Town of Onancock Town Council Meeting Monday, March 25, 2024  7:00 PM  1) Call to order and Roll Call: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM and roll was called. Councimembers Brandon Brockmeier, Cynthia Holdren, Joy Marino, Sarah Nock, Maphis Oswald and Mayor Fletcher Fosque were present. Councilmember Ray Burger was not present. Town Manager Matt Spuck and Town Clerk Debbie Caton were also present. A quorum was  established.  2) The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.  3) Approve minutes from the February 26, 2024, meeting -Councilmember Nock moved to approve the meeting minutes from February 26, 2024. Councilmember Oswald seconded the  motion. The motion passed with a! 5-0 vote. 4) Public Hearings: None scheduled. 5) Public Presentation:  a. Rail to Trails - was not present.  b. Neighbor to Neighbor - Peaches Dodge, an Onancock resident, gave a presentation on the startup of a new program in town called Neighbors to Neighbors. The goal of the organization is to assist residents with services such as picking up prescriptions or taking aneighbor to the doctor. This may give al better opportunity for the resident to age in place. All volunteers will be vetted and trained. If the program gets up and running, Neighbors to Neighbors will need support from the town and will need consideration in  the FY26 budget.  6) Council action:  Prioritize Five Year CIP (Capital improvement Plan) the 2025 budget = Town Manager Spuck explained that al list was developed from the Hill Studios' town plan anda a comprehensive list of equipment needs. The budget and the resolution signed for the budget is required to have a five-year CIP. Last month the projects and equipment were priced, and it was presented how each item would bei funded and the resources to cover the expenditures. The town manager presented al list of how to prioritize each project based on suggestions and feedback from residents. The prioritized list is part oft the  council packet.  1IPage    Town of Onancock Town Council Meeting Monday, March 25, 2024  7:00 PM  The agenda was amended to allow public comments earlier in the meeting.  7) Public Comment  Dr. Felthousen - Dr. Felthousen expressed his concerns about the new permit submitted to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality to renew and expand the amount of potable water drawn from the town's three wells. He was surprised that a new permit has been applied for and stunned this was not discussed in an open forum. Dr. Felthousen learned about the permit while attending the Accomack County planning commission meeting and was surprised that Onancock's planning commission members did not attend this meeting. He is encouraging an open dialogue before water is sold. (Dr. Felthousen's letter to the DEQ: staff with the same concerns is attached.) As part of the permit application, the DEQ paid for a Source Water Protection Plan. (Dr. Felthousen's concerns about the application is attached.) He advocates for open and Dana Simson - Ms. Simson pointed out issues in Somerset County (her previous residence) from the construction of a new prison. The residents' wells went dry because the prison used sO much water. We must look to the future and weigh heavilyi in terms of climate change and the number of residents that can have sustainability. Ms. Simson and other residents heard there was money to be allocated for the Onancock Historic School (HOS) for a new parking lot. She would like to see improvements to the Queen Street parking as this lot is essential to the success of businesses. (Ms. Simson's full Mayor Fosque stated thet town has not received any request from HOS fori funds to Priscilla Hart - Ms. Hart is a member of Onancock's local water committee. The committee was formed in September 2023. A consultant from CHA Solutions prepareda report and discussed manyi issues mentioned by Dr. Felthousen. Ms. Hart has concerns about the cost to provide water to developments outside of town limits and the cost to Onancock taxpayers for the infrastructure. Ms. Hart questioned our water quality reports. She presented water quality reports from 2019-2022 (see attached). She has concerns about why some oft the contaminants have disappeared from the report. Patsy Felthousen- - Mrs. Felthousen read from the lease agreement between Friends of Onancock School (FOS) and the town of Onancock. The lease states the town has no financial relationship with FOS. The wish list from Council members for budget year  responsible government.  comments are attached.) improve the parking lot.  21Page    Town of Onancock Town Council Meeting Monday, March 25, 2024  7:00 PM  2025 includes Councilmember Burger asking for $50,000, Mayor Fosque asking for $25,000 and Councilmember Holdren asking for money but did not specify a dollar amount. Ms. Felthousen and other residents have heard Councilmember Nock asked Mayor Fosque and Town Manager Spuck for $850,000 for a new parking lot at HOS. If these requests are approved, HOS would receive $1,000,000 in taxpayer money. FOS signed al lease acknowledging their obligations which includes the maintenance and repair oft the parking lot. Mrs. Felthousen would like to see all the! 501(c)3 non-profit Kasey Grier -7 74 Market St - Ms. Grier proposed town councilors and the mayor have set office hours for citizens to discuss issues in a casual setting. (Ms. Grier'sfull Rosemary Paparo - Ms. Paparo hopes the mayor and town council read an email sent on March 22, 2024, regarding certain issues with respect to thei town's signed agreement to supply potable water to Coastal Square residential development of more than 450 homes and commercial tenant in Onley, VA. Ms. Paparo trusts town officials will convene a special town meeting to discuss the ramifications of that agreement and any other agreements for housing or other projects beyond town limits with all the town residents andi taxpayers since we do not know what Onancock's cost will be and they  organizations treated equally. comments are attached).  