COMMUNITY COMMENT: Why November?

By LAWRENCE WEBB
November 2, 2011

With Election Day fastly approaching the residents in the City of Falls Church will have to cast their vote to answer the Referendum question, “Shall the City of Falls Church hold its City Council elections in November”?

This is a topic of great importance and I began pondering the question after campaigning in 2008.  As I walked around the neighborhoods knocking on doors asking for   support  I noticed for every five doors visited   three of them had no idea that elections were taking place and thought  all the city’s elections happened in November.   As I explained to them the process in Virginia many still had questions but took the information and thanked me for coming by.

After being elected the elections process still resonated with me and I began inquiring about what if we decided to change our elections to November instead of May.  I received many different responses and reactions and in 2010 offered an ordinance to change the city elections from May to November of odd years.  My one and only motivation for following through with this was I wanted to make sure that every person in the city had an opportunity to take part in electing those who make important decisions in the city.  Later after conversing with several constituents I amended my proposal to a referendum that failed and ultimately I supported the date change.  When this topic resurfaced my feelings were still the same in that I wanted the maximum number of citizens to take part in our elections.  With this referendum we will have this issue settled.

I have been listening to all sides on this issue and the number one reason that most do not support changing the elections from May to November is the fear that partisanship will make its way into Falls Church City elections. Both parties have indicated that they have no desire to get involved with endorsing candidates in city elections.   I too strongly support our elections staying non-partisan and that no political parties get involved in city elections.  The first thing that I would propose is to add to our city charter provisions that address  persons running for election in the City of Falls Church shall  be independent and follow all laws to get on the ballot.  Currently the only candidates that can be listed on the ballot with party affiliation are federal and state candidates.  The second argument is when canvassing will candidates for city office and those running with a political party be canvassing will all material.  The answer is simple.  It is up to the candidates to make sure that when his/her folks knock on doors that they only have their materials and nothing involving a political party thus avoiding confusion. 

When asking other jurisdictions that moved their elections if the elections became more partisan the response was no.  When asked if it cost more for candidates to run in November versus May the response was no.  Finally when asked if there was an increase in the number of citizens that voted in elections the response was yes.

Our Little City is one of highly educated citizens with a strong since of civic activism.  By having our elections move to November gives our citizens even more of an opportunity to have their voices heard by the leaders of the community.

I urge you to get out and vote YES on The Election Referendum on Tuesday, November 8^th.

Lawrence Webb is a member of the Falls Church City Council.

This is the second in a series of four Community Comments regarding next week’s referendum on moving City elections from May to November. The four commentaries include two opponents of the change – Vice Mayor David Snyder, and Edie Smolenski, a private citizen active in local civic organizations – and two advocates of the change – City Councilman Lawrence Webb and Robert Loftur-Thun, also a private citizen active in local civic organizations.

Those interested in the referendum also are encouraged to watch the Town Hall programs on this topic on FCC-TV. A link to the schedule is available here.

COMMUNITY COMMENT: Bullish on Falls Church

By IRA KAYLIN

October 5, 2011

On October 29th, Falls Church Director of Planning James Snyder will host a Community Meeting regarding the “N. Washington Street Small Area Plan.”

There has been much discussion about the need for “Area Plans”, which are intended to promote economic development in a manner that represents community values and development priorities, while generating sufficient revenue to maintain the city’s fiscal independence.

The meeting is important for a number of reasons.  It provides city residents an opportunity to discuss a small area plan (as compared to larger, more comprehensive plans), what it means, and why this approach is important to the city.  It will also demonstrate the city’s agility by taking advantage of smaller development opportunities, while continuing to press forward on the larger Area Plans.

It is my view that Falls Church is poised to take advantage of its physical assets; particularly its location, access to major transportation routes, and availability of underutilized land.  Though counter intuitive, the city may also benefit from current market instability.  Investment in the stock market, which reacts to everything all the time, is no longer an attractive place to warehouse liquid assets.  Alternative risk free investments yield practically nothing.  For those companies that have cash and are looking to put their money to work, Falls Church has much to offer, if we “set the table” properly.

