The URL can be used to link to this page

EDAAgenda2022January6 AGENDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY | THURSDAY, JANUARY 6TH| | 8:00 AM | COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING @ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING ROOM 107 KENT STREET WINCHESTER, VA 1. Call to Order 2. Annual Meeting || ACTION  Election of Chair and Vice Chair and establish days, times, and places for its regular meetings (First Thursdays of each month at 8:00 am, 107 North Kent Street) 3. Approval of Minutes – November 4th || ACTION 4. Treasurer’s Report || ACTION 5. Target Business Study || ACTION  Process on identifying target business sectors will be briefed 6. Lord Fairfax Small Business Development Center for Bilingual Counseling Services to Frederick County Businesses || INFORMATION  Update on results from Lord Fairfax Small Business Development Center’s bilingual counseling services in Spanish to Frederick County businesses. 7. EPA Brownfields Assessment Grants | INFORMATION  Update on program to complete environmental studies on actual or perceived sites containing hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. 8. FredCo Eats: Restaurant Week || INFORMATION  Update on the initiative that will celebrate Frederick County’s local restaurants and promote this sector 9. Grocery Store Attraction || INFORMATION  Update on progress of contacting grocery stores. 10. Such other business as may come before this Authority MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY | THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2021 | A meeting of the Frederick County Economic Development Authority was held on Thursday, November 4, 2021, at 8:00 A.M. in the County Administration Building, Board of Supervisors Room, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. PRESENT: Judy McCann‐Slaughter, Doug Rinker, Susan Brooks, Rick Till, Heather McKay and Stan Crockett. Bryan Fairbanks participated remotely due to business reasons and his participation by this method was approved by the Board members present. STAFF: Patrick Barker, Wendy May, and Donna McIlwee, Frederick County Economic Development Authority; Jay Tibbs, Deputy County Administrator; and Michael Bryan, Attorney MEETING CALLED TO ORDER: Chairman Rinker called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes from the October 7, 2021, meeting were presented. On motion of Ms. McCann‐Slaughter, seconded by Ms. Brooks, the minutes were approved by the following recorded vote: J. Stanley Crockett Aye Susan Brooks Aye Bryan Fairbanks Abstain (was not present at that meeting) Heather McKay Aye Doug Rinker Aye Judy McCann‐Slaughter Aye Rick Till Aye TREASURER'S REPORT Mr. Barker submitted the following report: Checking Account ‐ Bank of Clarke County as of September 30, 2021 ‐ $10,590.95 Savings Account ‐ Scott & Stringfellow as of September 30, 2021 ‐ $1,475,733.24 Page 2 of 5 Frederick County EDA Meeting Minutes | November 4, 2021 On motion of Mr. Crockett, seconded by Ms. McCann‐Slaughter, the Treasurer’s Report was approved by the following recorded vote: J. Stanley Crockett Aye Susan Brooks Aye Bryan Fairbanks Aye Heather McKay Aye Doug Rinker Aye Judy McCann‐Slaughter Aye Rick Till Aye EDA STRATEGY Mr. Barker explained that at the October meeting, a revised EDA Strategy was presented, which guides staff as they pursue Frederick County’s economic development activities. The consensus was to pause action on the Strategy until the November meeting so it could be closely examined by EDA Board members. To complete the Strategy update, a strategic session was held with the EDA Board. Based on that insight, staff restructured the objectives and measurements for each main goal. This structure provides more direct connectivity between an objective and measurement, thus providing staff more clarity to evaluate effectiveness. The overall objectives remain with some exceptions to remove redundancy. Mr. Barker stated staff is seeking the Authority’s comments and adoption, if appropriate, of the overall document. Mr. Till suggested including a statement for both charts shown on page 7 of the Strategy that Covid had an impact on the data shown and that Frederick County fared better than other localities in Virginia. Mr. Crockett complimented staff on the document and made a motion to adopt the Strategy as presented. Motion was seconded by Ms. McKay