Rating Agencies Reaffirm City’s Bond Ratings

By FALLS CHURCH OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS

July 20, 2011

Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s Investors Service have reaffirmed the City of Falls Church’s bond ratings of AA and AA1, respectively.  Bond ratings (expressed in letters from “AAA” to “C”), are grades given to bonds that indicate their credit quality.  Private independent rating services provide these evaluations of a bond issuer’s financial strength, or its ability to pay a bond’s principal and interest in a timely manner.

        The S&P report notes: “Standard & Poor’s considers the City’s financial management practices “strong” under its Financial Management Assessment methodology, indicating practices are strong, well embedded, and likely sustainable.”

        In reaffirming the City’s AA1 bond rating, Moody’s Investors Service is indicating it is also satisfied with the City’s financial management plan.

         “This positive affirmation from the rating agencies reflects the City’s careful financial planning and solid financial management practices, especially during the recent economic downturn,” said Mayor Nader Baroukh.  “One key to they City’s high credit ratings was the City Council’s decision to dedicate revenues for fund balance restoration in the FY11 and FY12 Budget.  This indicates the City is in a good position to move forward as the economy continues to recover. ”

According to the City Council’s Finance and Budget Committee members Johannah Barry and Ira Kaylin, “The ratings affirmation reflects the City’s commitment to sound fiscal management which balances needed revenues with expenditures, maintains bond issuance at prudential levels and above all else reflects our citizen’s willingness and ability to support the City. Though difficult to measure, citizen support is one of the most important factors in determining our rating.”

Top 20 U.S. Counties, Ranked by Property Taxes

By STEVEN VALLEY

May 25th, 2011

Over the past few months I’ve gone to several of my daughters lacrosse games, walked through the Farmers market, and been to get togethers with friends where I’ve overheard and partaken in several discussions about Falls Church City’s tax rate.  In each of these discussions something seemed to be missing or lacking from the exchange, that something being facts beyond speculation and or guessing. So with those recent discussions in mind and coupled with the fact that the City is the richest in the nation and thus become the center for some national press, I decided that I should get some context.  Here is some national information on home values, incomes, rates, and payment that can provide some framework, either positive or negative, on the subject.

Now I am not a Polly-Anna and I know that some folks will have issue with the source, some will have issue with the fact that the city is not a county, and others will have an issue with even pointing this information out.

With regard to the source; The Tax Foundation is pulling their information from federal agencies and it’s just been conveniently aggregated by them, I am not publishing their opinions, just the collected data.

As for the “City” vs. “County” moniker, I am not clear as to what we should be, however, the Federal Government has seen fit to list us as a “County” so in the absence of a better descriptor that is what we are, I guess.  Either way, we’re still an area within a state with boundaries that has a separate government from the surrounding areas and that doesn’t change our rates or our home values.

As for pointing this info out, the facts are the facts and they are there for anyone to see and formulate an opinion from. Now, for some of you who are “plugged-in” you may already know this info and you’re looking at me going “uh… duh”, but for those of you who are like me (meaning not plugged-in) you may find this information very interesting.

Property Taxes on Owner-Occupied Housing, by County, Ranked by Property Taxes Paid

2005-2009 (five-year average)

On the charts below, I took the same information that’s in the grid above and highlighted Falls Church City and then labeled it along with the next highest County, State in that category.

Source: The Tax Foundation

City Officials Pan Hotel Design, Mull Future of Child Development Center

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

May 17, 2011

Planning commissioners and City Council members were not impressed with the latest design for the proposed Hilton Garden Inn (706 W. Broad St.), which was presented at last night’s joint work session.

Officials felt more brickwork was needed and that the overall design inappropriate for a city as old as Falls Church.  ”I don’t think you could have built this down in Fredericksburg,” said a disappointed Lindy Hockenberry. 

Commission chair Melissa Teates called the facade ”unacceptable, especially on Broad Street.”  ”I’m not happy with the [building's] sides but can live with it; the front has to look different,” she said.  “I don’t think it meets our design guidelines.”   Mayor Nader Baroukh concurred, stating that he thought the design needed a significant amount of work. 

