Community Comment: ‘Pampered Commuter’ For GEORGE

Read more

City Installing 4 Red-Light Cameras Costing $350,000

Last night the Falls Church City Council voted to approve the installation of a red light camera system.  Chief of Police Harry Reitze advised the Council that if all goes smoothly the system will be operational by July 10.

The cameras were approved by a 6-1 vote.  In dissenting, Councilman Dan Maller stated he did not believe the system would generate sufficient revenue to justify its expense or substantially improve public safety.  He noted that one of the weaknesses of the new system is that it will not delay the opposing green light if a car running the light is in the intersection.  

Chief Reitze explained that the light cannot be delayed since it would throw off the synchronization of the lights just outside the City in Fairfax County.  However, City Manager Wyatt Shields advised the Council that he would consult with the city engineer to determine if the delay feature could be implemented, as he recalled the previous system was able to hold the light.

Red-light-running has been a long-standing problem in the City.  Vice Mayor Hal Lippman noted that the earlier system had detected over 19,000 violations in a single year.

Four cameras will be installed, presumably at the same intersections as in the past, three on Broad Street and one on South Washington Street. 

The contract for the cameras, which is not to exceed $350,000 annually, was awarded to American Traffic Solutions, Inc.

Lots of Ideas on GEORGE Bus – Will Any of Them Work?

Here’s a rundown of all the ideas we’ve seen the last few weeks on what to do about GEORGE, the City’s debt-ridden bus service:

First is from City Manager Wyatt Shields, who has to find a way to balance the budget: Dump GEORGE entirely and save $450,000 next year. End of story.

(But what happens to the buses themselves, which cost over $1 million in 2002? Couldn’t the City recoup some money by selling them? It turns out that the City signed the buses over to WMATA (the Metro authority) for “a nominal fee.” In return, Metro was to operate and maintain the buses for an hourly rate of $63, which since has risen to $99. If we kill GEORGE, does Metro keep the buses for free? See the COMMENT at bottom of page.)

The Falls Church News-Press said that Shields’ recommendation to kill George “may not be wise” -– at least if GEORGE were used “for its economic development potential, rather than as a private taxi cab for already overly-pampered commuting residents.”

City Council member Dan Maller wrote in the Falls Church Times:

Thank you for this forum.  I am determined to find a way to preserve the system so we can make a decisive transition to something that would work and be a better representation of our community values.  I believe that these 40-passenger diesel city buses are absolutely wrong for our needs, so once we get beyond the immediate crisis we need a medium and long-term plan that provides service using smaller vehicles powered by CNG, electricity, hydrogen, compressed air, horses, dogs, strapping Ukrainian lads, or whatever.

There appears to be a strong consensus that Falls Church cannot afford to operate the GEORGE system in the current fashion, and that the value added for residents is far less than the cost.  My opinion is that we should be able to come up with a plan that provides the bulk of the benefit at a fraction of the cost, or we have no business in the transit business. I am actively working to come up with the outline of a plan and I would welcome any feedback on this site or by email to dmaller@fallschurchva.gov. I would hope to have at least one brainstorming session (formal or informal) including GEORGE users prior to recommending anything formally.

The short-term options are to terminate the program entirely on June 30 or to find ways to reduce the subsidy to a number that the community would support (a tax increase or alternative program cuts).  My starting suggestion is a 1/2¢ property tax increase which would provide about $175,000, combined with a very serious and decisive look at the structure of the program.

The City’s Economic Development Authority held a special meeting March 23 to consider GEORGE. A formal statement should be issued in a couple of days, but the consensus at the meeting seemed to be that the City should preserve a smaller, cheaper GEORGE rather than discontinue it entirely. Even though the service is not cost-effective, it does help “brand” the City as a desirable place to live.

The Village Preservation and Improvement Society agrees with Maller that City Council should restructure GEORGE to reduce costs rather than scrap it entirely. Examples include partnering with the ART bus, reducing “platform hours” to shorter morning and evening rush hour times, and doubling the fare.

Mike Gardner, the Mayor’s husband, writing in “Blueweeds,” calls GEORGE a “vanity bus.” The City cannot afford it, “and any local politician who says it can is being incredibly irresponsible.”

On another blog, “Falls Church Insider,” EDA member Andy Rankin suggests:  Switch to “shuttle buses”; change the routes so they don’t duplicate Metrobus; and implement night and weekend service for access to entertainment and dining spots.

The Falls Church Chamber of Commerce issued a statement on its position, clarifying that it has no official position. But the “general consensus,” according to Executive Director Sally Cole, is that “while GEORGE is not working now, there must be some way to fix it so that it supports our businesses and the City’s economic development.”

