds, Loudoun County Housing Trust Fund, and other loans and grants. In the end, would that be a development that would be profitable? Would that be something then that the developer could then take some of the money from that to do another affordable housing project? Are these projects things that don't make any money? Keith Markel: It'd probably be best for the applicant to answer that question for you. Mayor Burk: I'll ask that. I think I saw -- Keith Markel: Mr. Hart's here in the audience. Mayor Burk: There you are. I'll get that information from you if that's okay. The Town would expect that there would be, how many parking spaces? Where's the list? Keith Markel: We'll go back here to the slide. I think we were insisting that we didn't lose any ground from where we currently are. With the current proposal that they had 175 spaces in the parking structure, the existing lot has around 120, depending on how you count them. The residential component would take 51 of those spaces. If you looked at our current zoning standards, you'd be looking at 238 spaces. There is an accommodation for senior housing to reduce the parking standards. You can work with the numbers a little bit, but at the end of the day, you want to make sure that you're providing ample parking for the facility. You don't want to be a burden on the surrounding properties as the on -street parking. We already know we've got parking issues and narrow streets in that part of Town. Looking to the future, you'd want to make sure that you're building in sufficient parking. I will tell you, in conversations we've had since the August discussion with Council, they have had interest in creating an additional layer of parking on that structured parking garage. You can go down -- Mayor Burk: Who would pay for the parking? Keith Markel: The Town folks of Leesburg would be paying [unintelligible], it could be part of the public improvement there. Mayor Burk: The request for proposal only had four components to it, to sell the Liberty Street Parking Lot to the developer. The public parking would still continue to be on site. There would be commercial on the first floor, residential possibly on upper floors. If residential is proposed, that some of it would be affordable. That was the only things that we asked for in this. Keith Markel: There were some more details in the architectural styles and the need for it to fit in the community. There are a few more details within the RFP itself, but those were the basic tenants of Page 9 1 March 27, 2023 what was being asked for. I think the Town, and I believe it was the direction Council that everyone's going into this thinking that the Town's skin in the game was really going to be the land, perhaps the remediation of the site. Really the land was what of value and what the Town could contribute. Then the private development community would come in and take care of whatever the buildout was on that site. Mayor Burk: That most certainly is what I thought we were going to be looking at and to see the change where the Town will take over building and maintaining the public arts facility, building, and maintaining the garage, building, and maintaining, is there anything else we would build there? Keith Markel: The restaurant component, the public park space on it. In fairness to them, I think they envision that we would build the shell of the restaurant and then lease that out to a local restaurateur to operate. Same with the performing arts center, that the Town wouldn't be-- I wouldn't be taking tickets on Saturday there, but you'd have it contracted out so that there'd be the nonprofit group or another entity that would come in and manage that facility for you. We've done some research. Mayor Burk: We'd end up having to pay them to manage it. Keith Markel: You would be, and they'll be the first to tell you, these are usually financial losers for a community. The benefit comes from the ancillary spinoff development, property value increases, increased tourism in the Town, but the use itself, the performing arts center, if you break even, you're doing great. Typically, you're going to be running that thing at a loss. Mayor Burk: Arlington closed one of theirs. I guess I need more clarification from Vice Mayor Steinberg as to what he's talking about because as it stands right now, and I'm a huge proponent for performing arts center, but I can't see a way to get there. Maybe I just, I'm too short. I don't have the vision to be able to support it at this point. I can't imagine going to the residents and saying to them, first off, we'll have to raise your tax rate. I don't have a problem with that because if that's what we're going to do, that's what we're going to do. Then to say, but we're also going to have to talk cut CIP projects that have been in the line for 6 to 10 years and you're not going to be able to get them. Those are things that are going to affect your neighborhood. The dual aspect of that is very difficult for me to be able to support and say, "Let's move forward with this." It's a real struggle. I'm not as sure that I can support this as I would like to have. I would like to have been a real cheerleader for this, but I don't know that this is going to work this way and I don't know how long we continue to talk about it. With that, tomorrow, it will be on the agenda for tomorrow? Keith Markel: It will, yes. Mayor Burk: At that point, we're going to have to make a motion one way or the other to move this forward or deny it, so we've all made comments. Oh, we got more comments. What? Oh, I guess we do. Vice Mayor Steinberg: We're awake now. Mayor Burk: Then I will go to you, Councilman Cimino -Johnson. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. The $31M estimated cost, what is involved to figure out what it's really going to cost the Town? Keith Markel: The first step, what we talked about here with Renee is knowing what lies beneath. I think that's going to be the first thing, because once we find out the materials that we have to dispose of, that will help us get a hard number on what our disposal costs are. Right now, that's in the several million -dollar range best we can figure. You'd have to do all the excavation removal, then you're just getting yourself down to a buildable pad site. From there depending on the size, the type, the architecture, you'd really want to really get into the details to come up with a cost per square foot based on the needs and you'd probably want to do a feasibility study for the community. What they've done, the proposers have a thought and they've Page 10 I March 27, 2023 done some good research on what scale do you need to get to where they can become more viable, so you don't want to go too small, you don't want to go too large. What's the sweet spot? What's the market that Leesburg would be looking to fill in this performing art space? This isn't going to be a large arena space, but what's that mid -range space that you'd be looking for? Probably going out talking with other communities that have similar uses, things they've learned, things they've benefited from, things they wouldn't do again, probably putting out feelers like that, all those things would go into sort of a feasibility study and see is this the right spot even for this use? This is the land that we have to offer, so this is where they're proposing to put the performing arts center. If your hearts really in building a performing arts center, but maybe this isn't the site for it, do you want to look at other locations throughout the town? Maybe use this as just structured parking and senior affordable housing and move the performing arts space somewhere else. Maybe this space is only big enough for performing art space and senior housing should go somewhere else. I think there are a number of different things you'd want to look at, different components of this to really understand what the true all -in cost would be. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Do you have an estimate of how long that would take? Keith Markel: I do not. We haven't gone down that path but that would be the next step if that was the direction you send us, we'd want to sit down and really think that one through. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: I know we all want a performing arts center. I hear it in the community, I've heard it from people up here. I would like to add to our legislative agenda, seeking money from the State for a performing arts center, whether it's this one or another one in the future. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Mr. Cummings? Council Member Cummings: Just one quick question. I know in these conversations we've floated the idea of creating a parking authority. If we were able to achieve a parking authority, which I know has its own whole process and funding that's needed, would that authority then bond money to build a parking garage separate from our bonds? Keith Markel: Maybe turn to the Town Attorney to answer that one, I think it's one of the benefits of that. Christopher Spera: Yes. One of the benefits of an authority is there's a financial separation as well as a liability separation, so a parking authority would've the ability to issue its own bonds without an impact on the Town's bonding. Council Member Cummings: My thought is just if as the Mayor brought up, which made me ask another question, so I apologize. Mayor Burk: Yes, that's alright. Council Member Cummings: You know, that we are needing to make a decision on this, I think I don't know what will happen with this entire proposal, but if we can take it, my hope is if we can't find a compromise, at least what we should begin to do is the process of looking at a parking authority to take over the parking that we currently have and then create more parking because as we've talked about time after time, parking is an issue in the Downtown especially. My hope is that we can at least come out of this moving forward on trying to create that. Mayor Burk: Mr. Wilt? Council Member Wilt: Thank you. Before questions on the specific presentation or this proposal, when the RFP went out early in the presentation, you said there was one response, do we know why only one developer group chose to respond to a two -acre parcel in the Historic District? Page 11 1 March 27, 2023 Keith Markel: I don't have a good answer for you there. Over the past several years, there have been various parties interested in hotels in the site and other uses there that have come and gone. For various reasons, they've looked at it. I think the site has significant challenges and if somebody came into it thinking that they were going to come in and remediate the site, and this is just Keith's conjecture here, that they had to take care of the dump issue, get the site to a buildable pad site, and then build these public facilities. It may not have been financially viable for them. I think we've