and approved by the following recorded vote: J. Stanley Crockett Aye Susan Brooks Aye Bryan Fairbanks Aye Heather McKay Aye Doug Rinker Aye Judy McCann‐Slaughter Aye Rick Till Aye Page 3 of 5 Frederick County EDA Meeting Minutes | November 4, 2021 EDA BUDGET FY23 Mr. Barker reviewed each section of the draft EDA budget for FY23 explaining the proposal aims to further elevate the EDA’s efforts of attracting and retaining workforce talent, retaining and expanding existing businesses, recruiting target businesses and employing policies that keep Frederick County a competitive business location. The request is consistent with past budget appropriations and reflects an increase of 2.3% or $14,756. Staff is seeking approval of the proposed FY23 budget before submission to Frederick County. Included in the proposal is funds to update and redesign the EDA’s website. Mr. Barker explained it is generally recommended that websites be redesigned every 2‐3 years so it is not outdated. Mr. Rinker stated he is hearing the same message from other organizations he is involved in. Mr. Till stated an organization’s website is an excellent source for recruiting purposes. Mr. Crockett made a motion to accept the draft FY23 budget as presented. Motion was seconded by Mr. Till and approved by the following recorded vote: J. Stanley Crockett Aye Susan Brooks Aye Bryan Fairbanks Aye Heather McKay Aye Doug Rinker Aye Judy McCann‐Slaughter Aye Rick Till Aye TARGET BUSINESS STUDY Mr. Barker explained that the Board’s October meeting served as a kick‐off to the update of the EDA’s Target Industry Analysis. As a reminder, the effort’s end goal is to quantitively and qualitatively identify the County’s best fits relative to traded‐sector industries, being those industries that would most benefit from Frederick County’s assets and would be willing to expand and/or relocate to the area. In addition, this analysis will identify those industries that bring value to Frederick County in the form of investment, jobs, payroll and local purchasing. Working through established steps, staff compared current and future industry trends with announcement data and wage rates of identified sectors for Step 2 of the analysis. The preliminary results from this step were provided to Board members for review and comment. A question was asked if any wages near Frederick County’s average wage should be included. Mr. Barker stated he will insert existing clusters if they do not make the “cut” at the end. Mr. Rinker reminded Board members this is for targets, not what is already here. Page 4 of 5 Frederick County EDA Meeting Minutes | November 4, 2021 Mr. Till stated it would be helpful to have the standard definition of those listed on the slide titled “Very preliminary priority targets.” Mr. Barker will distribute to the Board. Ms. McCann‐Slaughter asked if there was a timeline for completing the analysis. Mr. Barker stated he hopes to give the Board monthly updates. Mr. Crockett inquired as to the significance of using a 45‐mile radius for the charts showing industry sectors with positive 10‐year growth rate and cluster concentration. Mr. Barker explained that, typically, site selectors look 45 miles beyond an area. Mr. Crockett stated it might be good to expand the radius to include the I81 corridor rather than limiting it to 45 miles. Mr. Barker will explore that possibility to see how easily it might be accomplished. Board members were asked to send Mr. Barker any areas not on the list they think should be included for consideration. PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1ST QUARTER As information, Mr. Barker reviewed performance measures for the 1st quarter 2021. He explained that, based on the strategy just adopted at this meeting, measures will change. SUCH OTHER BUSINESS AS MAY COME BEFORE THIS AUTHORITY Mr. Crockett asked if it would be advantageous to change the EDA By‐Laws to include provisions for remote attendance of Board meetings. Mr. Barker explained the Board must follow State guidelines and did adopt a Remote Meeting Policy in November 2020 incorporating the stipulations for remote meeting participation as directed by the Code of Virginia. Ms. McCann‐Slaughter asked for an update on grocery store contacts. Mr. Barker stated he continues his attempts to contact stores on his list and also make follow‐up calls. Ms. May reported that 55 employers participated in the recent Employer Expo and there were 116 attendees. Mr. Barker stated quantity of attendees was down this year but the quality of those attending was higher. Results will be shared when completed. Mr. Barker reported an appraiser has visited the EDA’s property on Hope Drive but the road needs to be completed before she can complete an updated appraisal. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before this Authority, the meeting was adjourned at 8:50 a.m. Page 5 of 5 Frederick County EDA Meeting Minutes | November 4, 2021 ________________________________ ____________________________ Doug Rinker Jay Tibbs Chairman Secretary DATE: December 30, 2021 TO: Board of Directors, Frederick County Economic Development Authority FROM: Patrick Barker, CEcD Executive Director CC: Jay Tibbs Deputy County Administrator RE: Target Industry Analysis Update Working through established steps (see the flow chart below), the staff led update of the EDA’s Target Industry Analysis moves into industry drivers and project needs steps. As a reminder, the effort’s end goal is to quantitively and qualitatively identify the County’s best fits relative to traded‐sector industries, being those industries that would most benefit from Frederick County’s assets and would be willing to expand and/or relocate to the area. In addition, this analysis will identify those industries that bring value to Frederick County in the form of investment, jobs, payroll, and local purchasing. Target Industry Analysis Update January 2022 Since the last meeting, staff did verify the analysis from November. Therefore, staff recommends moving forward with the following industries for additional analysis. Economic information (jobs, forecasted jobs, etc) for each sector for Frederick County and a 45 mile radius of Frederick County is listed below. NAICS Industry Empl Avg Ann Wages LQ Ann % Growth 5415 Computer Systems Design and Related Services 3,320 $ 93,034 0.75 2.7% 5182 Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services 509 $ 85,234 0.68 1.5% 5221 Depository Credit Intermediation 4,206 $ 66,186 1.26 0.5% 5511 Management of Companies and Enterprises 3,262 $ 79,073 0.74 0.6% 5416 Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services 3,069 $ 80,534 0.88 2.2% 6215 Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories 407 $ 59,863 0.71 1.4% 3345 Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing 582 $ 76,652 0.73 1.1% 5222 Nondepository Credit Intermediation 719 $ 65,641 0.61 1.6% 5611 Office Administrative Services 1,181 $ 74,058 0.98 1.2% 5419 Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 2,473 $ 67,580 1.18 1.2% 3254 Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing 471 $ 67,086 0.76 1.8% 5417 Scientific Research and Development Services 305 $ 88,637 0.19 0.6% In addition to these, staff recommends the inclusion of existing industry manufacturing sectors with significant cluster value. Economic information (jobs, forecasted jobs, etc) is below. NAICS Industry Empl LQ 3115 Dairy Product Manufacturing 840 22.49 3274 Lime and Gypsum Product Manufacturing 80 22.18 3261 Plastics Product Manufacturing 1,892 13.42 3324 Boiler, Tank, and Shipping Container Manufacturing 201 9.64 3273 Cement and Concrete Product Manufacturing 420 8.91 3326 Spring and Wire Product Manufacturing 82 8.46 3111 Animal Food Manufacturing 106 6.44 3212 Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Wood Product Manufacturing 99 5.01 Target Industry Analysis Update January 2022 3323 Architectural and Structural Metals Manufacturing 395 4.20 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 63 4.13 3219 Other Wood Product Manufacturing 226 3.78 3262 Rubber Product Manufacturing 98 3.17 3114 Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food Manufacturing 121 2.84 3231 Printing and Related Support Activities 242 2.56 3279 Other Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing 48 2.51 3222 Converted Paper Product Manufacturing 147 2.32 3241 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing 61 2.31 3118 Bakeries and Tortilla Manufacturing 133 1.76 3119 Other Food Manufacturing 103 1.76 Recently, the Virginia Economic Development Partnership contracted with Boston Consulting Group to develop post COVID region‐oriented business attraction and expansion strategies and post‐COVID economic growth strategies. This effort included: identifying subindustries and companies that are interested in reshoring their operations and/or are well positioned to thrive in a post‐COVID economy, aligning sub industries to regions that are most attractive to relevant companies, and developing steps for stakeholders to take to capture subindustry growth. This analysis revealed the following subindustry sectors for the Northern Shenandoah Valley region, which includes the City of Winchester, Clarke County and Frederick County.  