could be significant. (Ms. Paparo's full comments are attached).  8) Council Discussion:  Discuss operating priorities (what to addi to budget and what to remove)  Councilmember Brockmeier would like to see the Christmas lights stretch the ii. Councilmember Nock asked if it would increase hiring potential by offering an offset to employees who need a family policy for health insurance since the employee portion is fully subsidized. Town Manager Spuck stated from a policy point of view, het thinks the personnel committee can take that on but froma financial point of view, since there is only one employee who uses two-person coverage it would be premature at this time to offer as subsidy. Councilmember Nock addressed the earlier public comments that she asked Mayor Fosque and Town Manager Spuck for $850,000 for the HOS parking lot. She stated that it iii. Councilmember Oswald stated her previous list is accurate. (See attached list from the council packet.) Councilmember Oswald stated iti isi important that organizations that support the entire shore and not just Onancock like Eastern Shore Coalition Against Domestic Violence (ESCAV) deserve to bei funded.  entire business district instead.  was utterly inaccurate.  3/Page    Town of Onancock Town Council Meeting Monday, March 25, 2024  7:00 PM  iv. Councilmember Holdren feels al landowner has a responsibility for al building structure hence we should be contributing in some amount to maintaining that building. (HOS) She would also like to see as seasonal employee tol help with landscaping. Because oft the past issues with the zoning, she thinks we should have an audit of the zoning ordinances to verify all ordinances were codified V. Councilmember Marino would like mulchi in at the Northeast playground. She would like to buy and supply a covered utility trailer that could be used! by residents for a party on1 their block or street. She would like funding for vi. Mayor Fosque stated although there was al lease in place with HOS that is does not preclude the towni from giving them money. HOS has noti formally submitted any request fori funds for a new parking lot. The Queen Street parking vii. Councilmember Brockmeier commented that he thinks non-profits should request thei funds and there should be a matrix in place to quantify how we fund Impact of real estate assessments - Town Manager Spuck stated Accomack County reassessed real estate and Onancock property values increased by 19.1%. The law requires we must start with our current budget and state how many dollars we raised from last year's real estate taxes. The budget for 2024 was $400,000. With the 19.1% we need to determine what thet tax rate would need to generate $400,000 for the 2025 Water rates: Town Manager Spuck reported the water meters are being replaced by remote read meters which are being provided by HRSD. The meter replacement should start this summer. HRSD will also bill monthly. As the meters are replaced, the resident will: start receiving bills monthly. During this time, some residents will be billed monthly,  when it was transferred to Municode.  "Neighbor to Neighbor" and the American Legion.  lot is the priority. the organization.  budget.  and some residents will stay on bi-monthly.  9) Committee Reports  Personnel (Cindy Holdren) -Councilmember Holdren reported unless there is an issue, Onancock Main Street (OMS) (Cindy Holdren) - Councilmember Holdren reported OMS maintained status as a nationally accredited Main Street program. OMS is submitting the Downtown Improvement Grant. Ifawarded the grant, mural phase III is planned. Mural Phase HI will consist of a mural in uptown section of town with hopes the mural will demonstrate our ethnic diversity. A committee was formed to help. There will a mosaic wrap on the Welcome Center to be visible for those people parking in the parking lot walking toward the main part of town. Most of the money will be for a commercial  the personnel committee will meet quarterly.  4IPage    Town of Onancock Town Council Meeting Monday, March 25, 2024  7:00 PM  interior improvement grant for1 the businesses located in the Main Street district. There will be community engagement to refresh OMS' connection to the community and to ensure the downtown initiatives reflect the need and desires oft the town's people. Historic Onançock: School (Sarah Nock) -Councilmember Nock reported the following  upcoming events:  Field Day Fiesta - Saturday, May 4, 2024, from 9:00 AM to 3:00P PM. 2nd Annual Blooms and Brushes- Saturday, June 8, 2024, from 11:00 Eastern! Shore Art League Spring show opened March 1, 2024, and will  AM1 to 3:00 PM. Wine Wednesdays each month. continue through April 24, 2024.  Pavilion construction is ongoing with thet trusses and foundation work being complete. Planning Commission (Brandon Brockmeier) - Councilmember Brockmeier reported they discussed parking and the suggestions that were, given back to the Town Council. The commission will continue to look at the comprehensive plan to review ordinances that Waterfront (Fletcher Fosque) -Mayor Fosque reported the first meeting oft the season was Tuesday, March: 23, 2024. Town Manager Spuck reported part of the ARPA projects was to dredge thet floating docks. Unfortunately, the original permit expired but when applying for the new permit the bulkhead and fuel dock willl be included. The spill site Economic Development Authority (EDA) (Joy Marino) - Councilmember Marino reported the contracts are ready to sign for the IRF loan with allt the required attorneysapproval. Councilmember Marino introduced Katie Schwab, Chairperson for the EDA. The new  Fundraising efforts are underway.  are important fori further review.  has been approved.  