seen in this proposal that a lot of the financial costs are being asked to be borne by the Town. I think that's what makes this one that they felt they could bring forward, but if you're looking for the private sector to build this and have it be positive cash flow on it, I think that probably stopped a lot of folks from proposing. Council Member Wilt: Do we have any sense of, we go through our own remediation study to find out what is actually underground and what the cost might be to take care of it? Would the appetite in the developer community be different in responding to this RFP in the future? Keith Markel: That's one thought. I think that the Town, aside from just committing to the land, if it committed to the full remediation, preparing the site, giving it the clean bill of health, so that you could come in here and build from scratch. That may have a change in who's interested in the site. That's the Town not only giving the land, which is valued around $2M but also spending several million dollars more to do the remediation. You're looking at probably a 5 to $8M investment. Council Member Wilt: It occurs to me that remediation of the site is a priority for us and is the Town's responsibility and we have existing parking there. Having more parking I think would be valuable in the space. This proposal has us, essentially, the parking as a wash for the Town. We don't gain any more parking on this site. That's a wash. The elements that were identified earlier in terms of the elements of the RFP, performing art center was not part of the request, is that correct? Keith Markel: It spoke more broadly in a cultural benefit, cultural amenities. Council Member Wilt: Oh, yes. I would love to have one actually, personally, and I've heard that from others. I would have a concern about the Town running a restaurant or even getting into the landlord's business. A restaurant on -site being constructed and being sold outright I think would be another possibility. Yes, this current state with the number for the Town, the concerns which were mentioned earlier, but I'd be interested, is there any way to get there in terms of building this and then running it without the Town really be on the hook for operating these in the future or this price tag. If that were the case, I'd be interested in hearing that answer. Right now this does look like it has some hair on it. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor Steinberg? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Oh, thank you. Thanks again. All right. First thing I would like to say before anything becomes too fixed in anyone's mind regarding this project is the only given regarding the possibility in this project is the fact that we have a two -acre lot under which there is a landfill. That's the only given, and certain values that are attached to that. Now, I confess, I've been involved in several conversations with a number of the principals who are part of this or have an interest in this project, and I also admit that a lot of my information comes from them. That's a good thing because I will also admit I am no expert in any of these fields, which is why I'm always looking for people who are smarter than me in subjects on which I don't have the knowledge. We don't know if there's a restaurant involved really yet. We don't know how many parking spaces we may achieve on this site. It may be 325 instead of 175, or 250. We don't know who may or may not operate a theater at this site if a theater is built. We're fairly confident about the scope of the affordable living aspect because Mr. Hart's pretty specific about that. Is it possible that and the parking occur on the site? Possibly. performing arts center on this site or elsewhere? Also, possibly. My whole point is there are simply too many unanswered issues and questions here for us to make what I feel to be a good decision based on the information we now have. That's all I'm looking for, is to be able to go to people whose fields involve this type of work, and have them come back to us with information, and say, "This is what Page 12 I March 27, 2023 you're looking at." It's potential, or it's not. Maybe it's a parking authority, maybe it's a residential facilities-- excuse me, recreational facilities authority. I don't know. These are terms that have come to me as of late as they have I think for a couple of other Council Members who have had these discussions. The fact is, I don't know, and I would like to know before I have to take any vote that either moves this conversation forward or stops it. That includes, in the end, immediate remediation. What we'll learn is what will be involved there, but whether we move forward, even with that part of the project will be determined by the scope of the overall. That's what I'm looking for, more information to make a good decision. Whether we decide to vote to continue the discussion for whether we want to continue to call it an RFP or simply refer to it now as the Liberty Street Potential Project, I don't know that either. That'll be how we shape that motion tomorrow evening. I guess we'll see how that goes, but I think we owe it to ourselves, and the public, for as much information as possible before we come to a final conclusion. Thanks. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor Steinberg, I'm going to ask you some questions on this. When we have the RFP, what does RFP stand for? Keith Markel: Request for Proposal. Mayor Burk: Request for proposal. When that comes forward, that proposal is what we're looking at, and we have a proposal before us. It's like a developer that comes forward and brings us what that developer hopes we will approve. How is this different, because we've asked for this proposal, they have very generously spent a great deal of time. The developers, the people that are involved, the principals involved in this are people that have an excellent reputation, and experience, and they have done other things, although not a performing arts center, but they have done other developments that are without a doubt excellent in their fields. There's no denying that. How is this different than a developer bringing forward their proposal, we look at it, and we say, "Can you change this, or would you do that, or would you--?" In the end, they come, and they bring it to you, and they say, "This is what we want." We have to vote on the information that we have, not the information that might happen, or the information that came previously. We have to vote on what's in front of us. Explain to me how this is different so that I have a better understanding of what you're asking for. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Thanks for the question. I would offer this as a very fluid situation. Perhaps one of the greater differences for this is, this is something we asked for as a potential public -private partnership. When a developer comes to the Town of their own free will with a potential proposal, they go through a process of negotiation. Generally, that's with the staff and the Planning Department. They come with a proposal, and staff looks at it, and they say, "We don't like that." They go away, and they come back, and they keep working, and they keep working. In this case, it's not that staffs not involved, but the conversation is really with us. We're the ones who have to decide what we want this project to be, and how much we're willing to spend. It is a partnership. If we don't like the proposal, and we can ask for more information, or to have this proposal be redeveloped, and reconfigured, then so be it. I think that's part of the conversation, and part of this particular process. Mayor Burk: It doesn't-- By prolonging it, are we not bringing this along in a process that's very different than what we usually do, which is we say, "This proposal, we've talked to you. It's not where we want yet. We're going to deny it. Now come back, and with another proposal." I'm just trying to figure out how we treat everybody fairly to begin with, but you are correct, we ask for it, and that's an important component to it. I'm struggling to find where the partnership is because it seems that it's the Town that's doing a great deal of this developing with the exception of the senior affordable housing. We haven't even-- there's another-- but anyway, so and you and Mr. Bagdasarian have been in constant-- well, honest and steady discussions with the principals here. Is it that you in discussing with them, they're not willing to change anything or you don't feel they should change? Is that why has Page 13 1 March 27, 2023 there been no-- this has been the proposal since it came forward. If there's been discussions on it, why are there no changes? Vice Mayor Steinberg: I would offer again that we're still in conversation. In our conversations there have been discussions about, well, how deep can you actually go as you excavate? How many parking spaces can you actually achieve? If you do a theater, what kind of theater would it be? Who might potentially operate that? Where might dollars come from? Were you getting ready to ask a question or--? Mayor Burk: Go ahead. I don't want to interrupt you. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Where might dollars come from that would help pay for that? Who for example in our philanthropic community might show a great interest in a project of this nature since we've basically been having a conversation in this area for a performing arts center for the last 50 years or so? My feeling is if the Town, without putting itself in financial jeopardy can show it's a real partner in a project like this, we might finally get serious outside interest to work with us because they can see this is a real thing. We have real players involved. You're right. There are still -- there are a lot of uncertainties. You're absolutely right. Can't deny it. Can we continue a conversation, get past those uncertainties, and see how we continue to shape the project to a point where it's workable for us or not? Mayor Burk: My question was going to be, are you asking for a feasibility study? In the end, is that what you're asking for? Vice Mayor Steinberg: As we skip on down, we're going to be getting into our budget discussions momentarily. I'm going to be asking for a relatively small amount of money, about $30K to be distributed among three different types of experts that include someone who understands this type of operation, how it's working in other areas and what kind of information can we glean from that. Someone who really understands how you can acquire Federal, State or and or local dollars that might involve a project like this, and someone who can do a very serious economic impact study and that'll say this project is going to cost this much. It may well be a slight loss as is every park in the Town with the exception of the tennis bubbles as we like to say. If the ancillary