The availability of underutilized land (defined as property where the land is more valuable than buildings) for a city as mature as Falls Church is relatively large, amounting to some 200 acres.  Current zoning restrictions that limit building density have encouraged “by right” development, which is often limited to relatively small projects that generate little revenue, and larger projects that are crammed into small parcels, making the city a less welcoming place to live.

As has been often stated, the city has to increase and diversify its revenue base if it is to survive.  In spite of the technically correct but misunderstood $4.1 million surplus, the city fundamentally is in no better fiscal shape than it was a year ago.  Almost half of the surplus is comprised of already approved Fund Balance restoration and legal costs that did not occur last year but may occur this year.  The remaining approximately $2.1 million is primarily the result of 1) delaying needed street and sidewalk improvements and, 2) the additional revenues created by increased real estate assessments and taxes as well as fee increases.  Unfortunately, the latter revenue generators do not reflect increased economic activity.  The only clear bright spot was an increase in sales tax revenues, but that did not materially impact the city’s finances.

Surpluses generated by delaying needed capital expenditures are much like increasing one’s savings by not making mortgage payments

Nonetheless, expenditure pressures continue to increase.  In addition to the above, there is evidence that contractor costs reductions have not only not ceased, but that going forward will increase.  In addition, school funding requests show projected increases of 4% to 6% per year for at least the next three years.  That increase does not include possible school capital expenditures, primarily school rehabilitation/construction resulting from enrollment that continues to trend upwards and restoration of aging buildings.

Given a national economy that is expected to remain in a slow growth environment until 2015-2017, it is inconceivable that real estate values will increase sufficiently to cover projected budget shortfalls

In spite of the above constraints, I am “bullish” on the future of Falls Church.  To promote the type of economic development that we need it is necessary to create an environment that attracts high quality developers.  One of the most important considerations will be to move proactively to rezone the city’s business districts in order to make underutilized land more attractive to development by promoting a reasonable level of higher density (and parcel consolidation).  In a city where all the business corridors are bordered by established neighborhoods this may not be simple.  Yet the fact is we have few, if any, alternatives.

Our location, the relatively good economic performance of the Washington area (compared to other metropolitan areas), combined with solid Area Plans, could attract and secure development sufficient not only for Falls Church to survive but to prosper.  Yes, the face of Falls Church will change, but it will change the way the citizens want.

Ira Kaylin is a member of the Falls Church City Council.

LETTER: City of Falls Church Fireworks on as Usual

TO THE EDITORS OF THE FALLS CHURCH TIMES:

June 26, 2011

A variety of special events organized year-round by the Recreation and Parks Department are one feature that makes the City of Falls Church such a popular place to live and visit. All City departments, including Recreation and Parks, have had to make cuts in programs and staffing levels due to the economic challenges of the past two years. Recreation and Parks has responded to cuts in its budget by reducing some programs and by asking for donations and sponsors for special events and activities. To date, more than $4,000 has been donated to help defray some of the costs of special events. Additional donations are welcome and needed. Read more

To Our Readers: Why We Suspended Comments

By THE EDITORS OF THE FALLS CHURCH TIMES

June 24, 2011

Thursday morning the editors of the Falls Church Times reluctantly decided to suspend comments on a breaking story.  Since then we have received emails both praising and panning our decision.  We believe that we owe our readers a brief explanation for our action.

We normally do not monitor comments closely.  Civility usually prevails on our forum and only rarely have we deleted a comment or an exchange of comments.  However, one comment on Thursday morning’s story made a very serious and specific allegation regarding a criminal case.  As we could not quickly confirm the statement, we decided to suspend further comments and delete those already received.  Since then we have learned that the  allegation was consistent with the charges and have posted a follow-up story which we have opened to comments.

Abrupt as it was, we believe that yesterday’s action was necessary and prudent.   Readers previously have made statements which we could not confirm, but those comments did not involve possible defamation or pertain to a story involving serious criminal charges under active investigation. 

The Falls Church Times will continue to report on this story, recognizing that it is a tragedy for all concerned.  We trust that our readers will keep that foremost in mind when commenting.

The Case for Drug Dogs

By Stan Fendley
June 6, 2011

Last week Falls Church News Press columnist Michael Gardner criticized Falls Church City public school officials for the recent use of police dogs to sniff backpacks at George Mason High School.