Sensing technologies  Plastic packaging  Paper packaging  Cybersecurity  Biotech  Business process outsourcing  Engineered Wood  Automation & robotics  EV batteries & parts  Plant‐based food & beverage  Data centers  Pharma‐biologics Target Industry Analysis Update January 2022 Previous work captured most of these sectors with a few exceptions. The following table provides a conversion from Boston Consulting Group’s sectors to NAICS codes. VEDP Sector NAICS Previously Identified Sensing technologies 3345 Yes Plastic packaging 3261 Yes Paper packaging 3222 No Cybersecurity 5415 Yes Biotech 3254 Yes Business process outsourcing 5511 Yes Engineered Wood 3261 Yes Automation & robotics 3339 No EV batteries & parts 3363 or 3359 No Plant‐based food & beverage 3119 Yes Data centers 5182 Yes Pharma‐biologics 3254 Yes Staff performed some analysis of those not previously identified and recommends including EV batteries & parts for additional evaluation. This recommendation comes from the sector’s wage rate and Boston Consulting Group’s analysis. based on a data review. NAICS Industry Empl Avg Ann Wages LQ Ann % Growth 3222 Paper packaging 511 $46,440 1.03 ‐0.6% 3339 Automation & robotics 181 $57,490 0.37 ‐0.6% 3363 Motor Vehicle Parks Manufacturing 376 $48,840 0.37 0.5% 3359 Other Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing 150 $58,360 0.56 0.2% In summary, the following sectors are recommended for additional analysis. Staff is seeking the Authority’s discussion and endorsement, if desired, of this recommendation. Computer Systems Design and Related Services Dairy Product Manufacturing Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services Lime and Gypsum Product Manufacturing Depository Credit Intermediation Plastics Product Manufacturing Management of Companies and Enterprises Boiler, Tank, and Shipping Container Manufacturing Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services Cement and Concrete Product Manufacturing Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories Spring and Wire Product Manufacturing Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing Animal Food Manufacturing Target Industry Analysis Update January 2022 Nondepository Credit Intermediation Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Wood Product Manufacturing Office Administrative Services Architectural and Structural Metals Manufacturing Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Grain and Oilseed Milling Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing Other Wood Product Manufacturing Scientific Research and Development Services Rubber Product Manufacturing Motor Vehicle Parks Manufacturing Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food Manufacturing Other Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing Printing and Related Support Activities Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing Other Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing Bakeries and Tortilla Manufacturing Converted Paper Product Manufacturing Other Food Manufacturing In addition, staff recommends organizing subsectors into six (6) major sectors. These will serve as a baseline for many of the additional steps.  Corporate Services  Information Technology  Finance & Insurance  BioScience  Advanced Manufacturing  Food & Beverage Staff is seeking the Authority’s discussion and endorsement, if desired, of this recommendation. The recommended sectors will be further analyzed through the previously listed steps. 