As now proposed, the hotel will offer 110 rooms and 121 parking spaces.  It is expected to generate $540,000 in tax revenue.  A two story office building on Park Avenue, which was not part of the original 2008 proposal, has been dropped.

City Manager Wyatt Shields said he hoped the project will be submitted for first reading on June 13.   If a special exception amendment and rezoning are approved by the Council, the project would be referred to boards and commissions for review and returned for second reading on July 25.

The Council and the Planning Commission also reviewed a request by owners of first floor space at The Byron (513 W. Broad St.) to allow professional and office use for space designated for retail.  The area involved is on the far right side of the structure and has never been occupied since the building opened in 2006.

Retailers have considered the space unattractive because it is far removed from the building’s non-resident parking spaces and has a narrow front.  The parking problem cannot be corrected as residents have assigned spaces, while the commercial and retail spaces are shared.

The mayor asked the applicant’s attorney to furnish information on the efforts to market the space and whether the owner would consider joining it with the adjacent space, previously occupied by Verizon.  Mr. Shields said that the matter may be ready for Council action next Monday, assuming a prompt response to the mayor’s request.  

The joint work session concluded with a discussion of a homeowner’s request that the City vacate 1,638 square feet of unimproved space at the end of Park Place near the State Theater.  Mr. Shields recommended the Council approve the vacation, however Mr. Baroukh expressed some reservations, given that the City might build a parking facility near the location.  Planning Director Jim Snyder said that his staff would review the matter. 

CDC Future  -  The Council then was briefed on the status of the Child Development Center (201 S. Cherry St.).  The building, which was built by private funds, has been leased to Easter Seals for nearly 50 years.  The current 25 year, dollar-a-year lease is expiring in November, but the leasee would prefer an extension until at least the summer of 2013 so it could secure another facility.  Easter Seals would be willing to pay $50,000 annually for the space. 

City Schools have asked to assume control of the property in July 2012 in order to house the preschool education programs currently located at Mt. Daniel.  This option also would free space to permit the relocation of  the Falls Church Community Center preschool program.  Other options include leasing the facility to another day care provider or another commercial user, selling the property for residentinal use, or converting the space to City government offices.

School Superintendent Lois Berlin told the Council that waiting an additional year to acquire the property would result in “underserving” of students.  Pre schoolers now are receiving three hours of classes instead of the more desirable five.  She said that two trailers at Mt. Daniel are used for half day pre school, but that an additional class was needed due to the increase in special needs students.

Vice Mayor Dave Snyder called for more analysis of the options, including possibly combining government and school use.  “A dollar a year is history” he said, stressing the need to obtain the maximum value of the property for taxpayers.  

Mayor Baroukh asked Mr. Shields for an updated staff report on the issue, ideally by next Monday.  School Board member Kieran Sharpe advised that the Board also would discuss the question at Tuesday’s meeting and submit input.

TJ Renovation Status  -  Mr. Sharpe and Dr. Berlin advised the Council that there will be a public forum on the renovation at the school on May 26 at 7:00 pm.  Ceremonial groundbreaking will be held on June 13 at 9:30 am.  The School’s Architecture Selection Advisory Committee will begin to review the RFP and design.

3rd Quarter Financial Report  -  CFO Richard La Condre reported that the City revenues were at or higher than budgeted and that expenditures are running at or close to budget.  He advised that the projected fund balance would be $4.9 million at the end of the fiscal year, an increase of a little over $900,000.

Economic Development Incentive Policies  -  A draft resolution has been prepared for referral to City boards and commissions for comments.  Final Council action will occur in June.  

Closed Session  -  The work session concluded shortly before 10:00 pm.  The members then withdrew for another conference on the water refunds case.

Video of the public meeting is available at the City website.

Divided Council Approves FY12 Budget, RE Tax Increase

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

April 25, 2011

The Falls Church City Council completed its marathon FY12 budget process this evening, but the members did not cross the finish line together.

Councilwoman Johannah Barry and Councilman Ira Kaylin voted against adoption of the $65 million budget.  Earlier in the evening, Councilwoman Robin Gardner cast the sole vote against a three cent increase in the property tax rate, which was approved as $1.27 for every $100 of assessed value.  The tax rate ordinance also authorizes a personal property tax rate increase from $4.71 to $4.84.

