Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2023_tcwsmin1023Council Work Session October 23, 2023 Council Chamber, 25 West Market Street, Leesburg, Virginia, 7:00 p.m. Mayor Kelly Burk presiding. Council Members Present: Ara Bagdasarian, Todd Cimino -Johnson, Zach Cummings, Kari Nacy, Vice Mayor Neil Steinberg, Patrick Wilt, and Mayor Kelly Burk. Council Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Town Manager Kaj Dentler, Town Attorney Christopher Spera, Deputy Town Manager Keith Markel, Director of Public Works and Capital Projects Renee LaFollette, Director of Utilities Amy Wyks, Deputy Director of Utilities Brian Stone, Leesburg Police Sargeant Ed Martin and Clerk of Council Eileen Boeing. AGENDA ITEMS 1. Items for Discussion a. Liberty Parking Lot — Site Remediation Ms. Renee LaFollette along with Mr. Luke Clark and Mr. David Sarr from WSP USA and Mr. Bruce Clendenin from Clendenin Consulting presented Council with the findings of the remediation investigation of the Liberty Street parking lot that was once the Town dump. Staff, Council and the consultants discussed the findings and required remediation and costs if development were to occur on the property. No remediation action is required to leave the property in its current use as a surface parking lot. Mr. Dentler reminded Council the investigation was to support the Town's understanding of the costs associated with remediating the site for any future development. There were no objections from Council for continued discussion with the offerors of the Liberty Street Lot Development proposal received in response to the Town's request for proposals (RFP). b. Liberty Parking Lot — Access from South Street Ms. Renee LaFollette reviewed the results the feasibility study to allow for two-way vehicular access to the Liberty Street parking lot from South Street and add pedestrian access to allow for a safe means for pedestrians to access the lot and comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Council and staff discussed the study results. It was the consensus of Council to wait until a determination is made regarding future development of the Liberty Street parking lot before proceeding with alternate site access/exit options. . c. State of the Water and Wastewater Utility Systems Ms. Amy Wyks and Mr. Brian Stone provided Council with an overview of the state of the Town's Utility Systems. The presentation included an overview �f the utility systems, accomplishments since the last rate study, current ongoing projects, current and upcoming challenges facing the department, future goals, an overview of the utilities fund and a brief outline of the rate development process. Council and staff discussed the Utilities' operations. 1 'Page Council Work Session October 23, 2023 2. Additions to Future Council Meetings a. Proclamation Requests i. A proclamation request was received from the Diversity Commission for National American Indian Heritage Month to be proclaimed at the November 14, 2023, Council meeting. It was the consensus of Council to add this proclamation to the November 14, 2023, Council meeting agenda. u. A proclamation request was received for Family Court Awareness Month/One Mom's Battle to be proclaimed at the November 14, 2023, Council meeting. There was no consensus to add this proclamation to the November 14, 2023, Council meeting agenda. b. Future Council Meetings and Agenda Topics There were no additions for future meetings. 3. Closed Session a. Pending Litigation in Loudoun County Circuit Court and Annexation with Respect to the Joint Land. Management Area (JLMA) Mayor Burk rescinded her original motion as it omitted some of the text on the revised agenda. Mayor Burk made the following replacement motion. MOTION 2023-.167 On a motion by Mayor Burk, seconded by Vice Mayor Steinberg, the following was proposed:: I move pursuant to § 2.2-3711(A)(7), § 2.2-3711(A)(8) and'2.2-3711(A)(3) of the Code of Virginia that the Leesburg Town Council convene in a dosed meeting for the purpose of consulting with legal counsel on matters related to Graydon Manor, LLC. v. The Town of Leesburg, VA, Loudoun County Circuit Court Case CL21-4323 and specific legal matters related to the annexation of the JLNIA where such consultation in open session would adversely affect the negotiating and litigating posture of the Town The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cimino -Johnson, Cummings, Nacy, Vice Mayor Steinberg, Wilt and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 Council convened in a closed meeting at 8:11 p.m. Council convened in an open meeting at 9:12 p.m. 2IPage Council Work Session October 23, 2023 MOTION2023-168 On a motion by Mayor Burk, the following was proposed: In accordance with Section § 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia, I move that Council certify to the best of each member's knowledge, only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under Virginia Freedom of Information Act and such public business matters for the purpose identified in the motion by which the closed meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered in the meeting by Council. The motion was approved by the following roll call vote: Wilt — aye, Bagdasarian — aye, Nacy — aye, Vice Mayor Steinberg — aye, Cummings — aye, Cimino -Johnson — aye, Mayor Burk — aye. Vote: 7-0 4. Adjournment On a motion by Vice Mayor Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Nacy, the meeting was adjourned at 9:13 p. m. Clerk of Council 2023 tcwsmin1023 3 IPage October 23, 2023 — Leesburg Town Council Work Session (Note: This is a transcript prepared by a Town contractor 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 Burk: Call tonight to order tonight's meeting of the October 23rd, 2023 work session. Our first item for discussion tonight is the Liberty Lot Site Remediation. Renee LaFollette: Good evening Madam Mayor, Members of Town Council. My name's Renee LaFollette, Director of Public Works and Capital Projects. Tonight I have with me from WSP USA, Luke Clark and David Sarr, and Bruce Clendenin from Clendenin Consulting. They will help me with the presentation and also are here for questions and answers. Just a quick reminder, the Liberty Street parking lot is a 2.03 acre site. We have 106 free public parking spaces there, and that is a correction from the PowerPoint that you received that said 120. There are 11 metered parking spaces. We do have our Public Works Satellite Facility there that's the sign and signal shop, a break room, and storage for downtown equipment, signs, barricades, and everything that we use for our special events in downtown. It was the former Town dump. On the map bordered by Wirt Street, the Town branch to Royal Street and then the townhouses to the west. There's our site in 1950 when it was an active dump. This what it looks like today. Then at your March 28 Council meeting, you authorized the contract with WSP USA to do a remediation investigation, and the scope of that work was to do ground penetrating radar and electromagnetic survey. We did some drilled shafts into the buried waste, soil borings, and groundwater well installations. Our final report, that was attachment to the memo, and then our cost estimate there was also an attachment to your memo. We will go through the results of that report and we will talk briefly about the cost estimation. At this time, I'm going to turn over the investigation findings to Luke Clark from WSP for him to walk through the findings. Luke Clark: Thank you. All right. As Renee said, WSP was brought in to do an investigation at the subject site, and the first phase that we did was the GPR survey, and that was back in April. The GPR survey did determine that the site is primarily underlaying by waste material. If you look at the figure up here, the blue material is generally trash and non-metallic debris. The red is generally non-metallic, metallic debris, general refuse, as well as potential ash in the landfill. Following our GPR survey, we did remobilize back to the site and we performed a drilled shaft survey. We used a one -foot diameter auger to install eight boreholes down approximately 33 feet deep. During this investigation, we collected 27 soil samples for laboratory analysis. Then following that, in June, we came back to the site, used a Geoprobe which is a direct push probe, to install five additional borings in which we did install four groundwater monitoring wells to collect groundwater samples from. Based upon the laboratory results that