economic impact is what we can anticipate, and if we can achieve other types of projects around it that will only help this core, then that could be great. If it doesn't work, like I say, if it won't work it won't work. I think we owe it to ourselves to see that. Mayor Burk: Mr. Markel, is there a consultant/person that can do this kind of study that he's talking about? Keith Markel: There are those folks out there. We have not explored that or got any cost estimates on doing that work at this point. Waiting again more for corporate direction from Council. First off, I think you have to buy into the vision. Is this the site, the use? Then if that's the case then you'd want to turn us loose to go find those answers for you and find the proposal. Then you can sit down and have that collaborative discussion with the proposing team and say we love this, we hate that. Let's try to work this thing out if that were your direction. Mayor Burk: Before you hired somebody is what you're saying? Keith Markel: Or after you get the results from the study or if you have certain things that you're absolutely in favor of and certain things you absolutely don't see on that site, I think that's something that you would need to make clear. Mayor Burk: So a feasibility study is possible? Keith Markel: Yes. Mayor Burk: You're just-- we're not sure. I think it all goes back to what we've all been saying. It really depends on that site, what's under there, what's in there? How much would it cost? If it ends up Page 14 1 March 27, 2023 costing $30M to remediate then we've got a whole other issue altogether, but we don't know that yet. Okay, so you will be bringing this back up tomorrow? Keith Markel: As it stands right now, it's on your agenda for action as to whether you want to continue the relationship with this RFP, or if you want to reject the RFP at this point or the proposal. Mayor Burk: Just so I get a feel for how the Council is, are there four people that would at this point right now deny this proposal? Two, okay. So, are there four people that would want to move forward with it after we've got the study information from the site? Are there four people that would want to move forward with that? I guess there's just someone [unintelligible]. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Also, I would like to know more about the 31M, if the staff hasn't told us whether the 31 M is correct, it could end up being 50, then my vote might change, or maybe 15, and then everyone's vote may change. Mayor Burk: We won't know that, we don't know that. That will have to come out of that study, the feasibility study. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Okay, I just want to make sure that that's part of this, then, yes. Mayor Burk: Mr. Cummings? Council Member Cummings: Like King Solomon, I'd like to cut the baby in half, no. Because this is a proposal sent to us and this is a public -private partnership, meaning we are partners in this venture, I'd like to talk to the proposers about looking at the, again, depending on what we get back from the remediation study, the parking lot, doing this in phases, just like we do with other major developments in the Town. Look at an additional parking garage, and the senior affordable housing, and then from there, see if there's an openness to start with that as phase one, and in the future, if there are other opportunities, look at other opportunities. I don't want to lose necessarily the total proposal, just like a few of us, I can't move forward with the entire thing as one. Mayor Burk: Tomorrow you may want to amend the motion. Okay, yes, Mr. Wilt. Council Member Wilt: Right, as it stands now, I don't think there's sufficient information to be supportive. What I'm seeing with this so far is 31M to build a performing arts center. I don't know what that means yet for the Town. So, one way or another, whether it's Council Member Steinberg's proposal that we fund further information gathering, or the proposers do the information gathering and bring that to the Town that can inform us more on how this might operate. Mayor Burk: That would also be an amendment to whatever motion comes forward? Council Member Wilt: Right. Mayor Burk: However, you wanted to put the wording, all right. Kaj Dentler: Madam Mayor, if I can just jump in. I think you're on the right path of how you want to determine where you want to go with this project. There's no magic to having to take a vote tomorrow night, just listen-- We need staff direction on where to spend our resources because right now there are a lot of ideas, and there's not a lot of concrete information, and it's clear that the Town cannot afford the project as it is currently proposed, so that's my greatest concern. If you aren't ready to take the position of staff, you may want to have a future work session where you get into details, whether you do it tomorrow night, or a future work session. What I am looking for, for staff, is very clear direction on what you want. What do you like about the proposal? What do you not like about the proposal? Do you have a negotiating team from Council? Page 15 I March 27, 2023 Do you want to consider feasibility work and allow us to do some homework on what that cost would be in order to help feed you information? If it continues the way it is, personally, I think it's just going to go on and on with ideas and ideas and ideas. It's been almost a year. It has some wonderful elements. End