Last (and least?), your obedient servant listed his own ideas in an earlier opinion column. Most are reflected above. The two most crucial are: Replace the big buses with smaller versions more appropriate for neighborhood streets. And then, actually run GEORGE on those neighborhood streets instead of largely duplicating Metrobus routes. I also recommended making GEORGE free to ride, noting that it’s probably not cost-effective to charge 50-cent fares. Now we’ve learned that the Metro Authority has been pocketing half the fare to cover the cost of collection. 

I’ll add another idea: Cut service WAY back. There may not be a compelling reason even to service West Falls Church Metro at this point. Ridership figures indicate most of the demand is for service to East Falls Church, where the parking lot fills up early. 

Page 1 Photo: Adam E. Moreira

Above Photo: Falls Church Times: George Southern

Links

GEORGE Service Options: http://fallschurchva.gov/Content/Docs/GeorgePresentationFY2010.pdf

Falls Church News-Press: http://www.fcnp.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4236:editorial-the-budget-a-fcs-future&catid=16:local-commentary&Itemid=78

Falls Church Times: http://fallschurchtimes.com/2009/03/06/opinion-how-to-save-george-the-wayward-bus/#comment-430

Blueweeds: http://blueweeds.typepad.com/blue_weeds/2009/03/the-hairy-george-issue.html

Falls Church Insider: http://www.fallschurchinsider.com/2009/03/george-okay-heres-what-i-think/

 

Save GEORGE Bus, Says Village Preservation Society

Read more

City Proposal: Cut Budget, Raise Tax Rate, Kill GEORGE Bus

Last night City Manager Wyatt Shields presented the first draft of the FY 2010 budget to the City Council.  As proposed, the $66.6 million budget calls for a cut of nearly $4 million, a 5.65% reduction from the current fiscal year.

“Although constrained, the anticipated revenues available to the City government allow us to continue to provide most of the public services the community has come to expect,” Mr. Shields said.  “However, the story of this year’s budget is strongly influenced by continuing uncertainty and risk for future years, especially FY 2011.”

Mr. Shields said the long list of spending reductions is in response to the overall decline in revenues due to the recession.  The total value of all real estate in the City as of January 1 decreased 2.5 percent, sales tax receipts are down almost 14 percent, building permits 57 percent, and investment returns 67 percent.

If adopted, the budget’s primary casualty will be the GEORGE bus service, elimination of which will save  $450,000.  The City also plans to cut three part-time and four full-time positions and to freeze the pay of government employees.  Although the City anticipates a 2% increase in student enrollment, the school system will face a cut of 1.6%.

Library and Community Center hours will not be cut under the new budget.  However, it does not include funds for library expansion, which the Planning Commission had recommended unanimously.

Under the proposed tax rate of $1.07, a single-family detached home with a median assessment of $605,950 would see an annual increase of only $76, due to declining property values.  However, to allow for a range of budget options, Mr. Shields recommended the Council consider advertising a rate of up to $1.09 per $100 of assessed valuation.

New fees will be imposed for services such as mulch delivery, street closures for block parties, false alarms, and land development fees.  Restaurants that pay their meals tax early will not receive a discount.

Water and sewer commodity fees will remain unchanged for the fourth straight year.  The water rate will remain at $3.03 per 1,000 gallons in FY 2010 and the sewer rate will remain at $5.91 per 1,000 gallons. These rates are below average for the National Capital Region.

Mr. Shields pointed out that there are reasons to remain confident that Falls Church will overcome its financial challenges.  Its unemployment rate remains low and per capita income remains high.  Residential property values are bolstered by its strategic location, schools, and quality public services.  He also noted that the City’s credit ratings remain very strong:  AA from Moody’s, Aa2 from Standard and Poor’s, and AA+ from Fitch.  These ratings are the highest that a small jurisdiction can achieve.

Mr. Shields’ presentation represents only the beginning of the approval process.  The Council will hold three work sessions on the budget prior to the first public hearing on March 23.  Four work sessions will be held before the second public hearing on April 13.  The Council will hold two additional sessions prior to the final public hearing and formal adoption of the budget on April 27.   The 2010 fiscal year runs from July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010.