we collected in the sample and groundwater that we collected, we did compare the soil samples to the what are called the Virginia Voluntary Remediation Program, the VRP soil screening levels. We compared the groundwater samples also to the respective VRP groundwater screening levels. In general, both soil and groundwater, there were multiple compounds that did exceed their respective VRP screening levels. As far as the soil is concerned, we analyzed the soil samples; the 27 that were collected during the drilled shafts, and the 11 that were collected during the soil borings. They were analyzed for volatile organic compounds, semi volatile organic compounds, metals, PCBs, pesticides and herbicides. The results of all 38 samples came back as follows; generally, we found volatile organic compounds, primarily naphthalene and trimethyl benzene that were exceeding their respective VRP screening Page 1 lOctober 23, 2023 levels. We found semi volatile organic compounds, primarily naphthalene, as well as benzo a pyrene that were exceeding their respective VRP screening levels. For the metals, we found arsenic, cadmium, and lead in the soil that exceeded their VRP screening levels. We also found some other detections of PCBs which exceeded, as well as pesticides which exceeded their VRP screening levels. The last bullet indicates that leachable lead concentrations exceeded the hazardous waste criteria. Of the 27 soil samples that were collected during the drilled shafts investigation, all 27 had leachable lead in them, and 19 of those had concentrations that did qualify as a characteristic hazardous waste material. For the groundwater samples that we collected, we did install four temporary groundwater monitoring wells at the site, based across the site. We analyzed the water samples for volatile organic compounds, semi volatile organic compounds, metals, PCBs, pesticides, herbicides, as well as PFAS compounds. The four water samples, the findings were generally as follows; we did detect semivolatile organic compounds, primarily naphthalene, methylnaphthalene that exceeded their respective VRP screening levels. We also detected metals such as lead that was in the water exceeding its respective VRP level. We also did detect PFAS, PFOS and PFOA was also found in the water samples. Of the four water samples that we collected, all four contained detectable concentrations that exceeded the EPA health advisory concentrations in all four water samples. With that, I will pass it over to Mr. David Sarr with WSP. David Sarr: Thank you, Luke. Good evening everyone. As Luke said, probably the key thing in terms of the cost of the potential remediation is the lead that was detected. We have as Luke said, between the drilled shaft investigation and ground penetrating radar, we have waste material that extends up to 22 feet below ground surface. Removing all that waste material and the soil that's mixed with it, that would generate approximately 52,000 tons of waste material to be hauled off -site. That's approximately 2,600 truckloads to go offsite. It does not have to go offsite. Its current condition, the site is capped. There's no potential exposure to anything that's in the waste buried there so it can remain there. But, if that material is excavated because the lead concentrations are above that hazardous waste criteria, most of that material has to be managed as a hazardous waste. As Luke said, approximately two-thirds of the samples from within that mixed soil and waste failed that hazardous waste criteria. It doesn't become a hazardous waste until it's excavated. In the picture here, that's the pile of material from the investigation. That's already been removed. That will have to go offsite as a hazardous waste. Again, anything that's there already and remains in place, it can remain. There is a potential middle ground. Our cost estimate is based on removing everything, we have the do-nothing option for it to stay in place, and there would be options for removing some of the material. And then talking about the cost estimate, so bottom line number $16.9 million to remove all the material, haul it offsite to facilities that are permitted to accept that material. It'd be a mix; Loudoun County landfill, an out-of-state non -hazardous waste facility, and an offsite out-of-state hazardous waste facility. The cost is based on as I said, removing all the material. It includes initial design work, it includes taking the site through the Virginia Voluntary Remediation program and getting the liability relief at the end of that process, and it includes some limited site restoration, but basically it would be turned over to the development partner to then begin construction once that is done. It does as I said, it does assume that over half of the material would be managed as a hazardous waste. With that, we'd be happy to discuss or answer any questions. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Thank you very much. Council Member Wilt, do you have any questions? Page 2lOctober 23, 2023 Council Member Wilt: In terms of the options, so on this slide there is just one mention. Can there be a discussion on what other options are? Renee LaFollette: I'll start with that one, Council Member Wilt. The estimate that was done was for full remediation because we didn't know what portion we wanted to do. If we want to look at something in between a do-nothing option and a full remediation, there are a number of other options that could be done of partial excavation, different foundation types. Until we know more about what we want to do with the site, we didn't have them go to any other estimate other than zero or everything. Council Member Wilt: Just on that point, Renee then, the zero which you mentioned, it's a do- nothing option. That is an option. There is no impetus for us to touch the site further? Renee LaFollette: Correct. It's perfectly fine the way it is. DEQ has it closed and we don't have to do anything. As soon as you disturb it, that's where you start triggering more activity. Council Member Wilt: We could leave it as 125 space parking facility and a Town storage and it's perfectly fine. Once we touch it and if we touch it fully, we're on the hook for $17 million? Renee LaFollette: If we do the full remediation, the estimate's 16.9. Council Member Wilt: Okay. Thanks, Renee. Mayor Burk: Town Manager, you had wanted to say something? Kaj Dentler: I think Mr. Wilt took care of it. His first question I think was dead on ,because we only showed you the full option, and the basis of that as Renee referenced is because the reason that we did the study was on the basis that there we have a proposal for a public -private partnership, which required as part of the partnership for the Town to do the remediation. At that time the number was anticipated to be far less than what it is, so that's why we went from zero to all-out type of thing. I just wanted to clarify that for how we got there, but I think he took care of everything as he took his questions. Mayor Burk: All right, thank you. Council Member Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Yes, thank you. I do have a few questions. Is it common to have a landfill in a residential area like in a Town or municipality? Is this uncommon or is this a typical situation? David Sarr: It's my understanding that there's other landfills in Leesburg that have been since remediated and developed upon. Yes, it is common. Council Member Bagdasarian: Who remediated those properties in the other sites in the Town? Were they the developer or the Town that did the remediation? Bruce Clendenin: I can speak to-- Leesburg had a number before the original dump was actually built in Evergreen Mills, they had a number of landfills around Leesburg. There was landfills on the REHAU property. There was a landfill was used to be the Carr property [unintelligible]. There was a big dump along Catoctin Circle that's underneath the BB&T Bank, it ran up the entire creek line. It's now underneath the Kia dealership. We built on those materials. There were other locations, but those are examples. In the case of REHAU, all that material was cleaned up and removed. They did that themselves. In the case of the Kia dealership, it was studied and we elected to build on it. Council Member Bagdasarian: It is possible to build on an existing site? Page 3lOctober 23, 2023 Bruce Clendenin: Yes, you build on it but you put your foundations through it. You're burying your building on something else below the fill. Council Member Bagdasarian: I'm surprised there are not Federal programs or Statewide programs that help with the remediation of landfills in residential areas. Are there programs to address such issues? David Sarr: Yes, there are grant programs available. However, they are usually for smaller amounts. The grants available are much smaller. Council Member Bagdasarian: Are there any implications with air quality or environmental factors if you were to excavate an existing site? What are those considerations that we should factor in? David Sarr: Yes. Because the site is bordered, you have residential properties on three sides, the concerns would be the dust. Obviously, you have lead in the soil there, so you'd need to pay special attention to dust control on -site during the excavation, during any handling of the material. Part of the cost estimate did assume that there would be some handling of the material to try and sift out debris so that some of that material could still go to Loudoun County landfill to try and control the cost that way. Anything, any of those— A little closer. All right [laughs]. Council Member Bagdasarian: We are live on TV once again by the way. Yes. David Sarr: All right. Any of those processes, anything done on -site would require special attention by the contractor to dust control, obviously to 'noise control and odor. There was some methane generated during the drilled shafts that was noticeable coming up from the drilled shafts. There'd have to be special precautions taken for that as well. Council Member Bagdasarian: Renee, it sounds like the big factor that was not originally considered was the location of the transportation of the actual waste, right? We can't do it here in Loudoun County. We're just not equipped to handle that, is that correct? Renee LaFollette: Correct. Loudoun County landfill is not allowed to accept hazardous waste. They can handle general household waste, but based on what the chemical analysis and all of that for the soils that were discovered, they cannot handle a majority of the materials. Once you get into the lead, the cadmium, the PCBs, all of that, it becomes hazardous material, has to be ticketed and freighted as such, and sent to a landfill that is certified to handle hazardous waste. Council Member Bagdasarian: Okay, thank you. Mayor Burk: Council Member Nacy. Council Member Nacy: Thank you. Did I hear the amount of truckloads correctly that would have to be removed? David Sarr: Yes, 2,600. Council Member Nacy: Okay, that's what I thought you said, [laughs] just wanted to make sure. I just want to clarify, it was a little bit hard to hear. I'm sorry, I'm going to repeat a question. It is okay to build on top of it currently, right? If we just left it alone, you can build on top of it, you can repave it, whatever, just as long as you're not disturbing? How far down can you go before it becomes disturbing it and needing some amount of excavation. David Sarr: There is basically a cover on top. You've got the asphalt, you've got the gravel under the asphalt, and we estimated maybe 4 feet of soil that would not require special handling as well. Council Member Nacy: Essentially, as Council Member Wilt said, we're good to leave it as a parking lot right now. You'd be able to repave it, you'd be able to do minor things to it without any issues? Okay. All right. Thank you. Page 4lOctober 23, 2023 Mayor Burk: Council Member Cummings. Council Member Cummings: Yes. I just wanted to ask a clarifying question to one of your responses on the Federal or State funding that might be available to help. You said that it would be a smaller amount. Did you mean smaller amount of waste or smaller amount of dollars? David Sarr: Smaller amount of dollars. Council Member Cummings: Dollars. That's what I figured, but I just wanted to make sure. David Sarr: There are grants for both investigation and remediation. They're generally considered separate. Council Member Cummings: Then we did the drillings, we tested the ground that are in the dump currently. Did we test in the Town Branch or anything to see if there are traces of lead or any of these chemicals in the water there? David Sarr: No, we did not. Council Member Cummings: Is that something that we think we should do or? Renee LaFollette: It depends on what we want to do with the site. The groundwater monitoring wells were deeper than Town Branch water table levels. The groundwater tends to be a little bit deeper, so we didn't see the need to test it right now. If that's something we want to do, we can do it, but I don't think any of us sitting up here saw the need to do that right away. Council Member Cummings: There's no concern about another entity, DEQ or EPA catching wind of this and requiring us to do that? Renee LaFollette: We had a number of conversations with DEQ as we were going through this process to talk to them about the voluntary remediation program. If we moved into a phase where we wanted to go through the voluntary remediation phase, there is additional testing that we would be required to do, and part of that testing would be testing sediments and water in Town Branch. They did not indicate during any of our conversations that we needed to do that now. Council Member Cummings: Thank you. Mayor Burk: Council Member Cimino -Johnson. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: I don't have anything that I could say. Mayor Burk: I have a couple of questions. Again, I just want to clarify, we do not think that any of this lead is being leached into the groundwater. David Sarr: There is lead present in the groundwater samples that we collected. Mayor Burk: There is groundwater in there. David Sarr: Yes. Mayor Burk: Isn't that a danger to the creek and to individuals living in that area? David Sarr: It would not be a danger to people living in the area since everybody's on public water, there's no wells so people would not be exposed to the lead. Mayor Burk: We don't know about the creek yet? David Sarr: Correct. Page 5lOctober 23, 2023 Mayor Burk: I was there when you gentlemen were all doing the digging, and I have to say it was fascinating to see how it worked. I was hoping that you'd come up with some really exciting things that were put in the trash at one point, but it was all broken up. Anyway, what was the impetus of what started all this was an RFP we put out. Maybe Mr. Town Manager, you could explain to us what was the original RFP? What were we saying we would do, or even maybe you could do it? I don't-- Kaj Dentler: The Council was interested in an RFP private -public partnership to explore development of that site. We were pretty open-ended on what we were open to. Of course, there has always been an interest in a performing arts center, and that's part of what the response came back with was performing arts center, parking garage. I believe a restaurant was included. Mayor Burk: I don't mean to interrupt you. I'm sorry. Kaj Dentler: No, fine. Mayor Burk: What did we as the Town commit that we would do in this partnership? Kaj Dentler: The Town was focused on giving the land as part of the development; either to sell the land or make that part of the process. There was always known there was some concern about what was below the parking lot, and if that would need to be remediated or not. The Council never committed to paying for all the cost, but the Council certainly was open to that discussion, because what was believed at the time was that the cost would be far less than what the number is today. Mayor Burk: Okay. I just want to make it clear to the public, this has come about because of an RFP that we put out trying to figure out if that site was developable. Kaj Dentler: Correct. Mayor Burk: In that process, we said that we would remediate it if it turned out it needed to be. Kaj Dentler: I believe the process, we would donate the land or make some exchange for the land. We're open to remediation, but there was no commitment that the Town was going to remediate it. Council asked during part of this process, was to go study the site so we knew what we were actually dealing with versus what we were being told it may be. Mayor Burk: Okay. All right. Chris Spera: Mayor, if I might add, I would characterize the remediation as a negotiable term as opposed to a promise. Mayor Burk: Okay. Chris Spera: It was one of the elements of the deal to be discussed. From my perspective, part of the reason why the Town agreed to fund this study, was so that we had a better insight into what negotiating that term would entail. Mayor Burk: All right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for clarifying that. That's helpful. We're in this process, we're trying to investigate. We come back with the information that says that there is hazardous waste there that will have to be removed if we get into any work on the site. Estimations were 16.9, $17 million. All of that is part of the negotiations of what we've been discussing, that Vice Mayor has been leading us with. I'm saving you for last so don't worry, I haven't forgot to. Something that you've all said that really concerns me a great deal now in regard to the site is the remediation with the three sides of— well, two sides are housing and the other is a commercial component. What is going to be the impact to those people? The noise will be a problem to begin with, but I'm more concerned about the lead in the air as you're doing all this remediation. Where does it end up going into their homes, where they are, where they Page 6jOctober 23, 2023 live? That really does cause me a great deal of concern at this point. The leaching you've already asked about, you talked about that one. You'did that one. Okay. All my questions are answered, and so I'm going to turn it over to you, Vice Mayor. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Oh, thank you Madam Mayor. I have a technical question from the staff report, which may have been answered. I think at one point when we were discussing the percentages of the material, it said 20% non -hazardous, 55% hazardous, and then there was a 25% figure that could be directed to the landfill. Maybe I think in the response you gave, would this be the material that you could sift out then as opposed to material that's already recognized as non -hazardous? What is the difference between those two figures? What are we talking about there? David Sarr: Right. There were some areas that we thought would be-- if generated would not be acceptable at Loudoun County Landfill, but would not be hazardous so therefore it would be classified as non -hazardous. It would still need to go to a non -hazardous landfill. Vice Mayor Steinberg: I see. David Sarr: It would be shipped off at a $100 a ton instead of $240 a ton. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Okay. There was mention of, regardless of what steps we take from here on out, are there programs from through which we could potentially recover the cost of the remediation study whether we take action or not? David Sarr: To recover the cost of the study that's already been completed? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Yes. As we've done the study, so after the fact, are there funds that can be obtained to offset the cost of the study whether we remediate it or not? Renee LaFollette: Council Member Steinberg, we did apply for a grant through the state for $50,000 of the remediation cost study, and we're in consideration for that right now. Based on our last email, I got a request for some additional information that I need to send back to DEQ, but they are reviewing our application for the $50,000. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Okay. I recognize in the grand scheme that that's a minor amount. I was just curious about that. Then when we talk about where we do proceed, when we talk about the water testing, is that part of this $17 million figure that we're talking about for mediation? It wouldn't be in addition to, correct? Renee LaFollette: Correct. The $16.9 million estimate includes everything from the design of the construction plans, the permitting, the air quality monitoring, the manifesting, the water quality testing, everything from soup to nuts to get that completely remediated. Vice Mayor Steinberg: When we talk about remediation, presumably in this day and age, the techniques are such that— I'll put it another way. The house I'm living in now when we bought it, there was a discovery of asbestos. They basically created a negative atmosphere so that air was not escaping from the site. Is this something that can be done on a large scale for a site like this, you would tent the whole thing and contain dust or what have you? How does that work? David Sarr: In a case like this it is more likely to be water application to suppress the dust, or they also make foams that would be used. That would be applied to the ground surface as it is being excavated to try and control that dust. Vice Mayor Steinberg: As you're sifting this material then, how does that come into play because at that point it would seem to me you would be creating a certain amount of dust? Page 7j0ctober 23, 2023 David Sarr: It would be the same kind of process. You'd be putting spray on that, whether it's just water or water with some surfactant added to control that. Vice Mayor Steinberg: All right. As the Mayor stated, Councilman Bagdasarian and I have been involved in about a six -month -long conversation at this stage with several principals of the RFP, one of whom is sitting in our audience this evening. I'm sure he's not entirely pleased to hear this figure. It is absolutely a much higher figure than we had initially anticipated. I would offer to the rest of the Council that were we to entertain anything, I'm not sure to what advantage it would be to do a partial solution because in the end without recovering the site its entirety, we're giving up a certain amount of vertical height for development that would almost certainly aid and abet any project we might do there. That said, we still have ongoing conversations with Mr. Knutson and several other individuals. We have a meeting this Wednesday, so these findings obviously are going to be presented there, and it obviously also sheds an entirely different light. I would say this certainly gives the entire Council pause for the price tag. Were we to consider proceeding in any form or fashion, and I know there are several voices that have said we simply can't afford it and I know at this stage that it's a heavy price tag, and yet I would offer that I would prefer not to give up the conversation entirely until we can now present this and see what other options may present themselves for this site, which at some point hopefully we will plan to do something with. It's a pretty valuable piece of real estate and could serve a variety of functions, and structured parking is not the least of them. In the course of our conversations, we have identified a couple of areas where structured parking could benefit the downtown area and solve a lot of issues, albeit it's an expensive solution. I don't deny it. Not to throw even more cold water, if we excavated the site, then we have a big hole in the ground. What are we going to do then? We know structured parking as the base for whatever goes on top of it is itself an expensive proposition. Nevertheless, we have an ongoing conversation, and we plan to continue that at least for the next couple of weeks. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Is there anybody on Council that would object to the conversation continuing with the people that are involved in the RFP at this point? Does anybody object to that conversation continuing? No, okay. You can move forward with that. We won't do anything at this point. We will wait until everybody gets together, has another discussion, and see where it goes. All right? Okay. Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen very much. Even though I'm disappointed you didn't find any gold or silver, keep looking. [laughs] Liberty Lot access from South Street. Renee LaFollette: Round two. Parking access, this is a request from Town Council back in February. We'll take a look at the background of this request, what our existing conditions are for access, some of the challenges, some improvements that we would need to do for a two-way access to Liberty Street from South Street, what the fiscal impact is, and what the staff recommendation is. At your February 28th, 2023 meeting, you requested us to study the feasibility of a two-way access into the Liberty Street parking lot from South Street. We had a consultant prepare a conceptual design plan. As we are all aware, Liberty Street's bounded and has access from Liberty Street. That's our two-way access, and our egress one-way exit is onto South Street there at VVirt. We have 106 free public parking spaces there currently. There's our exit point that we're looking at the two-way. It's about a hundred feet long, it's only 12 feet wide. Does not have any shoulders. That grade is 15%. As anybody that's come down that knows, it's fairly steep and right now we have no pedestrian access on that point. Our challenges are going to be putting pedestrian access on there, avoidance of any floodplain issues as the area of that intersection in the property to the left that has the growth on the fence there is all within the floodplain. That will be a challenge potentially. Obviously as we just discussed, avoidance of landfill disturbance. Page 8JOctober 23, 2023 Our design consultant took a look at this and we are able to get a two-way access point here. It will require us to do an all -way stop, so we would create a stop condition on Wirt Street and on South Street, and then on the exit. It would be 20 feet wide of pavement with a two -foot wide gravel shoulder on both sides. We'd need to reconfigure the existing parking lot circulation slightly, and that would mean the loss of one parking space. That's all. I just talked about the all -way stop. Right now there's no pedestrian access. Our challenge is going to be meeting ADA compliance with that slope depending on the classification. Is that a driveway? Is it a private street? We're still looking at that. Our fiscal impact is roughly $100,000 without pedestrian access. When we add the pedestrian access, we are anticipating that to be at least $200,000 just because of the constraints that we have to work with with slope. Our recommendation is that we defer action on this access point until we decide what we're going to do with the Liberty Street Lot. If we do the two-way access, we would not do that without including the pedestrian access so that we have a safe means of travel from the Liberty Lot to South Street for the pedestrians. Do you have any questions? Mayor Burk: Okay. Thank you very much. That most certainly is an important consideration to be able to make sure that it's safe for pedestrians of all types. Council Member Cimino -Johnson, do you have anything? Any questions? Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Yes. What would the timeframe be if we told you we wanted to do this? Renee LaFollette: I would propose that we add it to the CIP for 2025 so that we can put that in our workplan since this is not funded. Other than that, it would need to be a mid -year adjustment for it, and I would have to move projects around in order to be able to move this project up. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Just hypothetical though? Renee LaFollette: Hypothetically, you're probably four to six months for design and that's probably two to three months of construction. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Thank you. Mayor Burk: Anybody on this side? Council Member Wilt. Council Member Wilt: Yes. Thanks, Renee. One question about, there's existing egress on the site and we saw that in the photo. Can you explain the floodplain issues that are a challenge? Renee LaFollette: If we were to change the grade of the egress point, if we would happen to raise that intersection so that we didn't have a steep of a grade and we flattened it by raising the end and would have to raise that entire intersection, that's the only reason that we would have any floodplain impacts, but were not proposing that. Council Member Wilt: Ok. Then there was an assumption this is currently egress only. Renee LaFollette: Yes. Council Member Wilt: The assumption was to turn this into two-way. Renee LaFollette: Correct. Council Member Wilt: Was there a consideration of a smaller project to make this ingress only because there's already egress on Liberty Street? That would be a smaller project with less impact and less dollars, I would presume. Renee LaFollette: It wouldn't be a smaller impact because of the traffic circulation on Liberty Street and the one-way versus two-way street component. Page 9lOctober 23, 2023 Council Member Wilt: On Liberty Street? Renee LaFollette: On Liberty Street making that egress only -- Council Member Wilt: No, no, I'm saying leave Liberty Street alone. It's two-way on Liberty Street. Renee LaFollette: The site distance concerns coming in off of South Street, we would still have to do the reconfiguration of the parking lot itself because you can't have the site distance. Council Member Wilt: Right, but that's painting some lines on pavement and that's -- Renee LaFollette: And a guardrail barrier, yes, one of that. Council Member Wilt: That's pretty minor. Renee LaFollette: We did not look at that because the direction I understood from Council was to look at this as a two-way, ingress and egress. Given the substandard access point that we have from Liberty Street right now, I would not change this to an ingress. Council Member Wilt: Ingress only. Renee LaFollette: Ingress only Council Member Wilt: Because Liberty Street is poorly done. Renee LaFollette: That is really constrained there. Council Member Wilt: All right. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Council Member Bagdasarian. Council Member Bagdasarian: That was my question, is I was wondering why this cannot be an entrance versus a two-way, but you've just answered that, so thank you. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Yes, thanks. Out of curiosity, and I wouldn't think it's a good idea in any case, how could you create improvements without pedestrian access? If you create the improvements without pedestrian access, then how are the individuals supposed to get to and from their cars in a safe manner? Renee LaFollette: Good question. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Okay. [laughs] Renee LaFollette: We looked at it from the car perspective, is we don't have pedestrian facilities there now with just the egress point. Initially, it was can we even do this without disturbing the material that's underneath? That was our first start point, can we do that? Then when we had further conversations with Town Manager's Office and internally as staff, we're like, "We really need to put pedestrian facilities on this if we go both directions." Vice Mayor Steinberg: Question in that, does this meet the threshold of if you start a project, then you have to do certain things as has been the case in other parts of Town. Renee LaFollette: Yes, we need to do the right thing and put pedestrian facilities here. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Yes. Fine. I think the suggestion to defer this until we figure out exactly what we may be coming to in this area is a good idea. Yes. I would concur that creating an ingress only to then force all the traffic out into the Liberty Street access would probably not be a good idea. Thanks. Page 10lOctober 23, 2023 Mayor Burk: Looking at the picture on the slide, it didn't have a number on it, but the slide here, it seems difficult for me to see how you could put another lane up there and not disturb the site. Renee LaFollette: The bump that is to this area right here, we have the ability to cut down a little bit there to get the 20 -foot width without disturbing -- Mayor Burk: You'd be going that way. I see. I assumed you'd be going the other way, but you're going that way. Renee LaFollette: No, we would go - Mayor Burk: Towards the creek. Renee LaFollette: -towards the creek. Mayor Burk: Oh, wow. Renee LaFollette: Not the other direction because we know we have landfill material under there. Mayor Burk: That's interesting. I would hate to see this project be done and then we figure out something on the other project, and then it has to be redone again because the project ends up making it so that this has to be redone. Common sense just says we have to wait to see what's going to happen here. I appreciate the information. I think it is very important to have pedestrian ADA, Accessible Pedestrian Access, to it. I do think we've got to wait and find out what's happening with that lot. Thank you. Is there -- Yes. Mr. Bagdasarian? Yes. Council Member Bagdasarian: Great. You were looking over this way one last time. Mayor Burk: [laughs] Council Member Bagdasarian: I think it goes back to part of the original intent and the objective is to make it easier for people to find parking and access parking when visiting that area of South King Street. There's restaurants and dining and lots of things down there in the park and everything. One thing even is evident in this picture here is, we talked about earlier this year, is signage, Directing people to parking that there is parking right here. You cannot access the parking from this South Street, but if you make a right turn, there is parking there. Renee LaFollette: I know. Left turn, yes. Council