City Council Meeting

good evening I'm going to read a motion to conclude the closed meeting we had before the regular meeting at 6 6 50 p.m. the City Council concluded its closed meeting to discuss personnel matters I move that each of us certified that to best of each council members knowledge one only public business matters for lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements in the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and two only public business matters identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard discussed or considered all council members in favor of the certification motion please signify by voting aye aye those opposed the motion please vote nay ah the motion passes you unanimously thank you so much I would like to now call the regular meeting of

February 10th 2026 to order thank you so much everyone who is here for tonight's meeting as we celebrate black history month here in the city of Fairfax and I would like to ask that if you are able and so choose please rise for the pledge of allegiance I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you I would like to now ask dr. Michael Nickens affectionately known by all as doc nix to join me in the well okay come on in come on in this is where we proclaim and it's a very archaic form of communication communication but hang in there with us whereas in February of each year we

celebrate the diversity of black people in the city of Fairfax the Commonwealth of Virginia and in our nation whether they self-identify as African African American Afro Latino Afro Caribbean or black and whereas we celebrate this year's black history month theme of a century of black history commemorations marking 100 years since national Negro history week began in 1926 highlighting the enduring focus on African American history and its contributions to the US this theme reflects a century of honoring black life struggles and achievements through various events and observances with a renewed focus on accurate and inclusive history and whereas on February 10th 1976 during the United States bicentennial

President Gerald R Ford became the first president to issue a message recognizing black history month in 1986 Congress then passed public law 99-244 designating February as black history month and shrining in law this country's commitment to teach commemorate celebrate and educate current and future generations on the contribution of black Americans to American history and whereas it was the goal of dr. Carter G Woodson to establish Negro History Week to promote the history culture and achievements of African Americans and other people of color worldwide and the second African American to earn a PhD from Harvard University recognized the importance of establishing an initiative that could be celebrated annually on a national scale

in recognition of his contributions to his country Woodson High School in Fairfax was renamed in his honor in 2024 and whereas we acknowledge that we have never fully lived up to the founding ideals of this country that all of us are the founding ideals of this country that all people are created equal and we have often failed to acknowledge the contributions of those black Americans whose courage sacrifices and relentless efforts helped to build this country from the arrival of the first enslaved Africans in Virginia in 1619 and whereas we acknowledge systemic racism has resulted in black Americans being more likely to die at an earlier age from all causes with persons of color more greatly impacted by health inequities and

disproportionately overrepresented in our prison system and among our homeless populations causing trauma over multiple generations within the black community and whereas we recognize that all people have inherent value and worth and are deserving of respect dignity and basic human rights that have often been denied to black Americans through institutionalized racism that persists to this day and as a consequence we have not widely celebrated or raised up the many accomplishments of black Americans in the arts education science government technology and business with many important black leaders remaining hidden figures absent from our history books and whereas our country is celebrating its 250th anniversary this year it is incumbent on us to remember black Americans were here from the very first moments of our

the very first moments of our nation's founding and contribute in myriod ways to what makes America great now therefore I Catherine S Reid mayor of the city of Fairfax do hereby proclaim February 2026 is black history month in the city of Fairfax and encourage all of us to commit to learning the broader deeper and important history of our country through the lens of black Americans accomplishments and achievements and with that Doc Nix of design of design of design of design of design of design of design of design of design of design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design

The design of design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design design

Once you find you can see how love sets it all free, come and join us as we celebrate every he and she that be. So I spent however many countless hours in practice rooms and in music schools the practice rooms are set basically like a little dungeon. You're in these little small rooms with a small piano and you go into the room and you spend your time on your horn, working on the thing that was assigned to you. And then this culture starts to happen. You work for a little while and then you take a break and you step into the hallway and all the musicians start to tell each other I'm doing worse than anyone's doing. Everyone's like I'm the worst one. I'm having a terrible day. And I stepped out one day to have that, to get into that, whatever that was.