checking account is open.  10) Mayor's Report - Mayor Fosque addressed the earlier public comments about supplying water to developments outside of town. He stated no contracts have been signed. Town Manager Spuck clarified al letter of interest and capacity was required by the developer to present to Accomack County. Councilmember Oswald asked ift the developer decides to install wells, would the water come from the same aquifer? Mayor Fosque responded yes. Mayor Fosque stated the town council will make the decision about the supplying water to a development outside of town in an open forum during a public hearing. Mayor Fosque also stated he would get the answers about the inconsistencies on the water reports. Town Manager Spuck interjected to say he does not create the water reports. Virginia Department of Health (VDH) decides the  5Page    Town of Onancock Town Council Meeting Monday, March 25, 2024  7:00 PM  requirements for reporting. Currently, there are vacancies on Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA). The circuit court judge appoints the members but will take recommendations. 11) Town Manager's Report- The entire report is available in the town council packet. But Town  Manager Spuck gave specific updates on thet following projects.  DPW will be running the water line from Lilliston to the Welcome Center. Wharf concrete pour will be this week. The excessive rain and tide schedules have Town Manager Spuck thanked Onancock Business and Civic Association (OBCA)ona Financial Report -the full report is available in the town council packet.  caused several delays. successful St. Patrick's Day parade.  12) Town Councilmember comments  a. Councilmember Brockmeier = no comments. b. Councilmember Burger- not present.  Councilmember Holdren also responded to Kasey Grier's and Councilmember Marino's suggestions to have office hours and informal meetings. Her concern is ify you speak to one of us you are getting one person's opinion which is not the same thing as a council d. Councilmember Marino agrees with Kasey Grier's suggestions about bi-annual meetings with other town officials like the chief of police and fire department or "coffee with e. Councilmember Nock encouraged everyone to watch Against the Current." The Councilmember Oswald agrees with the comments about at town hall meeting to help  decision.  councimembers" at al local restaurant.  documentary will air April 24, 2024, at 8:00 PM on WHRO.  facilitate communication. None Scheduled  13) Closed Session  14) Adjourn - Councilmember Marino moved to adjourn the meeting. Councilmember Nock seconded the motion. The vote passed with! 5-0 vote. The meeting adjourned at 9:04 PM.  61Page    Town of Onancock Town Council Meeting Monday, March 25, 2024  7:00 PM  Qneu Cotar Debbie Caton, Town Clerk  Fletcher Fosque,  AIH  7IPage    a0/9  Fhe table below lists all oft the drinking water contaminants that we detected during the calendar year of this report. Many other contaminants were analyzed, but not detected. The presence of contaminants in the water supply does not necessarily indicate that the water poses al health risk. Unless otherwise noted, the data presented in this tablei is from testing done in the calendar year of the report. The EPA or the state requires us to monitor for certain contaminants less than once per year because the concentrations oft these contaminants do not change frequently.  MCLGor MCL, Your Range  Date of Sample 2019  Contaminant Chlorine (as CI2)(ppm) TTHMs (Total Trihalomethanes) (ppb) Inorganic Contaminants Fluoride (ppm) Nitrate (as Nitrogen) (ppm) Copper (ppm) Lead (ppb) - Radiological Contaminants Gross Beta Particles  AL, or MRDL 4 80  Violation  Typical Source of Contamination Water additive used to control By-product of drinking water Erosion of natural deposits; Water additive which promotes strong 2016 teeth; Discharge from fertilizer and aluminum factories Runoff from fertilizer use; 2019 Leaching from septic tanks, sewage; Erosion ofr natural deposits Corrosion of household plumbing 2017 systems; Erosion of natural Corrosion of household plumbing 2017 systems; Erosion of natural Decay of natural and made made  MRDLG 4 NA  Water Low-High 0.05 0.03-0.08 .017  Disinfectants & Disinfection By-Products  (There is convincing evidence that addition ofa disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants)  No No  microbes. 2019 chlorination  NA  4 10 1.3 0 0  4 10  0.46 ND  NA N/A  No No No No No  AL-1.3 0.60 0.16-0.76 AL-15 9.0 ND-29.2 50** 6.0  deposits deposits deposits  NA  2017  The! MCL for beta particles is4 4 mrem/year. EPA considers 50p pCVLto! bet thel level ofc concem for betaj particles  Activity associated with aLevel 1 assessment Activity associated with a Level 2 assessment  During the past year, we were required to conduct no Level 1 assessments. In addition, no corrective actions During the past year, we were required to conduct no Level 2 assessments. In addition, no corrective actions  were required. were required. Definitions  (AL) Action Level - the concentration of a contaminant, which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other (MCL) Maximum Contaminant Level - the highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. MCLs are set as close to the MCLGS as feasible using the best available treatment technology. (MCLG) Maximum Contaminant Level Goal - the level ofa contaminant in drinking water below which there is (MRDL) - Maximum Residual Disinfection Level means the highest level of a disinfectant allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial (MRDLG)- Maximum Residual Disinfection Level Goal means the level ofa drinking water disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MRDLGS do not reflect the benefits of the use of  requirements, that a water system must follow.  no known or expected risk to health. MCLGS allow for a margin ofsafety.  contaminants.  disinfectants to control microbial contaminants. (ppb) Parts per billion or Micrograms per liter (yg/L) (ppm) Parts per million or Milligrams per liter (mg/L)  (NA) -1 Not Applicable.  (ND) Not Detected - the test method/equipment did not measure any compound.  2    22000  For the benefit of people who are restricting their sodium intake, lab testing indicates a sodium level of27.3 ppm. A "severely restricted" sodium diet allows consumption of water with 20 ppm sodium, and a "low" sodium diet allows 270 ppm. For questions or concerns about sodium intake and your tap water, contact your doctor.  The table below lists all ofthe drinking water contaminants that we detected during the calendar year oft this report. Many other contaminants were analyzed, but not detected. The presence of contaminants ini the water supply does not necessarily indicate that the water poses al health risk. Unless otherwise noted, the data presented in this tablei is from testing done in the calendar year of the report. The EPA or the state requires us to monitor for certain contaminants less than once per year because the concentrations oft these contaminants do not change frequently.  MCLGor MCL, Your Range  Date of Sample  Contaminant Chlorine (as C12)(ppm) TTHMs (Total Trihalomethanes) (ppb) Inorganic Contaminants Fluoride (ppm) Nitrate (as Nitrogen) (ppm) Copper (ppm) Lead (ppb) Radiological Contaminants Radium (226+228) Gross Beta Particles  AL, or MRDL 4 80  Violation  Typical Source of Contamination  MRDLG 4 NA  Water Low-High 0.05 0.03-0.06 ppm ppm .015 ppb NA 0.46 0.23 0.0903 0.0602- ppm  Disinfectants & Disinfection By-Products  (There is convincing evidence that addition ofa disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants)  No No  2020 Water additive used to control By-product of drinking water Erosion of natural deposits; Water additive which promotes strong 2019 teeth; Discharge from fertilizer and aluminum factories Runoff from fertilizer use; 2020 Leaching from septic tanks, sewage; Erosion of natural deposits Corrosion of household plumbing 2020 systems; Erosion, of natural Corrosion of household plumbing 2020 systems; Erosion of natural  microbes. 2020 chlorination  4 10 1.3 0 0 0  4 10 AL-1.3  NA N/A 0.102  No No No No  deposits deposits  AL-15 ND ND-29.2  0.2 5pCi/L pCI/L 50** 6.0  2017 2017  No  Decay of natural and manmade  NA  deposits  * The? MCL for betaj particlesi is4 41 mrem/year. EPA considers 50pCi/Ltob be thel level ofc concem for beta particles  Activity associated with aLevel 1 assessment Activity associated with al Level 2 assessment  During the past year, we were required to conduct no Level 1 assessments. In addition, no corrective actions During the past year, we were required to conduct no Level 2 assessments. In addition, no corrective actions (AL) Action Level - the concentration of a contaminant, which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other (MCL) Maximum Contaminant Level - the highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. MCLS are set as close to the MCLGS as feasible using the best available treatment technoiogy. (MCLG) Maximum Contaminant Level Goal - the level ofac contaminant in drinking water below which there is nol known or expected risk to health. MCLGS allow for a margin ofs safety. (MRDL) - Maximum Residual Disinfection Level means the highest level ofa disinfectant allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial  were required. were required. Definitions  requirements, that a water system must follow.  contaminants.  2    2021  For the benefit of people who are restricting their sodium intake, lab testing indicates a sodium level of2 27.3 ppm. A "severely restricted" sodium diet allows consumption ofv water with 20 ppm sodium, anda" "low"sodium diet allows 270 ppm. Forc questions or concems about sodium intake and your tap water, contact your doctor. The table below lists all oft the drinking water contaminants that we detected during the calendar year of this report. Many other contaminants were analyzed, but not detected. The presence of contaminants in the water supply does not necessarily indiçate that the water poses al health risk. Unless otherwise noted, the data presented in this table is from testing done in the calendar year of the report. The EPA or the state requires us to monitor for certain contaminants less than once per year because the concentrations of these contaminants do not change frequently.  Contaminant MCLGor AL,or MCL, Your Range Violation Date of  Source of Contamination  MRDLG 4 NA  Water Low-High MRDL 4 0.05 0.03 0.06 ppm ppm 80 Sppb NA  Sample Typical  Disinfectants & Disinfection By-Products  (There is convincing evidence that addition ofa disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants)  Chlorine (as CI2)ppm) TTHMS (Total Trihalomethanes) (ppb). Inorganic Contaminants Fluoride (ppm) Nitrate (as Nitrogen) (ppm) Copper (ppm) Lead (ppb) HAAS Radiological Contaminants Radium (226+228) Gross Beta Particles  No No  2021 Water additive used to control  microbes. 2021 By-product chlorination  of drinking  water  Erosion of natural deposits; Water 2019 additive which promotes strong teeth; Discharge from fertilizer and aluminum factories Runoff from fertilizer use; 2021 Leaching from septic tanks, sewage; Erosion ofnatural deposits 2020 Corrosion of household plumbing systems; Erosion ofnatural deposits 2020 Corrosion of household plumbing systems; Erosion ofnatural deposits 2021 By-product of drinking water  4 10 1.3 0 0 0 0  4 10  0.46 0.5 AL-1.3 0.0903 0.0602 ppm AL-15 ND ND ND 60 ppb .7ppb SpCIL 0.2 pCIL 50** 6.0  NA N/A 0.102  No No No No No No No  chlorination 2017 Erosion  NA NA  ofnatural deposits  2017 Decay of natural and manmade  deposits  : Thel MCI. forb beta particles is4 mrem/ycar. FPA considers 50r pCiLt to be the level ofconcem fort beta particles  Activity associated with al Level1 assessment Activity associated with alevelZasessment  During the past year, we were required to conduct no Level I assessments. In addition, no corrective actions were During the past year, we were required to conduct no Level 2 assessments. Ina addition, no corrective actions were (AL) Action Level the concentration of a contaminant, which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other (MCL) Maximum Contaminant Level- the highest level ofa contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. MCLs (MCLG) Maximum Contaminant Level Goal the level ofa contaminant in drinking water below which there is (MRDL) - Maximum Residual Disinfection Level means the highest level of a disinfectant allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial (MRDLG)- Maximum Residual Disinfection Level Goal means the level ofa drinking water disinfectant below  required. required. Definitions  requirements, that a water system must follow.  