Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development Grants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board agrees to pursue industrial revitalization application for local applicant; staff to use Locust as service provider
Summary
County to act as applicant for an Industrial Revitalization Fund application on behalf of a private developer; board signaled preference for using Locust (service provider) to administer if awarded and asked staff to return with formal documents.
Get email alerts on the Economic Development Grants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Madison County supervisors signaled support on March 11 for moving forward with an Industrial Revitalization Fund (IRF) application on behalf of a private applicant seeking roughly $600,000 to support redevelopment in the Criglersville/Krogersville area.
County staff described the program, administered by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), as a tool that can be structured as a loan or a grant and requires a locality to be the applicant. Staff said an applicant must document other committed funding before DHCD will distribute any IRF monies and that DHCD requires a performance agreement between the developer and DHCD before funds are released. The county’s role would be to submit the application and, if awarded, either administer the award or select a service provider to manage it.
Staff recommended using Locust (a repeat service provider with prior DHCD experience) rather than trying to administer the award through the Industrial Development Authority (IDA). Staff said Locust can act as servicer and maintain revolving‑loan-style redeployment funds, while an IDA-administered award would keep repayments within local control. Board members discussed tradeoffs, administrative workload and clawback risk. The developer identified in the meeting (Felix Shapiro, described in the packet as the proposed applicant) would not be required to repay any awarded funds until revenue is generated, staff said.
After discussion, the board asked staff to proceed with the application process, pursue Locust as the preferred service administrator, and return with the necessary documents and a formal resolution for board action. Board members requested additional legal review and contract language to understand county exposure if a developer or servicer defaults, and asked staff to provide documents for review at a future meeting.