I'm not sure if it's supposed to make me feel better or worse or what's going on with that. And I was expecting the same feedback loop that it always is. And a good friend of mine broke the spell and he said, you know, we can't ever have control of our results, but we can stay faithful to a good process. And I just kind of looked at him and went back and started playing again and was not expecting that. And whatever it is that we do, we set aside a month, we set aside a day, we set aside words on a proclamation. We get together and we think these things through. We talk about these things. We write articles. We make art. And it's the repeating. It's like there's this Sisyphean thing where we work on it and then we step away from it,

but then we come back to it. I think about building Legos and making spaceships out of Legos. And you make a spaceship and then it's the most important thing you're doing until you put that last piece in place. And then suddenly it kind of loses something, right? It's done. You don't have a process anymore. You could put this on the shelf and show it off. You can show these Legos off, but you have worked with Legos, you know this thing is not going to stay together. It's going to fall apart. It's destined to fall apart. In fact, if you glued it, you would ruin the essence of what it was. And if you try to keep it in place, you're going to spend so much more energy because every time you touch it, one thing's going to fall off or something's just going to fall

apart on it without you doing a thing. So the only healthy thing to do is start over. Imagine the next spaceship, deconstruct. And the process continues again and again. So we're going to get together every year and we're going to revisit these things and we're going to have these conversations. And every time we come back to them, maybe it's because we can keep going from where we left off or maybe it's because we have to start anew because the sandcastle crumbled and we're going to just build it again. But every time we build a sandcastle, it's a little bit of a better plan for the next sandcastle. Every time we build a Lego spaceship, it's a little bit of a better plan for the next spaceship.

So let's keep getting together. Let's keep joining each other. Let's start the conversation again. Let's bring what we've learned every time we have the same conversation. We're a new person every time we come to it. And I appreciate the way that the city of Fairfax, the Commonwealth of Virginia, George Mason University has just put so much faith in me and trust in me and allowed me to continue to express myself. I say often, I'm like, they keep letting the basketball band director speak. I'm not exactly sure why, but I'm going to keep bringing my best self to it. And y'all seem to keep making room for me in a way that makes me feel like I belong and I'm valued. So I appreciate you for it. Good evening, Mayor Reed, members of city council, city staff, community leaders, neighbors, friends

and family. Thank you truly for this meaningful proclamation and for the city of Fairfax recognizing Black History Month with such care, honesty and intention. you're probably wondering who I am my name is Stacy Yvonne Claytor and I'm a business owner here in Fairfax City and I also grew up here but when my friend Christine Vincent reached out and said hey would you be up for being a part of the accepting of the Mayor's Proclamation for Black History Month I immediately said a thousand percent yes I want to be there and I want to be a part of this day and I'm so grateful to get to stand alongside my dear friend Doc Nickens as we do that tonight and so I stand before you as a black American woman who was born and raised

right here in the city of Fairfax and so because of that this moment is deeply personal to me because Fairfax is not just where I lived it's a part of who I am it's where I learned how to dream it's where I learned how to lead it's where I learned what it means to belong and also at times what it means to work for that belonging because belonging has been blocked this year's theme a century of black history commemorations reminds us that for a hundred years black communities and allies have insisted that our stories are not optional not supplemental and not seasonal they are essential black history black history is American history black history is Virginia history black history is Fairfax history

and what I appreciate most about this proclamation is that it does not only celebrate it also tells the truth it acknowledges both the brilliance and the burden both the contributions and the cost both the progress we've made and the work still in front of us it recognizes that systemic racism has created real measurable inequities in health housing policing opportunities and safety and that those inequities create trauma that stretches across generations that matters because truth is not divisive truth is healing I'm going to say that again truth is healing healing and healing is exactly what Black History Month can be when it is honored not as a performance but as a commitment I also want to uplift

the legacy of Dr. Carter G. Woodson whose vision gave this movement its foundation he understood that history is not just about the past it is about power who is remembered who is named who is centered who is seen and I think it is especially meaningful that in 2024 Fairfax renamed Woodson High School in his honor because it is a reminder that we are still even now correcting what was overlooked as an educator as a business owner here in the city of Fairfax and as an arts advocate and artist myself I receive this proclamation not only with gratitude but with responsibility because education is how we keep the truth alive business is how we build generational stability and the arts the arts are how we preserve memory