4. Understand industry drivers and location criteria (qualitative and quantitative) 5. Develop prototype project needs and specifications 6. Identify relevant benchmark locations 7. Gather comparative data and benchmark with competing locations 8. Identify key strengths (selling points) 9. Identify weak points to be improved 10. Develop current product profile of the location 11. Define most promising industry segments 12. Develop value proposition per sector that includes both qualitative and quantitative attributes specific to Frederick County, VA Staff’s tentative timeline is for the presentation of steps 4 to 6 at the February meeting and steps 7 to 9 for March, steps 10 and 11 for April and final step in May. NAICS Industry EmplAvg Ann Wages LQ Empl Change Ann %Total DemandEmpl GrowthAnn % Growth5415 Computer Systems Design and Related Services3,320 93,034$ 0.75 205 1.3% 3,862 993 2.7%5182 Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services509 85,234$ 0.68‐296‐8.7% 543 82 1.5%5221 Depository Credit Intermediation4,206 66,186$ 1.26 309 1.5% 4,353 214 0.5%5511 Management of Companies and Enterprises3,262 79,073$ 0.74 688 4.9% 3,239 214 0.6%5416Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services3,069 80,534$ 0.88 290 2.0% 3,791 730 2.2%6215 Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories407 59,863$ 0.71 60 3.3% 418 61 1.4%3345Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing582 76,652$ 0.73 131 5.3% 612 67 1.1%5222 Nondepository Credit Intermediation719 65,641$ 0.61‐1,489‐20.1% 849 121 1.6%5611 Office Administrative Services1,181 74,058$ 0.98 209 4.0% 1,314 150 1.2%5419Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services2,473 67,580$ 1.18 164 1.4% 2,716 315 1.2%3254 Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing471 67,086$ 0.76 144 7.6% 579 90 1.8%5417 Scientific Research and Development Services305 88,637$ 0.19 23 1.6% 277 17 0.6%Source: JobsEQ®Data as of 2021Q2Current 5‐Year History 10‐Year ForecastFrederick County ‐ 45miles NAICS Industry EmplAvg Ann Wages LQ Empl Change Ann %Total DemandEmpl GrowthAnn % Growth5415 Computer Systems Design and Related Services190 93,034$ 0.34‐14‐1.4% 243 73 3.3%5182 Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services17 85,234$ 0.18 6 8.9% 20 4 2.2%5221 Depository Credit Intermediation2,004 66,186$ 4.70 495 5.8% 2,400 317 1.5%5511 Management of Companies and Enterprises568 79,073$ 1.01 239 11.6% 735 152 2.4%5416Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services233 80,534$ 0.52‐35‐2.8% 320 78 2.9%6215 Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories38 59,863$ 0.51 15 10.7% 48 12 2.8%3345Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing16 76,652$ 0.16‐9‐8.4% 19 3 1.8%5222 Nondepository Credit Intermediation176 65,641$ 1.16 59 8.6% 240 53 2.7%5611 Office Administrative Services46 74,058$ 0.30 4 1.7% 58 11 2.1%5419Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services257 67,580$ 0.96 17 1.4% 341 72 2.5%3254 Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing401 67,086$ 5.09 96 5.7% 517 92 2.1%5417 Scientific Research and Development Services2 88,637$ 0.01 1 11.1% 2 0 0.0%Source: JobsEQ®Data as of 2021Q2Current 5‐Year History 10‐Year ForecastFrederick County, Virginia NAICS Industry Empl LQ Empl Change Ann %Total DemandEmpl GrowthAnn % Growth3111 Animal Food Manufacturing106 6.44 84 36.8% 176 38 3.1%3323Architectural and Structural Metals Manufacturing395 4.20 45 2.5% 549 86 2.0%3118 Bakeries and Tortilla Manufacturing133 1.76‐5‐0.7% 225 27 1.9%3324Boiler, Tank, and Shipping Container Manufacturing201 9.64 28 3.1% 304 57 2.5%3273 Cement and Concrete Product Manufacturing420 8.91‐68‐3.0% 439‐3‐0.1%5415 Computer Systems Design and Related Services190 0.34‐14‐1.4% 243 73 3.3%3222 Converted Paper Product Manufacturing147 2.32 23 3.4% 187 18 1.2%3115 Dairy Product Manufacturing840 22.49 266 7.9% 1,202 158 1.7%3114Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food Manufacturing121 2.84 22 4.0% 165 14 1.1%3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling63 4.13 6 2.1% 81 7 1.0%3274 Lime and Gypsum Product Manufacturing80 22.18 10 2.6% 93 4 0.5%3119 Other Food Manufacturing103 1.76‐373‐26.4% 166 30 2.6%3279Other Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing48 2.51 17 9.0% 54 2 0.3%3219 Other Wood Product Manufacturing226 3.78‐11‐0.9% 272 17 0.7%3241 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing61 2.31 6 2.0% 76 11 1.7%3261 Plastics Product Manufacturing1,892 13.42 757 10.8% 2,386 218 1.1%3231 Printing and Related Support Activities242 2.56‐22‐1.8% 312 22 0.9%3262 Rubber Product Manufacturing98 3.17‐126‐15.2% 142 22 2.1%3326 Spring and Wire Product Manufacturing82 8.46‐35‐6.9% 105 11 1.3%3212Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Wood Product Manufacturing99 5.01 93 75.2% 144 24 2.2%Source: JobsEQ®Data