The Council unanimously approved the FY12-16 Capital Improvements Program, which includes $5.9 million for construction at Thomas Jefferson School and $1 million for renovations at City Hall.  It also approved an increase in vehicle license fees from $25 to $33.  The Council deferred action on a water service rate increase to June 27 and on a proposed solid waste fee schedule until May 23.

Before the budget vote Mr. Kaylin moved, seconded by Ms. Barry, to reduce the amount of the School transfer by $390,000, a sum equal to the pay increase for School employees.  After their motion was defeated 5-2, both members joined again in opposing the FY12 budget.

Mr. Kaylin said that he was prepared to support bonuses for the employees but not salary increases, which he said would create stress on the FY13 budget.  He also questioned the equity of increasing School salaries while limiting City workers to one time, $1,800 bonuses.  Mr. Kaylin characterized his vote as a “symbolic gesture”, adding that a “yes” vote would constitute “no gesture at all.” 

Ms. Barry said she seconded her colleague’s comments regarding equit,y but that she also saw the issue as one of “sustainability” and that to create a significant, pensionable event (i.e., salary increases) would be irresponsible.  “We have to consider the drivers that are moving the City to a higher and higher tax rate” she said.

Prior to the vote on the budget members differed on how Falls Church had arrived at its current financial state.  Vice Mayor Dave Snyder said that the blame did not lie with the Council.  He regarded it as the result of “a perfect storm” due to the housing crash and subsequent recession, the water system litigation, and the imposition of state and federal mandates.  Mr. Kaylin disagreed, maintaining that the City was “structurally imbalanced” in 2008 and that the seeds of the problem already were present.  Ms. Barry agreed, stating that “little was unknown.”

Tax Rate Discussion  -   Members declined to approve the $1.28 rate recommended by City Manager Wyatt Shields, who had called for a rate of $1.25 during his March 14 budget presentation.  Councilman Lawrence Webb said he regretted that the $1.28 proposal had not been presented earlier and that citizens hadn’t had enough time to voice their opinions on the higher rate. 

Councilman Ron Peppe observed that he was not “A big fan of taxes, but we’ve reached a point where if you make further cuts you eviscerate the core values of the community.  We can’t just rely on hope.”

Ms. Gardner said she was willing to go to a $1.26 tax rate, but not higher as she believed the fund balance was being sufficiently rebuilt.  Mr. Snyder stated he first wanted to vote for $1.26 but decided to go higher in order to fund essential improvements to City Hall.

Mayor Nader Baroukh noted that restoration of the fund balance was critical for the financial health of the City, but stressed that ultimately economic development was essential in order to hold the line on taxes.   On this point, all members concurred.

More Traffic Lights  -  After completing the budget process the Council approved a measure that would secure funds for the installation of traffic signals at W. Broad and Pennsylvania and at Maple and S. Washington.

COMMUNITY COMMENT: City Must Not Follow Path of Nassau County

By IRA KAYLIN

April 22, 2011

In the April 18 edition of Bloomberg Business Week there is an article entitled ‘The Real Deficits of Nassau County, which explains how one of the nation’s wealthiest counties went broke.

Nassau County is the richest county in New York State with a population of 1.3 million residents and a median income of almost $95,000.  Property taxes are close to $9,000 on average, the second highest in the United States after New York’s Westchester County.

It is also broke.

On January 26 the six members of the Nassau County Interim Finance Authority (NIFA), a non-partisan state appointed commission, announced it would take control of the county’s finances.  The article went on to indicate that the top County elected official insisted right up until the end that everything would be just fine.  The county sued the NIFA in New York State Supreme Court and lost.

According to an official of the Rockefeller Institute of Government, “Elected officials don’t want to make tough decisions anymore and they are flat-out refusing to do so.”

Sixty five percent of the county’s property taxes go to the public schools that set their own tax rates, budgets and salaries.  Another large portion of its expenses go to police and fire departments.  In effect, Nassau County exists largely to cover the costs of the schools and public safety.

How does this relate to Falls Church?