express identity and transform pain into purpose the arts are also where so many of our hidden figures have always lived even when history books left them out so tonight I am grateful to accept this proclamation on behalf of black students who deserve to see themselves reflected in excellence black leader excuse me black elders whose stories built this city in ways we are still uncovering black families who have endured contributed and thrived black artists teachers entrepreneurs and leaders past and present who have helped shape Fairfax into what it is and I accept it with hope hope that this city will continue to do more than proclaim hope that we will continue to invest include and protect

hope that we will continue to learn the broader deeper history not just during February but every month of the year especially as our country approaches its 250th anniversary this proclamation reminds us that black Americans have been here from the very beginning contributing in countless ways to what makes America what it is so let this month be more than remembrance let it be renewal let it be a recommitment to telling the truth honoring the full story and building a Fairfax where every child every resident can live with dignity opportunity and pride thank you again Mayor Reed and thank you to the city of Fairfax for this proclamation we are honored to accept it applause applause applause applause

applause applause everybody come here right here here we go here we go okay good thank you Okay. All right. All right. All right. Now I am going to introduce Chloe Ritter, our multimodal transportation planner, to introduce a presentation by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. Ms. Ritter. From COG, he is the Deputy Director of Planning and the Director of the Transportation Planning Board. And he's here tonight to give a presentation on the DMV moves plan. Let me look at the computer up here again. And then he's going to give his presentation, kind of share an update on what the plan is. And then after, a little bit later in the agenda, there will be a consented item to endorse the plan,

with a resolution to endorse the plan, which we are bringing for you for consideration. And I just want to take a brief note. I'll let Conti do all of the details on the plan. But I want to take a brief note that staff has been engaged with this plan for the last two years in developing some of the recommendations. And Q's general manager and the Transportation Director have all been involved with developing these recommendations. And we support this plan and look forward to continue coordinating with COG and TPB, as we always do. So, I'm going to bring up the slides here for you. Can you hear me? Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Reed, and thank you, members of the Council, for inviting me, Council of Governments,

and giving this opportunity. I have two parts to my briefing today. One is talking about the city's membership within the Council of Governments. It's something that we take a lot of pride in doing once a year. We go to our members and we brief them about what the city or the county gets from becoming a member of the Council of Governments. And then I will briefly touch on the DMV Moves Initiatives. And within the DMV Moves Initiatives, I have two parts to it. One is providing you with the status and ending with an ask, a request, if you will. So, that's what I intend to speak about. But I want to particularly thank the city and its active participation at Council of Governments. Mayor Reed, you are a member of Council of Governments.

The Board of Directors, Mr. Peterson, you are a member of the Transportation Planning Board. And you both are alternates on each other board. Ms. Chandler, you serve on our board. Mr. Amos, you serve on our board. Mr. McFlein, you serve on our board. So, there's a number of activities within COG, and I will briefly touch on those things. But I want to start by thanking the city. The city has always been very active, very participatory, and never hesitated from demonstrating and living up to its regional commitments. So, we greatly appreciate that. If you can start. Yeah. That's fine. Okay. So, we'll start with regionalism. I just mentioned and appreciated the city's commitment to regionalism.

Why is regionalism so important? As you all know, so I don't mean to speak to you because you live and breathe and act on these things every day. Everything about living does not start and end at our jurisdictional boundaries. Whether it is our commuting to work, whether it is our public safety, whether it is the drinking water, whether it's the air that we breathe. They all cross jurisdictional boundaries. That is why we have to recognize that we are part of a region. And the way the region goes, so does the city or the county. And that is why regionalism is important. A couple of, one important statistic I would note is if our region were a state, the GDP of our region would place us 14th in the country.

So, we would be so far ahead of so many states, just our region. So, that is how much we gain as being and recognizing and acting as one region. Next slide, please. So, within this regional framework, what is COG? COG is a council of governments. You all created COG in 1957. The cities and the counties of this region got together and said, hey, we have issues that cross jurisdictional boundaries. So, we need a common forum where we can get together. We can discuss amongst ourselves what are the issues we face, identify what are the strategies that might help us address those issues, and then decide on which ones of these we can act collectively and on which ones of these we should act independently.