are: set as close to the MCLGS as feasible using thel best available treatment technology. no known or expected risk to! health. MCLGSa allow for a margin of safety.  contaminants.  2    02022  For the benefit of people who are restricting their sodium intake, lab testingi indicates a sodium level of24.7 ppm. A "severely restricted" sodium diet allows consumption of water with 20 ppm sodium, and a' "low" sodium diet allows 270 ppm. For questions or concerns about sodium intake and your tap water, contact your The table below lists all oft the drinking water contaminants that we detected during the calendar year of this report. Many other contaminants were analyzed, but not detected. The presence of contaminants in the water supply does not necessarily indicate that the water poses a health risk. Unless otherwise noted, the data presented in this tablei is firom testing done in the calendar year of the report. The EPA or the state requires us to monitor for certain contaminants less than once per year beçause the concentrations of these contaminants do not change frequently.  doctor.  Contaminant MCLGor MCL, Your Range  Date of  MRDLG AL, or Water Low-High Violation Sample Typical Source of Contamination  MRDL 4 0.38 0.04 6.00 ppm ppm .0023 80 mg/L NA 4  Disinfectants & Disinfection By-Products  (There is convincing evidence that addition ofa disinfectant is necessary for control ofr mierobalontamimants,  Chlorine (asC12)ppm) TTHMs (Total Trihalomethanés) (ppb) Inorganic Contaminants Fluoride (ppm) Copper (ppm) Lead (ppb), HAA5  4 NA  No No No No No No  2022 Water additive used to control By-product of drinking water Erosion of natural deposits; Water 2022 additive which promotes strong teeth; Discharge from fertilizer and aluminum factories 2020 Corrosion of household plumbing systems; Erosion ofnatural deposits 2020 Corrosion of household plumbing systems; Erosion of natural deposits 2022 By-product of drinking water  microbes. 2022 chlorination  4 1.3 0 0  0.78 AL-1.3 0.0903 0.0602 ppm AL-15 ND ND ND 60ppb 3.9 ppm  NA 0.102 NA  chlorination  Activityassociated with Level1 1 assessment Activity associated with aLevel2 2 assessment  During the past year, we were required to conduct no Level I assessments. In addition, no corrective actions were During the past year, we were: required to conduct no Level 2 assessments. In addition, no corrective actions were (AL) Action Level - the concentration of a contaminant, which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other (MCL) Maximum Contaminant Level- the highest level ofa contaminant thati is allowed in drinking water. MCLS (MCLG) Maximum Contaminant Level Goa! -1 the level ofa contaminant in drinking water below which there is (MRDL) - Maximum Residual Disinfection Level means the highest level ofa disinfectant allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial (MRDLG)- Maximum Residual Disinfection Level Goal means the level ofa drinking water disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MRDLGS do not reflect the benefits oft the use of disinfectants  required. required. Definitions  requirements, that a water system must follow,  are set as close to thel MCLGS as feasible using the best available treatment technology. no known or expected risk to health. MCLGS allow for a margin of safety.  contaminants.  to control microbial contaminants. (NA) Not Applicable.  (ND) Not Detected the test method/equipment did not measure any compound.  (ppb) Parts per billion or Micrograms per liter (ug/L) (ppm) Parts per million or Milligrams per liter (mg/L) (RTCR) Revised Total Coliform Rule  2    Dear DEW stan, unaware ofit.  l'am a resident and citizen of the town of Onancock. Ihad absolutely no knowledge of the permit application by the town manager of Onancock until reading of the proposal in our local newspaper. Had it not been for this permit being presented to the Accomac County planning commission at their meeting and the tag to your site, Iwould still be Since that meeting, I have done considerable research and attended the recent meeting (March 19,2024) of the ESVA Groundwater Committee. I'have learned oft the considerable risks to our potable water supplies from the perspectives Ar recent report, submitted last week, issued by Raylani Reis of CHA1 fort the Source Water Protection Plan for the Town of Onancock is even more disturbing. Her contact information is as follows (misgehasahtonscom: 540-552-5574. Herr report identifies the inadequate quantities of potable water that the Town has available in the present water system and numerous sources of contamination from private wells and local streams. It is also highly significant that her report does NOT offer any insight as to the expansion of the quantities of water to be pumped from the Middle Yorktown-Eastover aquifer and the increased risks of saltwater intrusion ift this plan is approved. lalso had the opportunity to see the recent release of Against the Current", a WHRO documentary, which clearly shows the growing risks to our fragile Eastern Shore environment. la ask you respectfully to schedule a public hearing for all of our shore residents to gain more information and voice their opinions on this matter.  