In most respects the Nassau situation and ours are not comparable.  For example, a Virginia jurisdiction can not “go broke;”  rather the tax rate goes so high that citizens are unwilling or unable to pay.  That said, there are striking similarities.

Specifically, we are in denial about our fiscal situation and have shown little appetite to make tough decisions.  Roughly a year ago there was a vibrant discussion regarding the City’s long term sustainability.  The conversation has died down, but the underlying threats to our independence remain.

An increase in revenues related to an increase in home prices is touted by the city manager as an unambiguous benefit to the City.  Most of the increase was in the assessed values of single family homes.  However, this is actually a two-edged sword. 

Single family housing prices, if current demographic trends continue, never will increase sufficiently to cover increased public service costs.  Nonetheless, an increase in assessments is presented as the cure to our financial challenges.  It should be noted that commercial real estate assessments, whose revenues do directly benefit our “bottom line”, declined more slowly in FY11.

The two largest components of the proposed FY12 budget expenditures are Schools and Public Safety (including Judicial Services) which together comprises 60% of total expenditures, not including debt service related to these two services.

There is reason to be optimistic about future economic development related to our excellent location and an emphasis on commercial development.  However, that development is still years away and its significant impact likely will begin to occur only after the projection period.  It is a long process.

How did we get here?

Unlike Nassau, it is not our current mayor who has been claiming that all is well.  Rather the city manager has taken on that mantle.  In the first FY 12 budget presentation to the School Board, a more optimistic view of the City’s financial situation was painted than was justified. 

What followed was to have been expected:

—  Those members of the School Board, who believed that the salary increases were essential, insisted, given the vastly improved budgetary situation, that a salary increase component needed to be included, whose impact would be fully incorporated in the FY13 budget.

—  The request for a salary increase set the stage for a Council/School disagreement, as it was left to the Council to deal with the future budgetary pressures.

—  The city manager then included a $1,300 salary increase for City employees, ostensibly to compensate employees for the increase in pension contributions, but whose approval would be largely determined by the School Board’s ability to receive, what was in effect a pre-approval by the Council, for a full 3% increase in salaries for FY13.

By accident or design, the city manager has ensured a substantial increase in compensation for City employees by letting the School Board do the heavy lifting.

Where are we?

First, it may be useful to explain the budgetary impact difference between a salary increase and a bonus.  Pension benefits are based on salary levels, so an increase in salary levels increases pension costs.  For example, $1 of salary increases cost $2 in future pension benefit obligations.   A one time bonus, on the other hand, does not increase salary levels; as such it does not generate future pension benefit obligations.

As it now stands the School Board’s pensionable salary increase will go forward over the objections of a couple of Council members.  The City staff will receive a $1,800 bonus.  Though the bonus is quite substantial it is not pensionable, since the base rate over which pensions are calculated remains constant.  Thus the unequal treatment differentiates between teachers and City staff at the expense of City staff. 

The tax rate will increase by 3 cents.

Non-users of the schools will be expected to pay more in taxes and receive fewer City services over time.

Where will we end up?

Notwithstanding the above, and though counter intuitive to the comments made above, I believe (depending on information updates) that the increase of 3 cents may not be adequate due to projected FY13 shortfalls. Pension increases alone will chew up most of the additional revenue.  Thus the stage may very well be set for additional tax increases in FY13.

The city manager has already planned on a 5–6 % increase in City staff salaries, having taken the proposed bonus and included the $1,800 as the base rate over which a 3% salary increase is to be calculated. Personally, I find this assumption outrageous and a further indication of a city manager in full denial.

If next year’s proposed tax is increase is not acceptable to the citizens, the only option would to be to reduce expenditures.  In that case, the likely result would be City furloughs and/or staff reductions.

The School Board would be within its rights to believe that the financial situation is better than the numbers indicate, given the explosive salary request assumed by the city manager, even if, ostensibly, only for planning purposes.

Again the city manager, either by accident or design, will have set the stage for another tough round of discussions between the Council and School Board.

My position

The vicious cycle must be broken.  We need to limit this year’s compensation increases to bonuses.  The City’s financial situation is far too fragile to commit to such further salary expenses that, once agreed to, cannot be changed.

