Amherst County service authority recommends awarding $351,834 bid for Gateway force main; supervisors question developer commitments

The Amherst County Service Authority presented a Gateway Project update and recommended awarding the construction contract for the Route 210 force main to Tony Construction of Forest, Virginia, for $351,834, the authority’s director told the Board of Supervisors during the board’s June meeting.

The authority’s director said the low bid was “under the engineer’s estimate,” and that the project would be paid with ARPA funds already obligated to the Authority under an ARPA subrecipient agreement with the county. He recommended pausing work on the project’s pumping-station and Morecambe property components (projects 1 and 2) until the developer submits a revised, Board‑of‑Supervisors‑approved site plan.

Why it matters: Board members said the county has already committed staff time and some funds to Gateway and pressed that the county should avoid advancing construction that primarily increases a private parcel’s value without firm developer commitments. Several supervisors said they want written assurances from the developer — such as a memorandum of understanding — before advancing more work beyond the force-main segment.

Project details and funding The director told the board that the gateway project was re‑scoped in late 2023 to reduce its budget from about $7.7 million to $3.9 million. He said engineering work cost roughly $70,000 to date and that the authority has $1,000,000 of ARPA grant funding designated for the project. The director said the ARPA funds must be invoiced by November 2026 and spent by December 2026.

Bids for the Route 210 force main were publicly opened May 27; two bids were received, and the director said the low bid of $351,834 was within the engineer’s estimate. He recommended that the authority award and execute a construction contract to Tony Construction for the “Gateway Old Town Connector Force Main.”

Scope and service questions The force main would carry sewage along State Route 210 to a point where it can tie into the authority’s existing gravity sewer; property owners along the force-main alignment would need individual grinder pumps to connect because the line is not gravity-fed for that stretch. Board members asked whether staff had performed outreach to property owners to gauge interest; the director said they had not yet done that outreach and that the project was originally designed to serve the Gateway development.

Supervisors repeatedly asked how many existing households could connect. Staff estimated roughly 10–15 properties near the Route 210 corridor could connect to project 3, but several supervisors warned that would not be a high enough guaranteed customer base to justify advancing other phases without developer commitments.

Contingency and alternative uses for ARPA funds Board members questioned contingency plans if the developer does not move forward. The director said there are other areas in Amherst County that could use sewer funds and that the authority would seek additional grant dollars — including a pre-application for a 2025 construction grant program that could provide roughly $500,000 — to reduce the need for long‑term financing.

Public comment and elected officials’ concerns During public comment, John A. Marsh Jr., an Amherst resident, asked the board under the Freedom of Information Act for documentation of the board’s prior commitment concerning Whitney Country Club and urged caution in advancing Gateway without written developer commitments. He said the county had already spent or committed engineering fees and interest, and warned, “I feel like this board is playing monopoly with my money.”

Board direction and next steps The service authority’s board did not have a quorum to act at an earlier meeting, the director said, and he planned to request authority-board authorization to award the contract at the authority’s next meeting. Several supervisors said they would not support spending further funds beyond the Route 210 force main unless the county receives a written commitment or MOU from the developer or unless additional, broad countywide priorities for using the ARPA funds are approved.

The board did not take a separate formal vote on the force‑main award during the supervisors’ meeting; staff said they would bring construction-award authorization to the authority board and return to the supervisors as necessary.

Ending note The Gateway update drew sustained questioning from multiple supervisors about developer timelines, public outreach and how to avoid placing county taxpayers at risk if the private development does not proceed. The authority director said staff will continue to pursue construction bids, grant opportunities and cost savings measures while pausing projects 1 and 2 until the developer submits a finalized site plan.