More controversy over Lance Terpenny

Lance Terpenny: So many questions, so few answers
Lance Terpenny: So many questions, so few answers

The controversy over new Floyd Town Manager Lance Terpenny’s lucrative departure from his former job in Christiansburg just won’t die.

Some angry Christiansburg Town Council members say they were kept in the dark about just how much money the town would be paying out in severance for the town manager they fired last month and they want to “clear the air” at a special meeting at 5:30 p.m. Wednesday night.

Councilwoman Ann Carter, whose term on the council ends at the end of August, told The Roanoke Times “we certainly not aware” that Terpenny’s severance would cost the town more than $290,000 over the next decade.

The payouts include:

  • 2 months of salary ($128,750);
  • A $12,627.60 payout for accrued vacation time;
  • $210 a month in town-paid “service merit” payments until he turns 65 (Terpenny is 55);
  • “Sick leave divestiture” of $1,050.66 a month for 10 years because of unused sick leave.

Terpenny hasn’t moved to Floyd and his deal with his new employers apparently does not require him to relocate. He continues to live in Christiansburg and will continue to serve on two Montgomery County agencies that provide additional stipends that pay him about $700 a month. Montgomery Regional Solid Waste Authority Executive Director Alan Cummins admits Terpenny is paid $350 a month from fees earned by the authority to attend a board meeting and serve as board chairman.

Incredibly, the same Christiansburg Town Council that told Terpenny to resign, saying it has “lost confidence” in his abilities, then reappointed him to serve on the Blacksburg-Christiansburg-VPI Water Authority where his paid at least $300 a month to attend board meetings.

It’s these kinds of backroom deals, along with Floyd’s willingness to look the other way at continuing conflicts of interest, that raise serious questions about the entire Terpenny deal that brought him from Virgnia’s third-largest town to one of the Commonwealth’s smallest.

While, on the surface at least, it seems like a good deal to get a Town Manager with Terpenny’s experience, his continued involvement with Montgomery County government entities suggests he will be — at best — a part-time manager with conflicting loyalties.

It also suggests the Floyd Town Council was played or — even worse — was complicit in a shady deal.

Enhanced by Zemanta

© 2024-2022 Blue Ridge Mus4

7 thoughts on “More controversy over Lance Terpenny”

  1. Muse….I love you 😉 You are one of the wisest people I have seen in a long time….now if only you could educate the good ol boys who keep fleecing us.

    BTW, that photo is showing a bit of wear & tear from a hard lifestyle. You can run but you cant hide forever.

    • BUT, the article image: that’s a Photoshop (or similar program) and lighting factor ENHANCED portrait. I might assume taxpayers paid for the possible ‘ID’ image, in that, in a larger version of the same image, the Town of Christiansburg is shown on the shirt.

      No ‘frown’ lines (vertical between eyes); virtually no forehead (horizontal) lines; other ‘adjustments’….SMOOTH move! Just look at the small ‘other’ version currently @the bottom of the article page, in which one can see more ‘realness’. Not that I care, unless folks paid for it.

      I’m glad the ‘ID’ gave me an ‘id’…know I know what I need to do to gain some ‘youthfulness’…just buy it in a portrait, without surgery. I still might not want to look.

  2. Why should this controversy be expected to die? It was started with some clever gamesmanship as Lance’s annual review in Sept. was approaching. He went all in with his 3 year contract that was very good for Lance. Bad timing. TC didn’t exactly call his bluff but were pressured by those pesky citizens demanding answers.

    It might not have been so clever to not just go away quietly. This latest news implies there is not even solidarity within the TC if everyone voting does not have equal and complete information.

  3. Council’s historic lack of information, requiring FOIA inquiries, is exemplary of decades of mis-management.

    I don’t really know why the shinanigans of certain Council members, current and past (some of whom moved to the planning commission), are not considered crimes; at least, crimes against humanity.
    However, criminal intent and perhaps criminal influence are to be considered.

    There’s rumors of ‘perks’ to some, including at least one that somehow acquired a huge addition for a home, at an unusually low price that approached 50% of actual value. I think that the can has been opened on the worms, as this single physical evidence of potential fraud implicates.

    Some states are beginning to investigate locales; Christiansburg would make a good case-study.

    I STILL want to know ‘where’s the money?’, RE: $10million ‘cost-overrun’ for the Terpenny/AQctr.

Comments are closed.