I do not agree with the differentiation of compensation between School and City staffs.  I believe it is inequitable.

There is a further social differentiation which is more subtle, but just as important.  That differentiation lies between the parents whose children are just entering the school system and those who are close to graduation. 

Specifically, as the tax rate increases and services to non-school users are cut, the willingness to support tax increases will erode.  Eventually, school transfers will be impacted, that is, reduced.  No one can predict when or at what tax rate will represent an upward limit, given the many factors involved.  Nonetheless, the outcome is certain.

It would be unfortunate that the parents who moved here with small children later find that resources may be more difficult to secure as their children move through the school system.  Moreover, parents themselves may find that they might not be able to afford continued tax increases.

There needs to be a combination of expenditure reductions and tax increases that establish a viable financial path until the necessary economic development comes is achieved.

A recommendation to decrease the school transfer amount by the amount of the salary increase, though symbolic, would be an important first step towards fiscal stabilization.

Final thoughts

Given our reluctance to confront the financial challenges facing us and our inability to make tough choices, we are at risk of becoming more like Nassau County than we might like to admit.

Councilman Kaylin delivered these remarks to the Falls Church City Council at its FY12 budget work session Thursday evening. 

COMMUNITY COMMENTS are welcome on any subject relevant to the City of Falls Church.  They may be submitted to contact@fallschurchtimes.com.  Shorter submissions may be published as a Letter to the Editor.

City Council Leans Toward $1.27 Tax Rate

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

April 22, 2011

Yesterday evening’s budget work session concluded with four Falls Church City Council members favoring a property tax rate of $1.27 for each $100 of assessed value.   If formally approved on Monday, the rate for FY12 will be two cents higher than that proposed last month by City Manager Wyatt Shields.   

The increase will be far lower than the 17 cent jump imposed for FY11.  According to CFO Richard La Condré, each cent on the tax rate equates to $310,000 of revenue.

Mayor Nader Baroukh and Councilmen Lawrence Webb and Ron Peppe favored the $1.27 rate, with Vice Mayor Dave Snyder, who initially held out for a penny less, subsequently joining them.  Councilwoman Robin Gardner preferred $1.26.  Johannah Barry and Ira Kaylin, participating in their first budget cycle along with Mr. Peppe, favored $1.28.   

Mr. Shields originally advertised a rate of $1.28, though he submitted a budget calling for $1.25.  However, last night he recommended the Council adopt the higher rate, stressing the need for fund balance restoration and the likelihood of greater fiscal demands in FY13. 

In advocating a lower rate, which would add less to restoring the City’s fund balance, Ms. Gardner stated that “we should allow our citizens to hold on to their money until we deem we need it.” 

However, Mr. Kaylin cautioned that the City faced serious risks if it did not confront its financial challenges and make tough choices.  His full statement to the Council has been published in the Times as a Community Comment.

The rate may well be higher next year.  Mr. La Condré presented a chart showing a million dollar gap for next year and a $5.5 million shortfall by FY16, assuming a rate of $1.26 and a 2% increase in assessed values.  A penny extra in FY12 will mean the gap would be slightly lower, but Mr. Peppe called the projections “pretty scary” and questioned the adequacy of the City’s $300,000 contingency fund.

Shields Recommends City Raise Tax Rate to $1.28

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

April 12, 2011

City Manager Wyatt Shields recommended Monday evening that Falls Church raise its real estate tax rate to $1.28 for every $100 of assessed value.

“My recommendation to the Council is to go to $1.28 to fund the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) and put the City in position to meet the financial challenges expected in FY 13,” said Mr. Shields.  “That would accelerate the fund balance restoration and create room to address gaps in FY 13 so we’re not continually forced to make deep cuts in the operating budget or delete items from the CIP that are not feasible.”

Mr. Shields warned the Council that the School’s lower transfer request in FY 12 (76% of their total budget, rather than the traditional 80-82%), due in part to an increase in federal funds, likely will result in a correction in FY 13, possibly accompanied by a large payment to the Virginia Retirement System.  He also cautioned that the City would face increasing expenditures next year because of debt service and higher pension costs. 