of quantity, contamination and the risks of saltwater intrusion. All are extremely significant.  Sincerely,  Dr. Greg Felthousen D.D.S, M.S. Goodmorning Dr. Felthousen,  Your comments have been received and will be addressed at the end of the public comment  period. Thank you.  Caitlin Kelly Lead Quality  Groundwater Withdrawal Permitting Team Office of Water Withdrawal Permitting Virginia Department of Environmental 1111 East Main Street, Suite 1400 Richmond,VA23219 (804).774-0828    Town Council Meeting - March 25, 2024  Town Council members, Mayor Foskey and Town Manager, Mr. Spuck; Thank you for your attention and allowing me to speak briefly tonight.  There are many issues that have been going through my mind over the past several months. I have tried to relax and absorb the impact oft the frustration in trying to address my concerns regarding the pavilion project. As you are aware, there have been few, if any changes to the original concerns that were expressed byi the members of the Onancock Residents Group. I have remained silent. After months of discussions with the Friends of Onancock School, there are no guidelines, no Special Use Permits, no plans fori further discussions. Ins summary, the Onancock school continues to go forward with the project. Our concerns have not been addressed. Ini the Friends yearly report, it was stated that the school has cash reserves, no debts and are making steady progress in addressing the roof, windows and heating system. All spaces are rented, including some by commercial businesses. So ithinkl That said, "casual conversations" continue between the Town Manager and the school which have not been discussed publicly. An evaluation of the school building structures has evidently  can rest, confident that it is being managed well.  been done  By whom is not known  But evidently it has been paid for by the town.  These, and other issues, renew my feelings of distrust.  NOW comes a new issue.  Our Town Manager has recently applied to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality to renew and greatly expand the amount of potable water drawn from the town' three wells. Speaking in round numbers, he is asking to withdraw 120,000,000 gallons of water per year. This is approximately 50 % greater than present use. The purpose of this increase is to provide water to approximately 1,000 new residences and supporting businesses outside of the town Iwas literally stunned to discover that this was not discussed at any time. Equally amazing is the fact that the members of the Planning Commission also were NOT aware of the plan nor of the arrangements made by Mr. Spuck to provide our town water to others without our Iremind the town council members and those who created the town' Comprehensive Plan just 2 years ago that ini the plan, it was clearly stated that our present ground water is good and the supply is adequate until 2030 at the CURRENT levels of use (p page 39 of the plan).  limits.  knowledge and consent.  NOW let me get to the most recent issue.  As part of the permit application, the' Virginia DEQ paid for a Source Water Protection Plan. This was only made available this past Friday. It is 155 pages long with many detailed charts, maps, measures and discussion. This report was created WITHOUT mention of increases to  water Withdrawal.  Several important items mentioned ini the report are:  page 9  the design capacity is limited by the present storage capacity. Simply  put, aslunderstand it, it can NOT be expanded without modification.    page 18 page 18 page 24 page 25  the Town should investigate impairments, ie. The Central Branch of the Town' wells are potentially at risk for saltwater intrusion, ie. The the Town should coordinate with other municipalities concerning future there is no emergency response plan and no plan to inform the public.  Onancock Creek is polluted by E. coli and other bacteria. The sources are NOT known.  wells may become unusable if the aquifer is overdrawn. development. Where is our planning commission ?    Source Water Protection Plan  Table #1. Town of Onancock' Wells Well Name Depth (feet)  Well7 Well 8 Well 9  220 220 220  The Town of Onancock waterwork has an estimated water demand of 288,000 gallons per day (gpd), a total source capacity of 604,800 gpd, and a storage capacity of 377,600 gpd. The waterwork is permitted for 8,079,200 gallons per month and 80,615,000 gallons per year. The waterworks is limitedt to a design capacivyof377,600: gallons per day due to limited storage capacity.  PAGE9  TOWN OF ONANCOCK: SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PLAN  CHAI PROJECT NUMBER 077507.000  CHA    Source Water Protection Plan 3.5 Water Resources 3.5.1 Surface Water Resources  While the Town of Onancock drinking water source comes from three groundwater wells as described in Table 1, the waterbodies surrounding the SWPA contribute to how contamination and pollutants are transported within the SWPA. Table 5 summarizes the water quality impairments for water bodies located in the SWPA. The waterbodies described in Table 5 are shown in Figure 2 Topographic and Impaired Streams Map. As shown in Table 5, there are several impaired streams and waterbodies whose impairment cause has limited or no data. The Town of Onancock should investigate funding sources to apply for in order to assess these impairments and accurately determine their potential impact on the Town's drinking water wells.  