Member Bagdasarian: Exactly. I think at least a temporary measure could be just to improve the signage just to help direct people to the parking. Renee LaFollette: Yes. My understanding is those signs, if they are not already installed, they're on order to be installed based on our previous conversation. Council Member Bagdasarian: Excellent. Thank you. Mayor Burk: All right. All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate the information. The next item is the state of water and wastewater utility system. Are you doing all these slides in 10 minutes? [background conversation] Mayor Burk: 15? Okay. Does anybody have any problems if we do 15 in this presentation? Okay. Amy Wyks: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Vice Mayor, Members of Council. My name is Amy Wyks, Director of Utilities. Tonight I'm here to give you the state of the Town's water and sanitary sewer systems. Our purpose tonight and our agenda, it has an overview of the systems, our Page 11 lOctober 23, 2023 accomplishments since the last rate study, which was five years ago, current projects that are ongoing, as well as current and upcoming challenges that we're facing. We want to plan for the future and go over some utility system goals. There's a utilities fund overview, and then we're going to touch briefly on the rate development process. After COVID, as a department, we took the time to look at our mission and core values. We established our mission to be, "We provide safe, efficient, and reliable water and wastewater services." As part of when we created our core values, we were able to create an acronym called (CARE, which stands for Integrity, Communication, Accountability, Respect, and Environmental Stewardship. Overall, the department is set up as four divisions. We have the administration division, maintenance division, which handles all the pipes. The water supply division is the water treatment facility, as well as then the water pollution control division for wastewater treatment. We currently have 106 approved employees. Operationally, as you probably know, both the water and wastewater treatment plants are Federally and State -mandated, related to our permits. Just the overview related to the water system, we have the water plant over at Edwards Ferry and River Creek Parkway. We have four booster pump stations that help move the water around to our customers. There are five water storage tanks and one well, the Paxton well. Our system, by the numbers, we're just under 250 miles of waterline, 2,900 fire hydrants. On average in 2022, the water production was at 4.1 million gallons per day. I want to emphasize that that is an average, so over the course of 365 days, that's the average. We, obviously, have our peak summer and irrigation, as well as other water users in the summer. Again, this is just the average with the treatment plant capacity at 12.9 million gallons. For 19 consecutive years, the water treatment facility has received a performance award from the Department of Health. I wanted to give a brief update related to the drought that was in the news a few months ago. As of September 30th, the most current drought status report, everything is normal. What is known as the CO-OP, they continue to monitor the operation status. The Potomac River is still below 1,200 cubic feet per second, so they still are an active drought status when they monitor the river. As I previously stated in an email, the Town staff, we're staying involved with the CO-OP, as well as COG, in order to respond if needed for the response plan for the drought awareness. At this time, we do not anticipate any conservation or restrictions. Related to the sanitary sewer system, we do have the water pollution control facility that's located on Russell Branch Parkway, and 11 pump stations in order for the wastewater to get to the facility. The wastewater, by the numbers, just under 190 miles of sewer, 5,700 manholes at the 11 pump stations. Again, an average 2022 volume of treated wastewater was 3.8. Obviously, it's certain times that number is higher, for example, during rainfall. Then the treatment capacity of the plant itself is 7.5 million gallons per day. As you may know, our reclaimed water, or what is known as the final effluent, that's treated from the wastewater facility is returned either to the Potomac River or it's sent as, the purple line, as cooling water to the Potomac Power plant that's located on Sycolin Road. We want to just highlight some of our accomplishments since our last rate study. Customer service, worked with customers during COVID, as well as upgraded the phone system. Utility maintenance has focused on sanitary sewer lining as well as water main replacements in the historic district. The water supply was able to recoat the hospital tank, as well as some other refurbishments and tank replacements. The water pollution control facility, as you may remember, the dryer was back online in order for us to produce our biosolid product, which is known as TLC, as well as another example of the renovation of the laboratory. One accomplishment I'd like to highlight that definitely was not in the rate study previously was we survived a global pandemic. The Department of Utilities was able to maintain our service. We had no downtime, and we implemented some teleworking positions for certain customer service positions. Overall, we changed the way we did things with no impact to our customers. Staff remained focused and committed to the department mission, not only do I CARE, WE CARE. With that, I'd like to turn the presentation over to Brian Stone, Deputy Director of Utilities. Page 12lOctober 23, 2023 Brian Stone: Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council Members. I'm Brian Stone, Deputy Director of Utilities. I'm going to start by talking about a few of our projects. In this case, this is the water plant filter refurbishment project. We're rebuilding all of the filters at the plant. Some of those were almost 30 years old and they're being replaced now. We're also implementing an ultraviolet disinfection system at the water plant for the destruction of some of the enteric microorganisms that are found in surface waters. At our pollution control facility or wastewater plant, we have a number of projects there, including nutrient removal in anticipation of more stringent nutrient regulations. We're also performing some solids processing studies now to determine how best to meet those needs for better solids processing. We're upgrading three of our sanitary sewer pump stations, Cattail Branch, Potomac Crossing, and Old Waterford Knolls. Current and upcoming challenges, inflation has been a big challenge, especially over the past few years. Last year we saw, this is from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 8% inflation or change in the consumer price index. We're seeing those numbers reflected in some of our chemicals that we use at the water treatment plant. Actually, those same chemicals are used at our pollution control facility as well. We're seeing increases of two and threefold between 2020 and 2023. Staffing is a real challenge. We're having difficulty filling positions, especially in the engineering and project management positions, and a lot of that is market -driven, those wages. We have certain regulatory requirements for our operators need licenses and it's tougher to find those as well. Also, the last bullet there, the aging workforce and retirements is a special challenge now as we're looking for replacements in replacing institutional knowledge. Supply chain, we're seeing some of the supply chain challenges now especially in equipment. Some of our electrical gear is taking up to a year and a half lead time after order to get it. We're seeing one year for new belt filter press equipment as well, which was recently approved by Council. Resiliency and Redundancy, we have some big plans for our water distribution system to provide better redundancy, resiliency there. On the technology side, we are upgrading our supervisor control and data acquisition, or SCADA systems, at both plants. We're also looking at some cybersecurity improvements. A little bit about plant capacity. We do not anticipate water treatment plant capacity expansions anytime soon, but we do need some help on the solids capacity at the Water Pollution Control Facility. Council approved a task order for a study a few months ago to look at that capacity. We need to increase that capacity by 2028. I'll talk more about that in a minute. On