as of 2021Q2Current 5‐Year History 10‐Year ForecastFrederick County, Virginia DATE: December 30, 2021 TO: Board of Directors, Frederick County Economic Development Authority FROM: Patrick Barker, CEcD Executive Director CC: Jay Tibbs Deputy County Administrator RE: EDA Brownfields Program | Update In October, staff provided an update to changes to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Brownfield Assessment Grants application. The most significant change was the EPA would no longer be accepting coalition grant applications this year and is only accepting “community‐ wide” applications. After some discussion with Draper Aden and the City of Winchester, staff’s conclusion was to delay applying until next year, as additional research is required to make a successful application. Specifically, the priority brownfield sites within the target areas need to demonstrate clear leveraging sources and concrete redevelopment plans for these sites and must describe how the project or revitalization plans will help promote Environmental Justice. Specifically, any project will need to demonstrate how disadvantaged communities (i.e., minority, low income) can benefit from assessment and redevelopment activities. EPA Brownfields Assessment Grants— Assessment Coalitions EPA’s Brownfields Program is designed to empower states, communities, and other stakeholders in economic redevelopment to work together in a timely manner to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and sustainably reuse brownfi eld sites. A brown field site is a property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. EPA’s Brownfields Program provides financial and technical assistance for brownfield revitalization, including grants for environmental assessment, cleanup, and job training. What are EPA Brownfi elds Assessment Grants? Assessment grants provide funding for a grant recipient to: •Inventory Sites: Compile a listing •Characterize Sites: Identify past uses •Assess Sites: Determine existing contamination •Conduct Planning for Cleanup and Redevelopment: Scope and plan process •Conduct Community Involvement: Inform and engage community Revitalized Kassenberg House, Moorehead, MN What are Assessment Coalitions? An Assessment Coalition is comprised of three or more eligible entities. The lead coalition member submits a Community-wide Assessment Grant proposal on behalf of itself and the other members. The coalition may request up to $600,000 to work on a minimum of five hazardous substance and/or petroleum sites. Who is Eligible to Apply as a Coalition for an Assessment Grant? Eligible entities, including those with existing brownfields assessment grants, are: state, local and tribal governments, with the exception of certain Indian tribes in Alaska; general purpose units of local government, land clearance authorities, or other quasi-governmental entities; regional councils; redevelopment agencies; government entities created by state legislatures; 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations; and qualified community development entity as defined in section 45D(C) (1). •Coalition members are not eligible to apply for an individual Community-wide or Site-specifi c Assessment Grant in the year they apply as part of a coalition. •Some properties are ineligible for funding unless EPA makes a site-specific funding determination. Why Should an Entity Form an Assessment Coalition? •Increases access to assessment resources for communities that might have limited resources to administer a brownfi eld grant. •Helps a state or county to focus assessment dollars on geographical areas with the greatest need over a given time. The larger pool of funding allows the coalition to shift geographic focus to new areas as revitalization needs are identified. Assessment Coalitions – The Basics •The grant recipient (lead coalition member) must administer the grant, be accountable to EPA for proper expenditure of the funds, and be the point of contact for the other coalition members. •Assessment Coalition Grants are community-wide. •Assessment Coalitions must assess a minimum of five sites regardless of funding request (e.g., less than or up to $600,000). •Assessment Coalitions may request hazardous substance and/or petroleum funding as long as the request is not over $600,000. •A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) documenting the coalition’s