Table #5. Town of Onancock SWPA Impairments Tributary that branches off near Dingleys Mill Road and crosses Savageville Road Branch of Onancock Creek Tributaries of Rattrap Creek east of Route Tributaries of Merry Branch near intersection of Fairgrounds Road and Various tributaries north and south of Onancock Tangier Fry including Back Creek, Chesconnessex Creek, Cedar Creek, Leatherberry Creek, Finneys Creek, Parkers Creek, Titlow Creek, South Branch Onancock Creek, Warrington Branch, and North Branch Onancock Creek Tributary to Folly Creek. Riverine section of Ross Branch, segment begins at of tidal waters. Located south of Entire Chesapeake Bay Watershed  Name Pungoteague Creek  Location Description  Impairment Cause Unknown/Not Assessed bacteria Unknown/Not Assessed Unknown/Not Assessed  Joynes Brancha Eastern riverine tributary to the Central DO,PHandE coli  Tributaries of Rattrap Creek Tributaries of Merry Branch Various tributaries north and south of Onancock Tangier Fry  13 Tasley Road  Unknown/Not Assessed  Ross Branch  headwaters extending downstream to start Benthic Population  Accomack.  Total Suspended Solids, Total Nitrogen, Total Phosphorus Enterococcus  Chesapeake Bay Onancock Creek  Central Branch  3.5.2 Saltwaterintrusion  According to the EPA, sea level rise in combination with increased groundwater pumping can increase saltwater intrusion in groundwater aquifers. This can result ini increased treatment costs related to desalinization and in severe cases render groundwater wells unusable. Over utilization of the Middle Yorktown-Eastover: aquifer has the potential for increasing saltwater intrusion and  PAGE 18  TOWN OF ONANCOCKI  SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PLAN  CHA PROJECT NUMBER 077507.000  CHA    Source Water Protection Plan  contaminating. the Town of Onancock's mapoMaa-alo. of Onancock should stayi informed on the utilization of the Middle Yorktown-Eastover. aquifer and implement conservation. effortsasineeded Additionally, the Town of Onancock should stay upi to date on current saltwater intrusion research such as coordinating with the Accomack-North Hampton Regional Planning District who are actively researching and implementing aquifer replenishment efforts.  3.5.3 Groundwater Resources  As described in Section 3.1, the Town of Onancock's three groundwater wells withdraw from the confined Middle Yorktown-Eastover aquifer. According to the Town of Chincoteague Water Supply Plan there are four main aquifers within Accomack county suitable for drinking water use and are, in order of increasing depth, Columbia aquifer, and the upper, middle, and lower Yorktown-Eastover: aquifers. These freshwater aquifers are divided by confining units comprised of very fine sand, silt, and clay. Because the Yorktown-Eastover aquifers are confined, their groundwater availability is characterized by low recharge rate, high storage, and low susceptibility to contamination, Figure 6 shows a vertical cross section of the aquifers and confining units for  the Eastem Show of Virginia.  Figure 5-Vertical Cross Section of the Easter Shore of Virginia  West.  East Mlnte (Kin Discharge  Eastern Sliote of Virginia Recharge 11 Surficiala aquifer Upper Yorktown-Eestover. çonfining unit Upper) ohtowinfasioergguler Middle Yorktown-Eastover confining unt Middle Yorktown-Eastover aquifer Lower Yorktown Eastover contining unit tower Yorktown- Eastover aquifer SL.Marys.confining unit  Discharge  Chesupeake Bay Channel NI  Saltwater  Seawater  NOTTOSCALE  EXPLANATION General drection ot ground watert flow  Source: USGS Virginia Eastern Shore Groundwater Resources 2021. TOWN OF ONANCOCK : SOURCE WATERI PROTECTION PLAN  PAGE 19  CHA PROJECT NUMBER 077507.000  CHA    Source Water Protection Plan  4.0 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION 4.1 Identifying Existing Potential Sources of Contamination:  As discussed in Section: 2.1ofthis Source Water Protection Plan (SWPP), potential contamination of the SWPA could occur via conduits into the confined aquifer. Based on the high usage of the aquifer as a water source in the area, the greatest potential pathway would occur through the introduction of contaminants from the surface through improperly constructed or defective wells within the SWPA. The private wells that have been identified within the Town of Onancock AOI The risk of contamination varies depending on the type of contaminant and its potential for reaching the groundwater. The highest priority area for protection includes the activities within the groundwater wells within the AOI. The Town of Onancock should use the potential. conduits to evaluate the risk posed to'theg groundwater resources, and the. need for protection measures. VDH develops aninventory of PSC within the designated. Zone 1 and Zone. 2 SWPAS as described in Section 3.0 through its SWAP. Since the aquifer that the three groundwater wells withdrawal from is a confined aquifer with an identified. AOI, the original inventory developed by the SWAPi is not shown on Figure 1andi is onlyi included in Appendix A1 fori informational purposes. Thep potential conduits shown on Figure 1 and included in Appendix A are the biggest threat to the groundwater The identification of existing contamination sources will help to address immediate concems about the protection of the local water supply. A summary listing of various sources of  are shown in Figure 1 and included in the potential conduit inventory.  quality. The potential conduit inventory is summarized in Table 6.  contamination that are commonly considered is included in Appendix A.  Table #6. Town of Onancock Summary of Potential Conduits  Facility Type Private Wells Impaired Streams TOTAL  Area of Impact 12 6 18  The potential conduits of most concern are the 12 privately owned wells located within the AOI. To ensure that the supply remains uncontaminated, continual review of land use activities and identification of potential sources of contamination and potential conduits isnecessary. The Town of Onancock should be aware of the SWPA and AOI when making any decisions regarding land use and future development to ensure sources of contamination and potential conduits do not impact the Town's groundwater supply. Coordination with Accomack County and nearby municipalities may be needed depending on the scale and location of any proposed future  4.2 Identifying New Potential Sources of Contamination  development.  