Gardner drew a stark picture of the use of drug dogs, saying “The incidences of misuse of dogs; where the animals caused elementary-age children to involuntarily urinate themselves, or poorly trained dogs bit students, or vaguely documented alerts led to strip searches of teenage girls, should give parents pause.”

Huh?  What’s he talking about?  That’s not what’s going on at George Mason.  As Gardner himself points out, in the recent search at GMHS, school officials kept the dogs separated from the students.  The students were instructed to bring their backpacks to the hallway — and then return to class.  Then the dogs were brought in to sniff the backpacks.  When a dog alerted on a backpack, the student owner was called to the school office to discuss the contents of the backpack, and the student’s parents were contacted.  The dogs did not come in contact with the students – and thus, there was no occasion for the parade of horribles Gardner suggests.  No dog bites, no urination, no strip searches.  Given the care that was taken to keep the dogs away from the students, I believe it is unfair to suggest that FC school officials may begin to use dogs in an irresponsible fashion.

Mr. Gardner also makes the charge that the search was poorly executed, but in my view, the opposite seems true.  First, GMHS Principal Tyrone Byrd gave students and parents fair notice some time ago that dogs would be used to search for drugs.  Then, when proceeding with the search, he used trained narcotics detection dogs to conduct sniff tests, a technique blessed by the U.S. Supreme Court almost 30 years ago.  In addition, Byrd has kept parents apprised with email messages providing significant detail.  In my view, that kind of forethought and follow-through indicate good execution, not the reverse.

Byrd is right not to report the detailed results of the search to the community, notwithstanding Mr. Gardner’s call for a report.  Although some may want to know the details, privacy considerations dictate otherwise.  Sharing such information with anyone other than need-to-know school administrators, school board officials, and law enforcement officials could subject the schools and City to even more lawsuits than we already face in other areas.  Given the City’s experience with recent litigation, Byrd is to be commended for avoiding more of it.  [As Gerald Pressman points out in his comment below, it may be in order for Byrd to report generalities, such as numbers, percentages, or funding of the costs.  Personal information,  however, should remain confidential unless release is required at some point -- for example, as a matter of law enforcement.] 

Let’s be honest – we have drug issues at GMHS, and it is the duty of school officials to deal with them.   The safeguards Mr. Gardner prefers — teachers, parental communications, attendance polices, health screenings, and counseling programs — are all good and necessary, but they do not serve the purpose of keeping drugs out of school in the first place.  For that purpose,  the use of drug dogs to sniff backpacks while students are in class may well be the most effective and least threatening technique available.  It provides universal scrutiny on an equal basis, provides deterrence going forward, and avoids physical threat.

If there are alternative methods to be considered, great, but they must be effective and efficient.  We cannot afford for school officials’ time and attention to be inordinately consumed by the few students who bring drugs to school, to the detriment of the many who stay away from drugs and just want to get a good education.  Given the availability of a tool like trained drug dogs which can sniff hundreds of backpacks in minutes, it is reasonable for school officials to use them.

As a parent of a GMHS student, I appreciate the work of Principal Byrd and other school officials to keep drugs out.  It’s one of the most important duties they have, and I urge them to continue their vigilant efforts to accomplish it.

LETTER: Farewell, Jerry’s of Falls Church

TO THE EDITORS OF THE FALLS CHURCH TIMES:

March 28, 2011

Farewell, Jerry’s.

Everyone has a place for comfort food. My place was Jerry’s Subs and Pizza in Falls Church City. It is no secret to the staff there that I would sneak in on an occasional Thursday between office hours and my daughter’s class for a cheese steak. Mmmm. We are all supposed to eat right, but occasionally we get to cheat. A mentor who was an oncologist in my residency training used to say cheating on the diet was one less day in a nursing home!

Anyway, I was sad to find out this past week during my most recent foray that Jerry’s Falls Church is closing in two weeks. Jerry’s has been in Falls Church City for a long time. It once was the sponsor of many Little League baseball teams and a favorite for after- game family get-togethers. Its Monday night discount pizza was a City favorite, with the line often stretching deep into the restaurant.

