Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Carroll County EDA members report grading started at Wobble Industrial Park; first-phase investment and job estimates discussed
Summary
At its March 18, 2025 meeting the Carroll County Economic Development Authority heard a report that grading has begun at Wobble Industrial Park and was given approximate figures for acreage, jobs and a first-phase investment; the board also approved routine minutes and financial items and convened a closed session under Virginia law.
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Carroll County Economic Development Authority on March 18 heard that grading has begun at Wobble Industrial Park and was told the project will use much of the site and include an initial phase the speaker estimated at roughly $20 million and “a little bit over a hundred” jobs.
Board member Mike reported that grading has started at the site and that the project is “using about a hundred and I wanna say a 20, hundred and 20 5 acres,” adding that the project’s first commitment was “up to a little bit over a hundred jobs” and that the developer was looking to invest “about a 20,000,000 on our first phase.” Mike said the proposal would grow produce and that, in his view, it “won’t compete with local growers.”
The comment came during new and old-business reports rather than as a formal vote item. The EDA approved the minutes of its February meeting and accepted the treasurer’s report and the payment of invoices by voice vote; the motions were moved and seconded by unnamed board members and carried without roll-call tallies recorded in the transcript. Later, the board voted to convene a closed session under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, citing Virginia Code § 2.2-3711(D); after the closed session the board certified that only matters authorized by that statute were discussed.
The EDA did not provide detailed documentation of the developer agreement, exact acreage, a binding job guarantee, or a formal budget breakdown in the public portion of the meeting. The figures cited by Mike were presented as speaker estimates rather than as binding commitments.
Votes at a glance - Approval of February minutes — motion to approve moved by an unnamed board member; seconded; carried by voice vote; outcome: approved. - Approval of treasurer’s report and payment of invoices — motion moved by an unnamed board member; seconded; carried by voice vote; outcome: approved. - Motion to convene closed session under Virginia Code § 2.2-3711(D) — motion moved by an unnamed board member; seconded; carried by voice vote; outcome: approved (closed session convened). - Certification after closed session that only matters authorized under Virginia law were discussed — board members each stated “I certify”; outcome: approved.
The meeting adjourned after the certification. The board did not provide further specifics in the public record during the meeting about timelines for planting, final acreage in the sale or lease, the identity of the developer, or whether state or federal incentives are involved.