PAGE 24  TOWN OF ONANCOCK! SOURCE WATER PROTECTIONI PLAN  CHA PROJECT NUMBER 077507.000  CHA    Source Water Protection Plan  5.0 SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PLAN  The SWPP describes the actions necessary to minimize the risk to the quality of the source water utilized by the Town of Onancock. The goal of the plan is to reduce or eliminate potential threats to drinking water supplies within the SWPA, either through existing regulatory or statutory controls or by using non-regulatory (and often voluntary) measures centered around an involved public. Current measures inj place for protecting the quality of water within the SWPA are:  5.1 Existing Measures and Activities  Virginia DEQ and VDH requirements for proper construction of new wells and  abandonment of inactive or defective wells; Monthly and annual water testing; Routine maintenance of the water system; Security fencing around all wells;  Town of Onancock Code of Ordinances (Chapter 14 = Environment) which specifies unlawful property maintenance conditions including the accumulation of trash and Town of Onancock Code of Ordinances (Chapter 34 - Utilities, Article IV - Water Conservation) which specifies the measures to be followed in the event a drought or Accomack County code (Chapter 38, Article III- Erosion and Sediment Control) serves to prevent the degradation of properties, stream channels, waters, and other natural resources ofi the County of Accomack by establishing requirements for the control of soil erosion, sediment deposition, and nonagricultural runoff and by establishing procedures  garbage that may have the potential to impact stormwater quality.  similar inadequate public water supply.  whereby these requirements shall be administered and enforced.  5.2 Source Water Protection Emergency Response Plan  The Town of Onancock does not currently have an emergencyresponse. plan. The Emergency Response Planning Template for Public Drinking Water Systems" produced for the Rural Community Assistance Partnership (RCAP) National Network and the Rural Community Assistance Corporation (2005) was used to develop a draft Emergency Response Plan. The Emergency Response Plan provides contact information and defines emergency response procedures to aid the waterworks in responding to a source water contamination event. Ad copy  of emergency response materials is included as Appendix C.  5.3 Public Education and Outreach  For citizens to appreciate the benefits of source water protection, they must first understand what the problems are in providing safe drinking water, and how they can become involved in the process. Public education is the greatest promoter of voluntary action and public support for a Activities andopportunities should be sought that willi increase public awareness that source water protection is al locali issue and that each citizen plays a part. A public education brochure template is available in Appendix D. An example of public education and outreach could include providing  community's wellhead source water protection program.  PAGE: 25  TOWN OF ONANCOCK I SOURCE WATER PROTECTION! PLAN  CHA PROJECT NUMBERO 077507.000  CHA    lam Dana Simson, with both a business and home in Onancock. Ifa any money is to be allocated to improve a parking lot, Queen Street has already been designated by Hill Associates as central to the health of downtown. The new visitor's center's back entrance  area should not look run down and ignored.  Ispent last Monday on the sign committee hearing a tenant of the school lament that they receive few visitors. The School's large  parking lot is in better condition than Queen Street.  There are many other areas of this town that also need repair or  attention to better serve the wider community.  In keeping with Onancock's dark sky focus, and increasing flood- ing issues due to excessive rainfall due to climate change, any new or improved parking lot should be permeable. There are many new substrates (some even from recycled materials) that look great and function like asphalt. Downtown Salisbury has long flooded, from both run off and tides. Our building there did not flood because we  refused to pave our back parking lot.  Please enter this comment into the minutes of this meeting.  thank you.  timed-58 seconds    ORG statement 25 Mar 2024  My name is Kasey Grier;! live at 74 North Street.  About ay yearago,/proposed that Town Councilors add "office hours" to their schedule. There, citizens could talk about issues in a casual setting. Some councilors and the mayor stated that phone calls, email and "running into each other" were sufficient for gaining constituent input. Idisagree. Serious issues facing Onancock include pedestrian safety, problematic residential zoning requirements, the special needs of North East, town water, a weak planning commission, thec Of public lands int the town, and the need to be able to exert more control over the proposed Liberty Street housing development. Ican easily come up with half a dozen  memagemonur  other issues, too.  Another channel for open communication is needed. Ipropose a biannual or quarterly town meeting. As long as official business is not conducted, a town meeting is not in violation of FOIA. These gatherings could take a number oft formats. I'll suggest these in a separate email tot the Town Council, Mayor and Town Manager. Participation in these meetings should be a requirement for Town Council, the Mayor and Town Manager. The Police Chief, the Fire Chief, and other local officials could be invited to participate in sessions when there is at topic that  touches on1 their responsibilities.  We need more two-way communication and transparency in decision-making processes. The more we practice it, the better we will be at sharing ideas. Thank you for your attention, andI  look forward to discussing this with you further.