But nevertheless, understand each other's issues, work together to identify strategies, and work together to implementing those strategies. So, you created us in 1957, and you serve on our boards, and that is who COG is. Next slide, please. COG is also the house of the Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Transportation Planning Board that Mr. Peterson serves on, and may read your alternate on that board. The Metropolitan Planning Organization is a federal entity. So, the briefest way I can explain the importance of the Transportation Planning Board is every penny that the federal government provides for transportation, whether it is for transit, whether it is for highways, whether it is for walk and bike, whatever, for maintains, your traffic signals,

any penny that comes from the Federal Transportation Trust Fund can only go to projects and programs that are in the long-range plan developed by an MPO. And that MPO for this region is the Transportation Planning Board. And the Transportation Planning Board is housed within the Council of Governments. So, in addition to what I said previously, at the Council of Governments, you all working together to collectively address the challenges on all kinds of issues, you also get the benefit of being a member of the Transportation Planning Board and ensuring that every penny of Federal Transportation Fund comes to this jurisdiction, comes to this region, comes to Virginia, comes to Northern Virginia, comes to the City of Fairfax.

So, that is also at the Transportation Planning Board. Next slide, please. So, in essence, the Council of Governments is focused on connecting the region so that the region collectively is safer, it is thriving, and it is a healthier region. So, that's the focus. Within the Transportation Planning Board, for example, in December, Mr. Peterson was very active in those discussions before the board took action. The board adopted the long-range transportation plan, the plan for this region collectively from Maryland, District of Columbia, and Northern Virginia, what transportation investments we plan to make in the next 25 years to address not just the prevailing mobility needs, but to also accommodate the growth that we expect in this region,

the growth in population, the growth in jobs, the growth in households. You probably would not be surprised that we, our region continues to be the place to go to within the country during all times of ups and downs within the economic region. It has remained, it has been so for the past at least 65 years that I've been seeing the data, and consistent with that and continuing the trend, we anticipate adding 1.2 million people to our region in the next 25 years. That is the size of the entire city of Austin. That's the size of the entire city of Philadelphia. So, we are about 6 million people today. We are going to go to 7 million people in the next 25 years. We anticipate adding a little north of 850,000 jobs.

We have about 3.8 million jobs today. We plan on hitting 4.5 million jobs in the next 25 years. So, that is what this region means, and that requires the region to work collectively on its infrastructure, whether it is water, whether it is sewer, whether it is transportation, whether it is housing, whether it is hospitals, schools, all kinds of things, and that is what the Council of Governments and the Transportation Planning Board does on every single week. Next slide, please. So, here are some examples. We have talked about the policy advantages. We have talked about the coordination advantages. But to quantify some of those benefits, within the Council of Governments, within the Transportation Planning Board,

there are a few grant programs. And these grant programs are available to the 24 members of the Transportation Planning Board. These are members, the counties and cities from Northern Virginia, from Southern Maryland, and the District of Columbia. And on this slide, you will see some most recent grants that the city has secured from the Transportation Planning Board. And whether it is you are addressing your street-neighborhood connections or developing some shared-used paths or conducting a roadway safety audit on your roadway systems. So, these are just some of the most recent ones. A little north of $3 million in grants is what the city has been able to secure. And I hope that that continues

and the city is more successful in applying and securing more technical assistance grants from the Transportation Planning Board as well as the Council of Governments. Next slide, please. Apart from applying grants, the Council of Governments is able to work with its 24-member jurisdictions and leverage the scale of purchasing, which we call the Cooperative Purchasing Program. All of us, all 24-member jurisdictions are buying bottled water, for example. Each city or each county is buying it on their own. And when they buy that on their own, there is a certain amount of quantity they buy, and they're able to negotiate a certain rate. But what if all 24 jurisdictions were to combine together? It's the same bottled water.

