Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council directs town attorney to review liability as nonprofit donor talks continue for Fireman's Field warning track

Purcellville Town Council · January 13, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council agreed Jan. 13 to ask the town attorney for a legal opinion on potential liabilities if the Fireman's Field warning track is not replaced before first use and someone is injured; the town is weighing a nonprofit donors proposal against procurement and timeline requirements.

The Purcellville Town Council on Jan. 13 directed the town attorney to provide an opinion on potential liabilities that would accrue to the town if the Fireman's Field warning track is not replaced before first use and someone were injured.

Town staff reported ongoing discussions with the Percival Canons (a local nonprofit) about donor-supported alternatives to a town-funded replacement. The town manager said the Canons reported a roughly two-week installation turnaround for the track if a contractor is identified and that nonprofit fundraising discussions are ongoing. Council members pressed for transparency and compliance with procurement standards and said the town must guard against open-ended reliance on a donor pledge that could fall through.

Council member Wright asked the attorney to analyze liability exposure should the town allow use of the field before the track is replaced and to provide that opinion promptly; council set a delivery target of Jan. 27 for the attorneys written opinion.

Council members also discussed procurement timelines if the town-funded option is pursued (staff cited about 30 days for procurement plus two weeks for installation, suggesting a two-month window from appropriation to completion), the difference in material grades (higher-cost, longer-lived options versus lower-cost shorter-life options), and whether the county (which maintains turf under the operating agreement) had a role in maintaining the warning track (staff said the county does not maintain the warning track). Several council members asked staff to begin a dual track of soliciting cost estimates while donor talks proceed.

The councils direction to the attorney was approved at the meeting and the council set a short timetable for legal review and follow-up staff reports. Council did not adopt any budget amendment at the meeting related to the warning track.