The Proposed FY 2010 Budget (197 pages):

http://www.fallschurchva.gov/Content/Docs/FY2010ProposedBudget.pdf

The City Council’s Budget Schedule:

http://www.fallschurchva.gov/Content/Docs/FY10BudgetTimeline.pdf

Opinion: How to Save GEORGE the Wayward Bus

There are lots of problems with our City’s GEORGE bus service, and as budget crunch time approaches, trail balloons are rising to suggest maybe we should just junk it. After all: divide this past year’s cost by the number of riders and you get $6.50 per passenger, per ride.

Sad to say, starting from the best of intentions, GEORGE has pretty much been a disaster. This past year the City paid out almost half a million dollars to run mostly empty, oversize buses along routes that largely duplicate Metrobus. Sure, some folks do ride GEORGE — either because the 50-cent fare is a bargain compared to Metrobus, or because they can save a block or two walk compared to the Metrobus stop.

Yet just across the City line, Arlington enjoys great success with a similar bus service known as ART – even though they charge a full $1.35 fare. Why?

PROBLEM #1: We bought the wrong bus. From the beginning, the City was carried away with experimental high-tech, gee-whiz machinery, when we should have been studying what already worked in similar municipalities. First we wanted electric buses, and when those weren’t ready for prime time we got saddled with expensive, huge, clean-diesel, voice-emulation wheelchair-accessible vehicles twice the size they should be. When these empty behemoths started prowling neighborhood streets and shaking the bric-a-brac, residents raised a squawk, and GEORGE was banned from Broadmont, to cite the most prominent case.

PROBLEM #2: Unlike a real bus, GEORGE runs a nonsensical circle route in one direction only. So, for example, if you live near Grove Avenue, you might find it convenient to ride the 26W straight to the West Falls Church Metro. But how do you get home? Not the way you got there. GEORGE only goes from Haycock Road to Broad Street to West Street to Poplar Drive to Seaton Lane to Sherrow Avenue to Virginia Avenue back to Broad Street to Oak Street to Lincoln Avenue to West Street to – Grove Avenue. Faster to walk – or in the real world, park your car at the Metro.

PROBLEM #3: The GEORGE schedule is, to use the kindest word I can think of, idiotic. It’s divided into two segments: peak hours and midday hours, “midday” being defined as 10 a.m.—4 p.m. During midday, there’s only one bus route instead of two. Fair enough, since almost everyone who rides GEORGE does so during rush hour. But why would anyone devise a “midday” service that goes places you can’t get to during rush hour? That’s right, from 10-4 GEORGE makes extended runs out to Eden Center and Wilson Boulevard. Before and after those hours, when someone might actually be on the bus, GEORGE stays away from that area. Worse, during the midday run GEORGE abandons almost any effort to provide unique service. With the exception of the link from EFC Metro to Eden Center, it’s all on Broad and Washington streets, same as Metrobus.

Can anything be done? Not if the City continues to choose band-aids over major surgery. Saving GEORGE essentially means starting over:

– Narrow its purpose. The vision of happy residents taking GEORGE to do their shopping and dine out is a pipe dream. Residents will only ride GEORGE to get to the Metro to go to work. So run GEORGE during rush hours and park it the rest of the time.

– Keep away from Metrobus. GEORGE should never run on any streets served by Metrobus. Instead, run it through City neighborhoods off the beaten path (and no, running on Park Street instead of Broad Street doesn’t count).

– Lose the Big Bertha bodies. We need mini-buses costing a fraction of the current model. And forget about expensive frills such as the high-tech voice emulation calling out street names. GEORGE is for City residents going to and from the Metro – we know where we live, for crying out loud.

– Run the bus in both directions, and skip the circle routes. Instead, run back and forth between WFC and EFC Metro stations. One bus could run through neighborhoods north of Broad and the other bus south of Broad.

– Mark the bus stops to clearly show what time GEORGE will arrive. Alexandria did this with its DASH bus and ridership immediately rose dramatically. (Of course it only works if the bus actually comes when the sign says it will.)

– And (here’s a ringer) make GEORGE free. What? That’s un-American! Right, it’s more like what they do in Australia – and Old Town Alexandria. At last year’s ridership level it would mean a loss of some $35,000 – minus the cost of collecting that $35,000 (which, with the high-tech Smartcard readers, probably cost close to $35,000).

– And finally: don’t change the name. I like it.

(Photo: Adam E. Moreira)

Traffic Congestion Rated Most Important Issue in Survey

Fifty-third District constituents responding to Delegate Scott’s annual issues survey overwhelmingly rated traffic congestion as the most important problem facing the area.  Education funding, development, and property taxes finished in a virtual tie as public concerns, but far behind traffic.