We could get a much lower price. That is what it is. And the city of Fairfax is participating in that. You just, on an annual basis, you buy about 170,000 gallons of diesel under this Cooperative Purchasing Program, about 130 gallons of unleaded gasoline the city buys through this Cooperative Purchasing Program. There are opportunities. There are other things that we can do, and these are opportunities that the Council of Governments provides for the city. Next slide, please. Within the Council of Governments, if you look at the revenue, I said the Council of Governments was created by the cities and counties, and there are 24 of you. The membership dues contributed to CAR makes up only 9%. We are able to use that 9%

and leverage and go after federal funding. So that is, we get $41 million by using your $9 million in membership dues. That is how we are able to bring in the scale, even on the funding. Next slide, please. So we talked about membership dues. I earlier mentioned about $3 million in grants that the city got. But the city pays COG in annual membership dues $38,000. That is close to 1 is to 9 return on investment. As a businessman, I would say that that is a good rate of return. So we appreciate you being a member. We appreciate your participation, and we certainly hope that you will continue to be an active supporter of Council of Governments. That concludes the first part of my presentation, going over what the Council of Governments is

and thanking you. I'll briefly now touch on the DMV Moves Initiative. So what is the DMV Moves Initiative? Why did it begin? One of the things that I said earlier that the region continues to be a very attractive place internationally for employers and for institutions to come, whether it's medical institutions, educational institutions, for them to come to this region. One of the things for them is the mobility. We are one of the few regions in the country that has 14 different transit systems operating in our region. So just within transit, that provides us with excellent options. Because all of us, we can't rely on the same mode of transportation every single day for every trip purpose. In our region,

every household, on average, makes eight trips per day. So if there is a household that are making eight trips per day, out of which only two are related to commuting. Six are related to living, living your life every day, whether it's shopping, taking your kids to their ballet class or to the soccer game. There are other trips happening. So all of those different trip purposes require different options. And we as a region are blessed to have so many transit options. It is a blessing, but it can also be a challenge. If it's not coordinated, it becomes very confusing. Because we all travel across jurisdictional boundaries. Your kids' soccer game might not always be in the city of Fairfax. You may have to cross over.

Or their school trip might be somewhere else. How do you get there? If your bus system operates at a different schedule and it has a different program versus your neighboring jurisdictions, it becomes a challenge. So coordination becomes important. We are lucky that you all created WMATA close to 50 years ago. And WMATA today is either, depending on the month and the ridership, either the second or the third largest transit ridership in the country. It's fantastic. Just before COVID, it used to carry 700,000 riders every single day. Just imagine if we didn't have that in what condition our roads and our mobility would be. So that is what we have. Regrettably, COVID disrupted all transit systems

and WMATA was not spared. So it was succeeding on a grand scale, but when disruption hit, it took the hit on a grand scale. It lost a lot of riders. It lost a lot of revenue. So WMATA needs funding for us to sustain. I said earlier we are going to, we are anticipating adding 1.2 million people. We are anticipating creating 800,000 plus jobs. Those things are not going to happen if people are unable to move and go where they want to go at an affordable, reliable, and efficient manner. So that is what the Council of Governments recognized. And they said, we need to have, we are a world-class region. We don't have a world-class transit. We have a lot of options, but we need to do better. So that was the purpose

of creating DMV moves. So all 24 jurisdictions, all transit agencies got together. We included WMATA and we examined what do each of our, including Q, what are the capital unfunded needs of the transit system? What are the operating funding deficits of this transit system? In order for it to be a world-class transit system. So we took about 18 months, we worked on it, and we identified what the opportunities are, what the weaknesses are, what the unfunded needs are. And the DMV moves ended up coming up with four sets of recommendations. Next slide, please. The first one, no surprise, WMATA's capital funding is underfunded. And this is critical, this is important, because WMATA's transportation system

or their rail system, particularly their signal system, an analogy that has been used during DMV moves, is they are still operating in a rotary phone system. So that system is inefficient. We can have more trains operating on our tracks. We can have greater reliability of our trains coming in on time. We can have safer train operations if we improve our signal system, if we improve our safety infrastructure within the WMATA system. So we can spend billions of dollars to add more rails, but if you don't upgrade the system, you will still be working on a rotary phone system. You won't be able to get all the advantages you get from a digital phone system. So that was one of the realizations. We worked with WMATA,