the development side, staff meets periodically with developers to understand their water and sewer needs, data centers, and the continued build -out, including residential and commercial with mixed use. We're looking at that. Then the, of course, all out -of -Town requests require Council approval. Regulatory challenges. I mentioned earlier about the nutrient, and I'm speaking of nitrogen and phosphorus. There's discharge changes in the Chesapeake Bay. Those are driven by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. We're also looking at lead and copper revisions now as well. Then we are looking at PFAS as well, which is mentioned earlier with the Liberty Street project. Those are the commonly known as forever chemicals. We have a 40 -year replacement cycle for assets. This equates to about 10.5 million annually or 2.5%. We want to continue the high standards, reliability, and quality of service. That comes from timely repairs, excellent customer service, and then, of course, our award -winning water quality. We want to be, long-term, we want to be financially sustainable. The key financial targets to maintain the Triple -A bond rating. We've heard from our consultants about two indices, the cash on hand and the debt service coverage. Our consultant will be speaking at the next Council meeting about those. Our operations are 24/7/365, especially with the emergencies, water main breaks, sewer backups. Those things can happen in the middle of the night. We want to be proactive instead of reactive because it's more expensive to repair things in an emergency. This is just a little color graphic showing the age of our system. If you look at that, about two-thirds of it has been constructed since 1990. That leaves about a third of our system was constructed before 1990. That gives you an idea of the age of the overall system. The upkeep is not just about pumps and equipment, but we also have to maintain structures, including roof replacements and other painting and other things. We recently replaced some of our Page 13jOctober 23, 2023 equipment, including our vactor truck, which is the most expensive thing we have in our fleet right now. An overview of the utilities fund, the budget for FY '24 is 40.6 million. 29.5 million is operations, 3.6 million for asset replacement, and 7.5 for capital projects. We have a little under 16,800 utility accounts, and those are billed quarterly. We are entirely funded through availability and user fees. That makes us enterprise -funded. FY '24 is the 5th and final year of the Council -adopted 5 -year rate plan. We have a rate consultant under contract now that we'll be presenting next month to talk about FY '25 through '29. That will be at the Council meeting on November the 14th. Questions are financially, how do we get there. That will open the public hearing for rate increases. Then on November 28th at the Council meeting, the Council will be able to approve the ordinance with Town Code amendments with the utility rates. Any questions? Mayor Burk: Thank you very much, both of you. We appreciate the report. Mr. Bagdasarian, I'll start with you. Any questions? Council Member Bagdasarian: I do not have any questions. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Anyone else have any questions? Council Member Cummings? Council Member Cummings: Yes. I know that in the report, you talked about the number of customers we have currently. Do you know what the growth was in the last fiscal year? How many customers we added? Brian Stone: In the past fiscal year, I don't have those numbers over here, I believe. Council Member Cummings: [crosstalk] Brian Stone: No. Council Member Cummings: Okay. Brian Stone: We can get that for you. Council Member Cummings: That'd be great. Thanks. Then maybe on the rate study when it comes out. Amy Wyks: There's information about it. Growth is about 0.5%, is what they had in the model. Council Member Cummings: Did you all look at the operating expenses and have any approximate increase annually-- What percent they're increasing annually or decreasing? I doubt they're decreasing. Amy Wyks: You're referring to the usage? Council Member Cummings: No, just all the expenses in the utility fund, where they're moving as far as -- Amy Wyks: We don't have that information. Tonight's focus was the state of the utility, and the rate consultant will definitely be able to answer those specific budget questions and operating next meeting. Council Member Cummings: Well, I'll save the rest of my questions for the rate study. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Council Member Cimino -Johnson. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Thank you, Amy. Thank you for your presentations. My question revolves around the 40 -year replacement cycle for assets. You said that it equates to approximately 10.5 million annually. Do we actually put that into a savings account and save that much a year or how does that work? Page 14lOctober 23, 2023 Amy Wyks: That's typically part of the CIP. On average, we try to have projects including our repair, replacement, and rehabilitation, which is known as 3R CARP, equaled at least to 10.5 million, so that's part of the planning, that's part of what the rate consultant will look at in regard to covering the operating budget, as well as covering the capital and the 3R reinvestment. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Okay, so for the adopted fiscal year '24 budget it's only 3.6. Amy Wyks: It's 3.6 but then you also have to add the 7.5 for the capital. It's both, so those combined is the reinvestment. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Got you. Okay, so it seems like we're meeting that. Amy Wyks: At this time, yes, but similar to Capital Projects Office being able to get projects to completion has been difficult, but we are making some progress related to that with getting plans designed and out to bid and contract awarded. Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Okay. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor Steinberg. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Thank you. Just look into the future when we talk about increasing capacity, can you increase the capacity of one of the operations without increasing the capacity of the other -- Let me ask it a different way. I assume we can increase capacity of wastewater treatment without increasing intake capacity, but can you increase intake capacity without increasing wastewater treatment capacity? Brian Stone: Do you mean, could we expand the water plant without the -- Vice Mayor Steinberg: Yes. Brian Stone: Yes. We could, but we have to understand what the use is going to be, like a consumptive use from the water plant that is not going to return increased flow to the wastewater plant. Those are the questions we have to ask. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Thanks. You mentioned UV treatment, is that in addition to other treatments or just -- Brian Stone: Yes. Vice Mayor Steinberg: It doesn't replace other treatments. It's an additional. Brian Stone: Yes. It's an additional. It's like another layer of treatment that we're adding to it. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Inflation in the recent past was 8% or 9% or 10% whatever. Why are the price increases more like 100% or 200% for some of the things that you listed in the slides? Brian Stone: For the chemicals? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Yes. Brian Stone: I really don't know. We started seeing chemical prices going up just a few years ago and it's-- I can't explain it other than just there's a limited supply of companies providing this now and so that's where the market is. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Okay. Now when we talk about data centers, we currently have no data centers within the Town limits yet, but we are currently committed to-- We are providing utilities to one data center, and we have agreed to provide to another. If I understand correctly, they are two different systems. One system I think is not a closed loop and for the second center they are proposing a closed loop system. Are we going to see more of those and then expect less demand on our capacity Page 15lOctober 23, 2023 for data centers that may or may not be approved for within Town limits? Do we have an idea what's going on in the industry these days? Brian Stone: That's really a mixed bag because the different cooling systems can allow the data center operator to intensify the use of the data center, so they can provide more storage depending on the type of cooling system that they use. What we've heard is that the adiabatic cooling systems which are consumptive evaporative systems, which use more water, you can provide more data storage, more servers. You can cool more servers with those type of cooling systems than with the close loop systems. The close loop systems use more electricity. That's what we're told, so really we're trying to adjust to this and trying to understand it to make sure that we can meet the needs on the supply side and then that we can ensure we can meet the needs on the discharge side too. It is with the adiabatic evaporative system there's much less discharge with those than the close loop. Vice Mayor Steinberg: All right, thank you, thank you for the information from both of you. Mayor Burk: I just have a couple of questions. On your water system map, I was surprised Dr. Cook's property doesn't have a well on it. Amy Wyks: That's not a well that's operated by the Town. The one well that I referenced to is the Paxton well, which is Town -operated. There are other wells in the Town but that's the only one that the Town owns and operates. Mayor Burk: Oh, okay. There might very well be a well there but -- Amy Wyks: Correct. I mean, there's -- Mayor Burk: There were times when he provided the water, his farm provided the water for years and years. Amy Wyks: I think he refers to his actually as a spring but we do have some other businesses that have wells and that's what they use for their potable water. Again, we don't show those because that's not part of our permit. Mayor Burk: Right. Okay. This hasn't come up recently but is there any consideration or talk about lowering the use of fluoride? For a while there that was a big issue that I was getting a lot of feedback on. Amy Wyks: Lowering what? I'm sorry. Mayor Burk: Fluoride in the water, that we add fluoride. Amy Wyks: Correct. Mayor Burk: There was a whole group of people that were really opposed to it previously. Amy Wyks: Right. We currently meet the requirements that the CDC has put out and the event Council would like us to look at that. We just would need some instructions to do just that. Mayor Burk: Okay, thank you. Is there any present way to control or to remove the PFAS, the forever material that we didn't realize we were creating but we're creating? Brian Stone: That's being studied extensively now. There are some methods that appear pretty promising on the wastewater side for solids but it involves very high temperatures and it's pretty expensive too. It's called Pyrolysis. It's a really high -temperature process for solids. It is removed with filters. We will remove it with our filters at the water plant and at the waste -water plant but it's still on the filter so you haven't gotten rid of it. You removed it from the water. It's really how you dispose of it Page 16lOctober 23, 2023 and that's really tough because it doesn't break down because of those organic bonds there that's really tough to break. Mayor Burk: I'm really glad to hear that. I didn't realize that filters could remove them but didn't we get recently recognized because our water was so clean and it didn't have them? Didn't you have to do a test recently? Brian Stone: Yes, we got 19 years with an award from the State, yes. Mayor Burk: Right, and I think that's something we should tell everybody, that our water is so clean that it doesn't have any of that in it so that's great. Anyone else at this point? Well, thank you. I know the rate study is coming next. This is useful to look over and there's a lot looking ahead but we have to have clean water and so we got to be judicious on all of us so thank you very much. Brian Stone: Thank you. Amy Wyks: One final point with the rate consultant is finishing their report and getting ready for their presentation. Staff is available to meet in the event that there's any Council Members that would like to talk about that prior to the November 14th meeting. Mayor Burk: Okay, great. Thank you. If anybody wants to talk about it in detail, they can meet with you. Great, thank you. I have two requests for proclamations. One is from the Diversity Commission and it is for National American Indian Heritage Month. It would be presented on the 14th. Are there four people that would head nods, that would be okay, with that proclamation? Okay. [laughs] You can't vote. Sorry, no. [laughs] It is for the National American Indian Heritage Month. [background conversation] Mayor Burk: That's all right. The next one is a little unusual in that it is not from a local individual or group. It is in regard to Family Court Awareness Month Committee/ One Mom's Battle. Now we don't have any family court here. That's in the County. Their mission is to educate judges and other family court professionals on evidence -based peer review research. Are there four people that want to do a proclamation on Family Court Awareness Month Committee? Okay. There is not an interest in that one. Okay. Next, on the 14th we'll have the National American Indian Heritage Month. All right. Thank you. Future Council meetings and agenda topics, is there any, at this point, that anybody wants to bring forward? All right. In that case, we have the fun part of moving to-- Are we going to stay in here? Chris Spera: Yes, Mayor. Mayor Burk: Okay. Move pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(8) and 2.2-3711(A)(3) at the Code of Virginia that Leesburg Town Council convene in a closed meeting for the purpose of consultation with legal counsel and briefing by staff members regarding specific legal matters relating to the annexation of the JLMA where such consultation in open session would adversely affect the negotiating or limiting posture of the Town. Is there a second? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Second. Mayor Burk: Second by Vice Mayor. All in favor? Council Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? All right, that passes 7-0. Chris Spera: There was an additional Code section on an additional matter. Page 17j0ctober 23, 2023 Mayor Burk: Ok. Chris Spera: If you wouldn't mind just — Mayor Burk: Reading that again? Chris Spera: I will give you mine. Mayor Burk: I am reading an old one because I see the other one here. Chris Spera: [inaudible] Mayor Burk: But do I need to reread the whole thing? Chris Spera: [inaudible] Mayor Burk: Yes, you will have to go again. I am redoing my motion. I am rescinding it and doing a new motion. I move pursuant to 2.2-3711(A)(7) and 2.2-3711(A)(8) and 2.2-3711(A)(3) of the Code of Virginia that the Leesburg Town Council convene in a closed meeting for the purpose of consulting with legal counsel on matters related to Graydon Manor, LLC. v. The Town of Leesburg, VA, Loudoun County Circuit Court Case CL21-4323 and specific legal matters related to the annexation of the JLMA where such consultation in open session would adversely affect the negotiating and litigating posture of the Town. Do I have a second? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Second. Mayor Burk: All in favor? Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? That passes 7-0. Council convened in a closed session at 8:11 p.m. Council convened in an open session at 9:12 p.m. Mayor Burk: Microphones are on? Microphones are on. In accordance with Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia, I move that Council certify to the best of each member's knowledge, only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirement under Virginia Freedom of Information Act and such public business matters for the purpose identified in the motion by which the closed meeting was convened were heard, discussed and considered in the meeting by Council. Mr. Wilt? Council Member Wilt: Aye. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Mr. Wilt. Mr. Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Aye. Mayor Burk: Ms. Nacy? Council Member Nacy: Aye. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor Steinberg? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Aye. Mayor Burk: Council Member Cummings? Council Member Cummings: Aye. Page 18lOctober 23, 2023 Mayor Burk: Council Member Cimino -Johnson? Council Member Cimino -Johnson: Aye. Mayor Burk: And Mayor Burk aye. Is there a motion to adjourn? Vice Mayor Steinberg: So moved. Council Member Nacy: Second. Mayor Burk: Moved by Vice Mayor, seconded by Council Member Nacy. All in favor? Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? That passes. C") Page 19jOctober 23, 2023