More recently, the place has been quiet. When the previous owner sold a few years ago, the restaurant’s new owners upgraded the decor to the new Jerry’s standard. Unfortunately, they abandoned the community involvement of the previous owner. Business dropped off. As a business owner in the City, I know that community presence is very important.

Then, the owners moved the napkin and condiment dispensers behind the counter. You could no longer eat a few pickles while waiting for your dinner. Extra napkins or ketchup? Had to ask for them at the counter. Business faded away.

But I still visited. An occasional Thursday afternoon was a great chance to read the local paper while indulging in a cheese steak. Jerry’s also was a great place to grab a pizza or sub to eat at the summer Concert in the Park. There are other places to grab a sandwich or pizza, sure, but Jerry’s was just convenient for our town.

Farewell, Jerry’s Falls Church. I am told that the employees will work at the other franchises in Seven Corners and Idylwood. I won’t be seeing you often there –- just too far to travel for a quick bite. Hopefully, your Broad Street storefront will be filled with something else delicious. We had a good thing going.

GORDON THEISZ
Falls Church City

Letters to the Editor should be submitted to contact@fallschurchtimes.com. They may be on any subject relevant to our City. Writers should include their full name and city of residence. All submissions are subject to editing.

COMMUNITY COMMENT:
Schools Budget: Smart, Responsible, and Necessary

By PAT RICCARDS

March 24, 2011 

At this past weekend’s town hall meeting, a number of residents asked about the FY2012 schools budget.  Recognizing Falls Church City Public Schools represent approximately 45 percent of the City’s budget, they rightly wanted to see the level of detail on the schools budget presented at these community sessions as they were hearing on the City budget.

As most know, the Falls Church City School Board passed its FY2012 budget on February 15, the earliest the School Board has approved its budget in history.  We accelerated our process at the request of City Council, which wanted additional time to review the schools budget as part of the larger discussion.

To meet this goal, the School Board began its budget process in November.  We conducted town hall meetings and public hearings on the budget.  We met with school staff in all of our buildings, including central office.  We set up a website to collect public feedback.  We spoke with neighboring jurisdictions to understand what would happen in other localities.  And we regularly updated Council (both publicly and privately) on both our progress and our intentions.

Ultimately, we passed a smart and responsible budget.  Early in the process, City Council asked us to provide a “zero growth” budget, meaning we would ask for the same amount for the schools as we did in FY2011.  This was not an easy task, but it was the responsible thing to do. 

But we had to craft that “zero growth” budget under very difficult conditions.  Why?  The first answer is student growth.  For the current school year, student population growth is 150 percent higher than was projected during last year’s budget cycle.  And we are looking at additional increases for FY2012.  Each of those students brings costs, and those costs have to be managed in a “zero growth” environment.

In recent years, we have seen our student population grow more than 10 percent.  Since FY2009, we have added nearly 200 students to class rolls.  At the same time, the City Transfer to the schools has decreased by nearly $2 million.  We are asking our educators to do more and more with less and less.

Like the City, we are also experiencing significant increases in our fixed obligations.  For next year, our state retirement costs, mandated under the Virginia Retirement System and of which we have no control whatsoever, will increase 25 percent.  Healthcare costs for the majority of our employees are up 27 percent.  And we have new federal and state mandates we are required by law to meet, all in that “zero growth” budget.

The budget approved by the School Board navigates these unavoidable cost increases, and does so without cutting into the classroom or affecting the students.  We have made smart choices to meet our obligations.

One of the most significant decisions the School Board made was to improve compensation for our educators.  Last year, we, in effect, cut teacher salaries.  Frozen pay, coupled with increased benefit costs and the elimination of professional days, translates into real pay cuts.  After such cuts, and as we watch our neighboring jurisdictions increase pay for their teachers, we had to act.  For us to deliver the excellent schools City residents expect, we need to support our educators.

Working closely with school employees and their representatives, we were able to act in a smart and responsible way.  To retain and reward our excellent schools staff, our budget funds a mid-year, full step increase for all educators.  And we did it through no staff furloughs.