site selection process must be in place prior to the expenditure of any funds that have been awarded to the lead coalition. It is up to the coalition to agree internally about the distribution of funds and the mechanisms for implementing the assessment work. •Assessment Coalitions can cross regional boundaries, but will be managed out of the EPA Region where the grant recipient is located. •An eligible city entity and a redevelopment authority from the same locality can be coalition members provided the entities are separate legal entities under state and local law. •No more than $200,000 can be expended on a site. •For Assessment Coalitions involving state entities: •Only one eligible state entity can apply as the lead coalition member (e.g., state environmental agency, state economic development agency) or be part of a coalition. An eligible state entity cannot be a member of two or more Assessment Coalitions. •If an eligible state entity is part of a coalition that receives an Assessment Grant, no additional Assessment Grants can be awarded to state entities from the grant recipient’s state. What are Some Examples of How Assessment Coalitions Work? Example #1 A state agency applies for EPA Brownfi elds Grant funding together with several smaller communities as members of a coalition. The state assumes the role of “recipient” (i.e., the entity that would administer the grant, is accountable to EPA for proper expenditure of the funds, and acts as point of contact for other coalition members). These entities have formed a coalition to target numerous sites that have become blighted and/or under-utilized along an historic highway running through the communities. Example #2 A coalition of metro municipalities, such as one large city and several surrounding cities/towns, could apply for $600,000. In a given year, one coalition member’s site assessment needs may be relatively minimal compared to another member’s, or the ability to assess a targeted site may be complicated by legal access issues. Priorities can Brownfields Assessment Grants do not provide resources to conduct cleanup or building demolition activities. Cleanup assistance is available under EPA’s Multipurpose, Cleanup, and Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) Grants. Information on EPA’s Brownfields Grants, please visit www.epa.gov/brownfields. be set each year to conduct assessments on the properties that have the most immediate need. How Do I Apply as a Coalition for an Assessment Grant? A single, eligible entity applies as a coalition for a Community-wide Assessment Grant on behalf of itself and other eligible entities. A proposal submitted by a coalition must include: •Applicant information (e.g., describe all jurisdictions covered under the proposal, and provide their general populations). •Applicable mandatory attachments (e.g., coalition applicants for Assessment Grants must document how all coalition members are eligible entities; and all coalition members must submit a letter to the potential grant recipient in which they agree to be part of the coalition). •Responses to evaluation criteria. How Long is the Performance Period for an Assessment Coalition Grant? The period of performance is three years. The Consumer Energy Headquarters Property in Jackson County, Michigan, before revitalization (above) and after (below). United States Environmental Assessment Coalitions Protection Agency Fact Sheet Washington, D.C. 20460 EPA-560-F-18-186 October 2018 www.epa.gov/brownfields DATE: December 30, 2021 TO: Board of Directors, Frederick County Economic Development Authority FROM: Patrick Barker, CEcD Executive Director CC: Jay Tibbs Deputy County Administrator RE: FredCo Eats Restaurant Week | Update FredCo Eats Restaurant Week will be held January 31 – February 6, 2022. Participating restaurants will offer special multi‐course menus, meal deals, and/or promotional discounts during the week. Restaurant Week seeks to showcase Frederick County’s growing restaurant scene by sharing stories of local restaurants; featuring the diversity of local menus, increasing camaraderie among Frederick County eateries; and elevating the County’s overall restaurant sector by highlighting individual restaurants. Restaurant Week will communicate the unique character of Frederick County’s dining experience, an important aspect of the Northern Shenandoah Valley Talent Initiative