of the day as it's proposed, the Town of Leesburg cannot afford this project unless you're going to cut projects or raise new revenue, and I don't know where that's coming from right now. The bottom line, the most clear direction you can give the staff, of what you want us to do or not do is what we're looking for, and I think the proposers also deserve to know where we're going. I think you need to have a very concrete plan, so go back to where I started. If you cannot get there, if you're not ready to take that action tomorrow night, don't feel compelled to have to do that. You may need a little more time to work through it. If you know it, then make a decision and move forward. Mayor Burk: Let me make sure that we're clear on this. When we started this discussion tonight, it was with the intention that we would come up with directions for staff. After our discussion we would come up with directions for staff tomorrow, but you're saying now that we don't need to do that at this point? Kaj Dentler: Well, what I'm saying to you is there's no statutory requirement that you have to take action tomorrow night. Staff is at a position that we can't move forward with this project until you give us some direction of what you want, what you don't want, et cetera, because based on other priorities that you have for us to do so, Council needs to give some direction on the project. The more clear your direction is and your scope of work of what you want us to do is most important. Otherwise, we'll probably be here in about six months and have a very similar conversation of a lot of ideas and nothing concrete, and the Town has-- I think getting our resources from the outside is good, but if the Town is a major investor in the project, you need to have some independent analysis. Is that information correct? Not only feasibility, need, location, traffic impact, community impact, this is a big project in a small area. I think you need to process what is it that you want and what are your concerns and what you want us to analyze through hiring different consultants to ensure you've got independent information that you can use in your decision making. Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg-- sorry. Vice Mayor Steinberg. Vice Mayor Steinberg: You can call me Dr. Steinberg. Mayor Burk: I got the last name right. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Well, to answer Mr. Dentler's concerns and also to be as expedient and efficient as possible, I'm going to offer that we do some of these initial studies to run along with the remediation study, so that by the time we get to October, we will know what's there and what may or may not have to be done there. Knowing that these are the potential components that might work on this site, whether it's only the affordable housing and parking, which we desperately need anyway. If it includes the performing arts center, which would be a great component, but I don't think we should wait to find out what's there. I think we should have all the information available to us by the time we get there and not waste six months then in gathering information. I think we can gather this information as fast, if not faster than the remediation information is the point. It shouldn't take that long to come up with some of the economic information that might serve us by the time we get to October. Mayor Burk: For clarification purposes, for tomorrow do you want a draft motion of some sort to give direction? Kaj Dentler: Yes. Unless you're going to defer to a future work session to have a more in-depth conversation on what you like. Do you want it? A fundamental question is, do you even want it performing arts center? I think the answer is probably yes. Are you wedded to only this location or other locations? What are your expectations of it? What's the market demand? Which is what Mr. Markel has talked about it. How do you manage that? What's the feasibility? Now, if the Town was moving forward on building a performing arts center, that's exactly what we would be doing. The proposers already have done some of their own homework, but the Town has not. I can't spend those funds until you give me that direction to do so. Page 16 I March 27, 2023 Mayor Burk: Okay. So, people need to come tomorrow with a decision on what they want to do in regard to this. Alright. Thank you. Keith Markel: Thank you. Mayor Burk: Appreciate it. That takes us now to our budget discussions. Kaj Dentler: Madam Mayor, as we go into tonight's discussion on budget, this is your final markup session. Obviously, you can make changes tomorrow night as you go into your last vote, but the purpose of tonight is to set the stage for what we can anticipate your vote will be tomorrow night. Then all of our legislation, all the numbers are prepared appropriately based on your direction tonight and then any changes that occur tomorrow night we can make easily enough. On the screen are your straw poll votes from two weeks ago, things that were suggested that passed or failed, none of these were binding. The very first item, if you go back, please, the Liberty Lot, we just talked about that. Should you wish to go forward with that tomorrow night, which I think you will, our recommendation is to use Unassigned Fund Balance versus General Fund that impacts the tax rate. We have the funds for that and that would be our recommendation, et cetera. Then I know there has been some discussion by some of you to