In response to the proposal, Mayor Nader Baroukh said he had not settled on an exact amount but that he was open to going above the $1.25 rate presented in the proposed FY 12 budget.  Mr. Baroukh stated that he wanted to maintain a low tax rate, but not in a situation where important items were deferred and the City did not secure its financial situation.   Councilman Ira Kaylin added that it was unclear if the City could sustain the anticipated $18 million in debt service without a tax rate higher than $1.25

However, Dave Snyder emphatically opposed going to the higher rate or adding additional revenue sources, such as increased fees.  “No way, no way,” said the vice mayor, adding that he also would oppose the commercial tax overlay if there was a move to increase the real estate tax rate.  Earlier in the meeting, Falls Church Chamber of Commerce Chairman Michael Ankuma voiced his organization’s opposition to the overlay proposal.

The mayor said he supported the Schools going forward with their CIP plan, but had reservations concerning plans for concurrent renovations at city hall, citing other pressing matters such as park improvements and deferred maintenance issues as reasons to scale down the project down.  He also questioned the City’s ability to do two major projects in one year, not just financially but also due to staff reductions. 

Mr. Snyder observed that a full city hall renovation would cost $8 million and asked for alternative proposals that would attend to immediate needs, which he felt needed to be addressed “sooner rather than later.”  Councilwoman Johannah Barry said she felt there was a disconnect between the proposed city hall renovation and the recent efficiency study.  She requested the staff to provide “sequenced expenditures” and how they were connected to the efficiencies achieved in the reorganizations conducted in the last 10 months.     

Mr. Baroukh said he favored a one time bonus for City workers.  “The last thing I want is to do a salary increase this year, then have to pull it back or resort to staff reductions to enable us to meet our obligations,” he said. 

Mr. Kaylin said he would only consider bonuses because of the strain salary increases would place on future budgets.  “A one dollar increase in salary can lead to a two dollar increase in expenses, going forward,” he said.  ”Bonuses would help the younger teacher that have cash flow problems and city staff who are under strain due to the increases in their pension contributions (five to seven percent).  Good governance means all citizens are treated fairly, that one side is not preferred, neither schools nor city hall.  If city residents decide there should be a preference, they can do so by electing Council members that favor one side or the other.”

The Council will continue its FY 12 budget deliberations in work sessions scheduled for this evening and Thursday night.  A town hall meeting on the budget will be held Saturday morning at 10:00 at the Falls Church Community Center.

Council Approves 1st Read of Budget, Water Rate Increase

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

March 29, 2011

Monday evening the Falls Church City Council approved the first readings of ordinances that would raise both taxes and water rates.  The Council also approved first reading of an ordinance adopting a FY 12 budget of $64.5 million.  All three measures passed unanimously (6-0), with Vice Mayor Snyder absent.

The tax rate ordinance advertises the real estate rate at $1.28 for every $100 of assessed value.  The projected budget currently assumes a tax rate of $1.25, allowing the Council some flexibility during the development process.  The ordinance also includes a 5 cent tax overlay for each $100 of commercial property, designated for transportation improvements, and a 28 cent increase in the personal property tax (PPT).

The current PPT rate is $4.71 for each $100 of value.  City Manager Wyatt Shields stated that each one cent increase in the rate equals $11,400 in revenue.  In addition to vehicles, the tax covers such business tangible items as office computers and dental equipment.

Mr. Shields continued to stress the need to restore the fund balance to an adequate level.  ”There is really no room for error when you don’t have a healthy fund balance,” he said.  “Projections will take us up to the 12% target level by 2014.”

Councilwoman Robin Gardner commented that she did not see 12% as a “magic number” and suggested 11% as a possible target.  She stated she would like to see City employees receive more than the proposed $1,300 across the board pay raise. 

Councilman Ira Kaylin concurred with Mr. Shields view on restoring the fund balance, calling it “smart policy” to be prudent, whether times are good or bad.  He said he had “different views” on the level of salary increases the City’s budget could bear.

Most of the citizens who spoke at the session called on the Council to approve the School Board’s entire transfer request. 