messaging – One region, multiple cities, and towns, each with their own unique character. A survey from a sampling of County restaurants was utilized to determine the week Restaurant Week would occur, participation criteria, and how the success of the event would be measured. The FredCo Eats logo, web, and social presence have been developed and registration of restaurants is underway. Follow FredCo Eats at www.FredCoEats.com, www.Facebook.com/FredCoEats, and www.Instagram.com/FredCoEats. # F r e d C o E a t s R W JANUARY 31 - FEBRUARY 6, 2022 Enjoy multi-course menus, promotional discounts, and meal deals at participating Frederick County restaurants! Content features at FredCoEats.com will showcase local cuisines, our favorite neighborhood hangouts, creative chefs, and restaurant families. Join us this winter as we rally around and support the Frederick County, Virginia, restaurant industry. Stay Up-to-Date  FredCoEats.com A SHOWCASE OF FREDERICK COUNTY RESTAURANTS Dine-inTake-out& Special restaurant week menus and pricing FredCoEats.com #FredCoEatsRW social media prize drawings Get to Know FredCo Eats - content features DATE: December 30, 2022 TO: Board of Directors, Frederick County Economic Development Authority FROM: Patrick Barker, CEcD Executive Director CC: Jay Tibbs Deputy County Administrator RE: Program Update | Bilingual Counseling Services to Frederick County Businesses At the September, the EDA, the Frederick County EDA authorized the expenditure of $15,000 to the Lord Fairfax Small Business Development Center (SBDC) for the purpose of providing bilingual counseling services for Hispanic/Latino owned Frederick County businesses. Attached is the quarterly report detailing the program’s success to date. LFSBDC Bilingual Services Update November 11, 2021 Prepared by Diana Patterson and Christine Kriz, LFSBDC Since beginning of our bilingual services in early September, we have had a tremendous response from local Hispanic/Latino business owners! We’ve helped 25 Hispanic/Latino small business owners that are so grateful to have an advisor to reach out to for help. Our bilingual accountants are educating new and existing business clients on financial management to run their businesses more efficiently. Counselors are explaining local, state, and federal taxes and helping businesses to pay correctly and on time.  This month we will be holding the first ever Contractor Licensing Course in Spanish. There are 16 people enrolled. This seminar will help them to understand how to study for the exam, how to apply for licensure, and how to keep their license current once they get it.  The LFSBDC has created a committee made up of Spanish clients, our LFBDC bilingual consultant, our bilingual accountants, bankers, and economic development to evaluate the financial needs of local Hispanic/Latino business clients. This committee also helped to market a bilingual job opening at one of our local banks.  One Hispanic/Latino clients were helped through the Go VA SBRT program during this last quarter and in total they received $1500 in funding to receive financial services. Frederick Sept ‐Oct 2021 Clients who signed up for counseling 18 Grants/Loans received by SBO's Facebook page followers Number of sessions 43 Total Counseling Hours 121.5 Sales Increase Amounts Reported $80,000 Business Startups 3 DATE: December 30, 2022 TO: Board of Directors, Frederick County Economic Development Authority FROM: Patrick Barker, CEcD Executive Director CC: Jay Tibbs Deputy County Administrator RE: Grocery Store Attraction | Update Staff is providing a regular update on its progress regarding efforts to encourage grocery stores to locate in Frederick County. A request was made for monthly updates for this project. GROCERY STORES  Aldi  Amazon Fresh  Harris Teeter  Kroger  MOM's Organic Market  Publix  Safeway  Sprouts Farmers Market  Trader Joe’s  Wegmans  Weis Markets  Whole Foods CONNECTION STATUS  Successful | 9  Awaiting | 4 o Each contact received a follow‐up email and two phone calls once a month. Calls typically placed on Wednesday and Thursday between 4:00 pm – 5:00 pm. These times are considered best practices. INTEREST LEVEL  Moderate | 3 o Actively looking for locations in a larger geographic area, which includes Frederick County  Long Term | 3 o No current plans to enter the market, but our area is part of their long‐term market consideration  None | 1