reintroduce the full COLA for employees to restore that 1%. If you do that, restore the full COLA and you pay for the Liberty Lot out of Unassigned Fund Balance, you'll restore the tax rate back to what was proposed at 17.74, dependent upon what other changes you may make. The other things that passed were the safety and decorative lighting using Unassigned Fund Balance, it doesn't impact the tax rate, et cetera. The mobile command center you placed in for basically submission by putting into the CIP in the out years or into the future projects while we're also pursuing grant money. With that, we're here to answer any questions that you have. Mayor Burk: Does anyone have any questions at this point? Mr. Cummings, did you have a question you wanted--? No? Council Member Nacy: I have a little one. Mayor Burk: Yes, go ahead. Council Member Nacy: You dangled a reduced tax rate in front of me, and now I'm having a hard time giving it back. I totally agree with moving stuff around. I'm just wondering if there's anything else we have budgeted that could temporarily be used from the Unassigned Fund Balance that would offset and to maybe hold the reduced rate. We're at 17.62, right? You said we give back the COLA, which is great, and use Unassigned Fund Balance for Liberty Lot. Is there anything else we can do that with that would hold the reduced tax rate? Is there any other things that we could use Unassigned Fund Balance for? Kaj Dentler: Let me back up to make sure that I'm following you correctly. If we pay for the Liberty Lot remediation study from Unassigned Fund Balance, we're not impacting the tax rate. So that if you will, just for conversation's sake, just show that as failed and then that'll come off when you see the tax rate will go back to 17.74 and it goes down to 17.47. Then if you - Council Member Nacy: Add that. Kaj Dentler: -put the COLA back in play as proposed, if you'll show that as fail, then it returns to 17.74. It depends on the triggers that you do. There's nothing else on the board of using unassigned fund balance Would matter unless -- Council Member Nacy: There's nothing else like overall that maybe we haven't talked about? I know I'm reaching here. Kaj Dentler: I'd have to go back and look at that. Nothing comes to my mind off top my head. Council Member Nacy: If there's nothing that stands out [unintelligible]. Page 17 1 March 27, 2023 Clark Case: Where we've had one-time money, we've used one-time money as we put the budget together for that. The things that are in the budget are divided between recurring items which come out of the tax rate and the one-time items like vehicles and things of that sort that come out of one- time money. Kaj Dentler: Can you show them the Unassigned Fund Balance chart, the items that are funded in the budget in the proposed budget from the unassigned? Because there are several items in the proposed budget that we've talked about that are paid for out of the Unassigned Fund Balance already. You may or may not be comfortable with adding more items to that. Council Member Nacy: At the end of the day, were holding the tax rate where it's at. It's not a huge -- I'm just seeing if there's anything else that helps reduce it. Again, at the end of the day, it's not. Mayor Burk: Hopefully, we don't go through everything. Cole Fazenbaker: Hopefully not. Kaj Dentler: Hopefully not. So, it's a little hard to read this. Council Member Nacy: I'm good. Kaj Dentler: You would be versus me. That's the unfunded list. Council Member Nacy: Okay, I see. Kaj Dentler: Here we go. These are the items. It's $1M plus of projects to be funded from the Unassigned Fund Balance -- Council Member Nacy: Okay. Kaj Dentler: -that we're already doing. You do have other, obviously, you have additional Unassigned Fund Balance you could use for things, but off the top of my head, it's hard. I'd have to go back and look for over tonight, tomorrow. Council Member Nacy: No worries, and again, it was just a thought, but like I said, at the end of the day, we're holding the tax rate. At the same time $1M. Now being able to see that we need to save our pennies for a rainy day. Kaj Dentler: Right, because we would only use the Unassigned Fund Balanced dollars for non- recurring items anyway. Council Member Nacy: Right, 110. Kaj Dentler: Which are what these are. Council Member Nacy: Okay. That's it. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Well, if we go back to the other. There. I'd like to see if there's anybody on the Council that would be willing to put back that 1% of the COLA at this point. Council Member Cummings: Okay. Mayor Burk: Okay. There would be Kari, Mr. Steinberg, myself, Mr. — Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Okay. Mayor Burk: Okay. I'm done, now I'm not counting you. Mr. Cimino -Johnson and Mr. Cummings. Anybody else have anything at this point? Page 18 1 March 27, 2023 Vice Mayor Steinberg: Are we done now? Mayor Burk: Add things or take things out. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Apropos our last discussion, I would like to add $30K, which I presume is going to come from the Unassigned Fund Balance to fund three different studies that will better inform us about a project which may or may not happen on the Liberty Street Lot. Mayor Burk: I've never heard of a study that's only been $10K, but if it goes beyond the 30 -- Vice Mayor Steinberg: Well, now staff can inform me. In conversations that Council Member Bagdasarian and I have had with the principals who are sitting here earlier, and I don't know if others have had. They have already initiated, at their expense, I might add, gathering a certain amount of this information, but it needs to go several steps further than it has now. There are three individuals either involved or could be involved in the areas of their expertise. Staff would have to tell me, is this something that has to be put out for some kind of proposal, or given that the amounts are low, we could simply say, yes, you three can continue doing this and tell us what you find? Kaj Dentler: I can't give you a definitive answer tonight. We would certainly look at all our options, whether we have someone on retainer, whether we can ride contracts, et cetera, for those resources, but I don't think we'd have to go to bid for all of it. My only real concern would be depending upon what those three studies are. I know you talked about the economic impact, feasibility. I think those numbers are really low based on my experience, but -- Vice Mayor Steinberg: Sorry, what do you think? Which numbers are really low? Kaj Dentler: That's from my experience, $30K to do three studies is really low, but we would have to know exactly what are the studies you're asking us, and then you can put $30K on the board, no problem. We'll come back to you and say, here's what the numbers are, and if it fits $30K, that's fine. If it's $60K, we'll tell you that. You can make a decision on what you want to do. Without doing the research, I don't know if we can afford, if $30K will be enough, but we'll figure that out once I know what the request is. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Okay. Kaj Dentler: That fair? Mayor Burk: You're not asking for the principals to be doing this, you're asking us to get a consultant to do it, right? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Yes. Mayor Burk: Okay, just want to make sure. Kaj Dentler: We would find a consultant. Vice Mayor Steinberg: There are three individuals, they're confident who can provide us the information given the amount of money I discussed in pretty quick time. Mayor Burk: Okay, I'm confused. What do you mean there are three individuals? Vice Mayor Steinberg: There are different studies. You have a study which talks about similar operations in our area or something in that range. Mayor Burk: All right, but let me clarify it. Who are you suggesting would do that? A consultant? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Yes. Mayor Burk: One of the principals? Page 19 I March 27, 2023 Vice Mayor Steinberg: No. They also recognize their fields of expertise. They're relying on other individuals whose field of expertise rests in these specific areas. Mayor Burk: Okay. I just want to make that clear because we were confused over here on this side. If you were asking for them to do it, and then —but you're not, you're asking -- Vice Mayor Steinberg: Yes. Outside of this meeting, I can give staff the names of the individuals and they can talk to the principals if they want to and see whether they have gotten on these studies or not. Mayor Burk: You don't have to put it out if it's -- Kaj Dentler: It depends on the dollar amount. We have our procurement rules we have to follow anyway, so we'll figure that part out. Obviously, we want to make sure that the consultant is independent and working for the Town. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Yes, of course, [crosstalk] absolutely. I appreciate that. Kaj Dentler: As I know you would expect, and not working for the developer, but we will figure that out. My recommendation for tonight is just to identify what the three studies are. You've got a $30K marker on the board, then we'll go do the homework. We can add the $30K in for tomorrow night's vote. If we need to adjust it later or not spend it all, you will make that decision in the future. I would suggest we come back with information, and you will then decide whether to release that money or not. Mayor Burk: You're talking about feasibility study and economic development? Vice Mayor Steinberg: We're talking about basically situational comps, funding availability, and economic impact, those are the three areas that we're talking about. Kaj Dentler: Okay. We'll put it all together. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Right. Mayor Burk: All right. Is there anybody else at this point? Well, then, I guess we're done. I thought we did but, okay. Kaj Dentler: This would be Unassigned Fund Balance. Mayor Burk: Okay. Four people willing to put the $30K forward on the Liberty Lot study. Mr. Wilt, Vice Mayor Steinberg, Dr. Cimino -Johnson, and I'll put my name, I'll be the fourth. Did I get everybody? Yes, okay. All right. I think we're done at this point then. Anyone else have anything? All right. Then, any additions to future meetings, Mr. Wilt? Council Member Wilt: No. Mayor Burk: Ms. Nacy? Mr. Cimino -Johnson? Council Member Cimino -Johnson: No, no, at this time. Mayor Burk: Mr. Cummings? Council Member Cummings: No. Mayor Burk: I have nothing. Is there a motion to adjourn? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Motion to adjourn. Mayor Burk: Second? Page 20 1 March 27, 2023 Council Member Nacy: Second. Mayor Burk: All in favor? Council Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Thanks, everybody. Enjoy your [unintelligible]. Mayor Burk: I called you Steinberg every time. Page 21 1 March 27, 2023