Nearly 600 people responded to the survey, either by mail or via the internet.  While not a scientific sampling, the results probably are a reasonably accurate reflection of the views of the majority of area’s residents.  However, it may also be fair to assume that, given a wider sampling, some of the results might have been less one-sided.

In perhaps the most interesting result, a slight majority of the respondents favored using more nuclear power, while only 21% were definitely opposed.  Over 22 years now have passed since the Chernobyl disaster and nearly 30 since the Three Mile Island Incident, so anxieties over nuclear energy may have diminished with time.

Fifty-eight percent of the respondents favored legalization of physician-assisted suicide.  Thus far only Oregon and Washington have approved this measure.  Such action is not explicitly criminalized in Virginia, although there is a statute which imposes civil sanctions on persons assisting in a suicide.

Not every respondent answered every question.  Questions on immigration and education drew the highest number of responses.  Questions on energy and the death penalty drew the lowest, though the difference was only around 6%.

Survey questions are shown below in boldface.  All percentages have been rounded to the nearest whole number.

Which two of the following do you feel are the most important issues or problems facing our area today?

Traffic Congestion  -  72

Development  -  29

Education Funding – 29

Property Taxes  -  28

Lack of Affordable Housing  –  25

Increased Funding for Mental Health Services  -  12

How Should the General Assembly respond to projected budget shortfalls?

Give localities power to initiate an income tax of 1/4%  -  19

Allow localities to raise the sales tax by 1/2%  -  43

Require local governments to solve the problem with existing resources  -  32

No opinion  -  6

Would you favor increasing gas taxes dedicated to transportation?

Yes  -  73     No  -  23     No Opinion  -  4

Would you favor taking funds away from other services such as education, human services, and public safety to make those funds available for transportation?

Yes  -  8      No  -  73     Need more information  -  19

Do you support transit oriented development (i.e., higher density, mixed residential and commercial development at Metro stations such as Dunn Loring) because it will mitigate congestion?

Support  -  78     Oppose  -  13     No Opinion  -  9

Should Virginia taxpayers subsidize alternative forms of energy such as solar, wind, ethanol, and/or bio-diesel?

Support  -  70     Oppose  -  21     No Opinion  -  9

Nuclear Energy:  Which statement is closer to your opinion?

I favor more nuclear power in Virginia to meet the state’s energy needs   -   51

I oppose more nuclear power generation in Virginia   -   21

I need more information   -   28

The US military opposes drilling for oil and natural gas within 20 or so miles of Virginia’s coastline for security reasons.  Others say drilling will help cut reliance on foreign oil and gas suppliers and therefore increase security.  What is your opinion?

Virginia should allow off-shore drilling for natural gas and oil   -   30

Virginia should allow drilling for natural gas but not allow drilling for oil   -   11

Virginia should oppose off-shore drilling for both   -   59

Virginia should allow physician-assisted suicide.

Yes  -  58     No  -  24     Don’t know  -  18

Should the state ban housing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation?

Yes  -  71     No  -  22     Don’t know  -  7

Virginia should appropriate funds to pay for tax credits or vouchers to assist parents to send their children with disabilities to private or religious schools of their choice.

Yes  -  31     No  -  52     Don’t know  -  17

Localities should be allowed to ban weapons in public buildings.

Yes  -  88     No  -  8      Don’t know  -  4

Death Penalty:  Which statement is closest to your opinion?

Virginia’s death penalty laws are satisfactory   -   27

Virginia’s death penalty laws are not tough enough   -  9

Virginia should ban the death penalty   -   44

Virginia should place a moratorium on the penalty until it is more fairly administered   -   20

Traffic-Light Cam Returning to Falls Church?

Better slow that car down, leadfoot.  Remember those traffic-light cameras that used to be on Broad Street, one at Broad and Annandale, and one at Broad and Birch?  Looks like they’re coming back.  Last night the Falls Church City Council agreed to the first reading of an ordinance to reinstate them.  (Not necessarily on Broad Street, mind you.) 

Councilman David Snyder, speaking in favor of their installation, stated that cameras are a critical safety measure, that they help prevent accidents, and that they allow law enforcement officers to focus on more important activities. 

An engineering safety analysis must be performed at an intersection before a camera is activated.  Under Virginia Code, the maximum fine for a violation will be $50.  

The vote to approve the first reading was 6-0.  Vice Mayor Hal Lippman did not attend Monday night’s session.

A public hearing and second reading is scheduled for February 9.  The motion to approve the ordinance:

http://www.fallschurchva.gov/Content/Government/Council/Meetings/2009/January26/PhotoRed012909.pdf

« Previous Page