Richlands council debates generator contingency, seeks legal review

Council members spent the longest portion of Tuesday's recessed meeting airing concerns about the town's planned generator project and the contingency funds that have been tapped during project development. Mayor Curry opened public discussion after a procedural motion that limited formal action on the generator; council then agreed to move into executive session to consult with legal counsel about the generator and the project's power‑purchase/service agreement.

Council member Seth defended the project as a long‑term hedge against rising transmission and supply costs and said municipal generation is needed to stabilize local electric rates. "We have to generate our own electricity in this town," Seth said, adding that the generator is intended to reduce the town's exposure to volatile market prices and serve as the start of a path toward energy independence.

But other council members and several residents raised concrete financial questions. Council member Laura asked for public clarification of contingency spending, saying she had reviewed contract materials and did not find explicit contingency language in the contract: "I do not see the contingency funds written into this contract," she said. Laura noted the town recently paid $145,000 to CNX to cap a gas well on the proposed generator site and cited pro forma projections presented to the public that forecast an increase of about $45 per 1,000 kilowatt hours in fiscal 2027 (which she said translates to roughly $90 a month for a household using 2,000 kWh). She said she would not support a rate increase of that size without fuller explanation.

Council member Jordan, the maker of the initial procedural motion that limited action on item 11(d), said his intent was to preserve the ability to discuss the matter publicly while the council clarifies rules and conflicts. Town manager Ron and other staff said they would continue to provide data to the council and public; Ron confirmed staff and outside counsel had discussed legal issues related to project routing and contracts and that those questions merited closed‑door consultation with attorneys.

The council voted to go into executive session under Virginia Code '.2''37411(A)(1) (personnel) and (A)(8) (consultation with legal counsel regarding the generator and the PSA contract). After the closed session, the council returned to open session and certified the discussion remained within the announced topics.

What happens next: staff and counsel will provide additional documentation and legal analysis for the public record and the council requested more explicit accounting of contingency costs and the contract language that governs them. The council set the next regular meeting for Dec. 9 and may schedule further public discussion or hearings on the generator project if requested.