Public hearings on the tax rate and the budget will be held on April 11 and April 25.  Final adoption is scheduled for the later date.  Mayor Nader Baroukh said he expected “robust discussion” on budget issues during the coming weeks and encouraged public comment.

Water Rates Rising  -  The city manager stated that water rates have not been raised since 2005.  Since then Falls Church has devoted $34 million to improving the water system’s infrastructure.  The current rate is $3.03 per 1,000 gallons.

The ordinance calls for gradual increases over the next three years: $3.27 per 1,000 gallons in FY12, to $3.53 in FY 13, and to $3.82 in FY14.  Quarterly service charges and peak charges also would be increased annually over the three year period.  A typical quarterly bill, with no peak usage, would rise $2.04 in FY12.

Mr. Shields noted that the City’s Public Service Commission met on March 23 and recommended Council authorize the increase.  If approved at second reading, the new rate structure will take effect on July 1. Earlier this year the Council approved an increase in sewer rates. 

Miscellaneous Measures  -  The Council unanimously approved first reading of an ordinance authorizing a new fire prevention code and two resolutions concerning the sale of the Pendleton House (114 E. Columbia St.).  One measure requests the Planning Commission’s recommendation on the sale of the property for $772,680.  The second resolution requests the Commission to amend the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map to reclassify the lot from park and open space to  low density residential.  A public hearing on the sale is set for May 9.

The Council also approved a resolution that dissolves the Senior Commission (SC) and assigns its responsibilities to the Human Services Advisory Commission.  In recent years the SC had seldom met, due either to lack of agenda items or the absence of a quorum.  There are no current members. 

City Staff Reorganization  -  Councilwoman Johannah Barry of the Government Operations Committee (herself and Councilman Ron Peppe) asked Mr. Shields to furnish additional data supporting the cost savings realized through his planned staff reorganization. 

Mr. Kaylin said he was perplexed that the report that the GOC had received on Monday was issued only 2.5 hours before the Council meeting, given it had been requested March 2.  He asked at what point would the reorganization, scheduled to take effect May 1, become irreversible.  Mr. Shields said he was not sure what was meant by this term and he and Mr. Kaylin subsequently agreed to discuss the issue “off line.”  A consultant’s report earlier concluded that $300,000 in savings would be achieved through the reorganization.      

That Light’s Too Bright  -  Two Winter Hill residents expressed concern about the lighting system associated with the traffic monitoring camera at the corner of W. Broad St. and Annandale Road.  One described the light as “bright enough to light up a football field” and asked the Council to move it from a residential to a commercial area. 

The mayor said he understood that the City had been working on some type of shading for the mechanism but that it had evidently not worked.  He asked the city manager to provide a status report at the next Council meeting. 

City Manager’s Report  -  Mr. Shields announced that Kathy Allan has been named Employee of the Year.  Ms. Allan was cited for her leading role in outsourcing the City’s solid waste system from a service performed by Falls Church employees to a private contractor, saving the City approximately $150,000  per year, and for spearheading the effort to bring trash and recycling carts to City customers.

Howard Herman Honored  -  In honor of his 40 years of service the Council began the process of renaming the Hamlett Reese tract after retiring City Recreation and Parks director Howard Herman.  The four acre parcel runs between W. Broad St. and Thomas Jefferson School.  The Council resolution requests boards such as the Planning Commission and the Historical Commission for their recommendations on the proposal. 

At the beginning of the meeting the mayor read a proclamation declaring April 10 as Howard E. Herman day in Falls Church City.  In response Mr. Herman said he had been blessed to work with some really wonderful people and that he would cherish the honor the rest of his life.

Appointments  -  Mary Ann Ralls was appointed to the Community Energy Plan Task Force.  Her term will run through June 2012.  Glenn Stephens was appointed to an unexpired term on the City Employee Review Board.  His term will extend until through October 2013.

David Rogers and Craig Cheney were reappointed to the Human Services Advisory Council.  Their terms will run through February 2014. 

The mayor informally appointed Mr. Peppe to the Northern Virginia Transit Authority’s Planning Coordination Advisory Committee (PCAC).

Video  -  A recording of the meeting is available at the City’s website.

« Previous Page — Next Page »