Yes, we delivered a zero growth budget that requests not a penny more from City taxpayers at a time when our student enrollment has already increased more than 5 percent.  And yes, we did so while also honoring our promise to our world-class educators to fairly compensate them.  But our budget accomplished far, far more than that.  

In the area of school facilities, we are now ready to move forward with our expansion of Thomas Jefferson Elementary, thanks in large part to our success in securing a QSCB bond from the Commonwealth.  As we promised to Council in the fall, the Schools will cover the costs of these school construction bonds for the next three years.  The QSCB not only saves the City $1.3 million in interest in the short term, but this specific construction project will actually save the City $20 million in previously planned long-term capital expenditures.

The budget allows us to build on our award-winning food services program by establishing a breakfast program for all of our schools.  It places our marker down on e-learning, as we seek to establish Falls Church as a national leader for online instruction.  And it makes revenue generation a priority for the schools, as we continue to look for additional public-private partnerships to help fund new initiatives.

We were asked to deliver a “zero growth” City transfer budget, and we did that.  We were asked to provide a responsible budget, both for this year and future years, and we did that.  We were asked to protect the quality and reputation of our schools, and we did that too.

The Falls Church City School Board approved a smart, responsible, and necessary FY2012 budget.  This budget was carefully crafted to address all of our City’s needs, building on integrated economies of scale and focusing on return on investment.  This budget request – in its totality – is essential to deliver the high-quality education expected of Falls Church.

(Pat Riccards is Vice Chair of the Falls Church City School Board.)

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.

OPINION: City Library Facing the Unkindest of Cuts

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

March 23, 2011 

“It’s the latest, it’s the greatest, it’s the library!”

That song, which is well over 40 years old, came to my mind today when I thought about the impact of the proposed budget cuts on the Mary Riley Styles Public Library.  Not so long ago the tune still held true here, but now it would seem an appropriate local lyric would be “It’s cut, it’s shut, that’s our library!” 

Actually, though cut last year and facing further cuts this year, it’s not entirely shut, but long-time library board member John Lawrence warned at last Saturday’s town hall meeting that the potential loss of state aid, which provides 10% of the facility’s budget, could signal “the beginning of the end.”

That might take a few years, but the trend line is well established.  Last year the weekly hours were reduced from 68 to 64, due to Sunday closings.  Sunday hours will return under the proposed FY 12 budget, but the total number of hours will drop to 55 due to later openings and earlier closings during the week.

Shorter library hours will mean further staff cuts.  Six other city departments are scheduled to have one position either eliminated or reduced to part-time.  However, the library will lose two part-time librarians, one part-time library assistant, one part-time page, and see three other positions have their hours reduced.  

“It’s a huge, huge hit,” said Mr. Lawrence.  “You may say they were part-time, but that’s what most library work is.  I can’t think of any year in the last three when we haven’t had staffing cuts.  People who’ve been here 20-25 years have left and their positions haven’t been filled.”

More than hours and staff will be cut.  The book budget will be reduced.  The periodical collection cut in half, with the 21 foreign language publications especially hard hit.  The local history room, now open three days a week, will be closed except by appointment.  Library expansion, long deferred, likely will be pushed back once again.      

“I want to make it clear, the library board hates this,” said Mr. Lawrence.  So do I.

The library is one of Falls Church’s most popular institutions, routinely breaking circulation records.  More than 25,000 people now have Falls Church library cards, including 92% of the City’s residents.  Over 1,000 children participated in the library’s Summer Reading Program.  For the third consecutive year the library was designated one of America’s Star Libraries by the Library Journal.  

“It’s one of the markers that sets us apart,” said Vice Mayor Dave Snyder, upon receiving the library’s annual report in January.  Johannah Barry, Council liaison to the library, called it a “small organization, large in heart, that provides extraordinary service.”   Indeed it does, even in the face of the reductions imposed in recent years, but it is becoming increasingly difficult for the library to maintain its stellar reputation.

If you believe that the library is facing more than its fair share of reductions, speak out at the upcoming public hearings, either next Monday or on April 11, or at the town hall meeting on April 16.  Alternatively, forward written comments via budget@fallschurchva.gov.  To support the library directly, please consider contributing to the Mary Riley Styles Library Foundation Trust.

« Previous Page — Next Page »