and they gave us an estimate that they need $460 million per year that would grow at about 3% from all three states. So they said, if you can give us that, in the next 15, 20 years, we will be caught up, and we can provide you with more safe, reliable, more frequent transit system. So that is one part of the DMV moves task force's recommendation. that we as a region work together with our general assemblies to come up with that funding. The second thing it said was, we can't always expect to expand our metro rail system to every corner of our region, and the region keeps growing. We are close to 4,000 square miles. Transit becomes very hard to operate over such long distances. So they said, well, BRT,

bus rapid transit systems, are more, are cheaper, equally efficient, and it gives you the flexibility of changing routes as needed. So they said, well, Northern Virginia Transportation Authority took about more than a year and developed an excellent plan of about 28 corridors within Northern Virginia where BRT systems can be built. So the TMV moves and why don't we do this? Why don't we as a region, all 24 jurisdictions and the three states come together and pick six or seven of those corridors and commit to implementing and operating them within the next six to seven years? And we will then realize the benefits of that and then we can tackle the rest. So that was his second recommendation. They picked about

seven corridors. Two of those are rated very high on the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority's BRT plan. The third recommendation was acknowledging local transit systems and the VRE and MARC systems need both operating and capital funding. They have unfunded needs. So they have identified what it is. And the last thing is the one that I mentioned earlier. Fourteen different bus systems, but they are all, they are doing a great job. They are providing excellent service, but they are also operating independently. So the idea is, could we have them coordinate and collaborate more closely so that there are time transfers? When I get off at the border of the city of Fairfax and if I need to catch

them on a WMATA bus, it should be such that when I get off this bus, in the next couple of minutes the metro bus is there as opposed to having me wait 25 minutes. That dwell time is what drives people away from transit and forces them to drive by themselves. So that, so there are many such opportunities. For example, all of the bus systems provide low transit subsidies for lower income families. But the thresholds are different. So all the bus systems provide free, free bus rides for children of certain ages. But those ages are different. So if my child wants to go meet, wants to go spend some time with the grandma, becomes hard. Once they leave the city, they are free within the city. Once they leave the city,

they have to pay. So there are opportunities for coordinating this. So that is the fourth set of recommendations that the DMV moves. Which means you don't necessarily need money to get better quality of service. you need a coordination amongst all these operators towards a consistent set of policies and operating procedures. That's the fourth set of recommendations. And I won't, next slide please. I won't go into the details. Those coordination opportunities are within six broad groups. And the Transportation Planning Board was asked if they would take the lead in convening these 14 operators and negotiating or helping them discuss among themselves and agree to work together. And the Transportation

Planning Board in January agreed to do that. So it will be an ongoing process. We hope some of these products will be made available within the first year. Others might take a little longer. But there's a commitment to do that. With that, and the next slide please. Here are the samples of the seven BRT corridors that I mentioned earlier. Two of these are in North Virginia. And the last slide is what I said is going to be the Council of Governments ask or request that the city consider supporting legislation that's being introduced in Richmond to provide the Virginia share of the $460,000. It's about $136 million per year. That would be from Virginia. So if the city would support that, we would

hopefully, not sure if it will happen this year, but we have to begin this year. It has started this year. He was a delegate back then when he served on it, but today he's the Secretary of the Finance. Mr. Sickles served on the DMV Moose Task Force. He's involved in it. So in Maryland as well, in their General Assembly, they have introduced a bill to raise that money. DC already had enacted on it, so they are well on their way. With that, I'm going to stop and be happy to answer any questions, but I, once again, thank you for the opportunity to come speak with you. Thank you so much for the presentation. It's a lot. Council Member Peterson and I sit through these meetings every month, and, you know,

I can tell you it took me a long time just to ramp up to where I understood the terms and the systems. It is a lot to know, so I have a lot of empathy for the people sitting here tonight trying to wrap their minds around what they just saw because it is, it is, it is difficult when you talk about these numbers and these systems and the enormity of it, but you're correct. It's a matter of coordination and collaboration to provide the most efficient transit we can for the entire region. So I'm going to see if there are questions. Council Member Peterson? Well, I just first want to make a comment, maybe to amplify what you've just said, and if I have my numbers straight, so first off, I think there are

something like 300 elected officials that are appointed to boards and commissions with the Washington Council of Governments. Is that? Yes, about 300 elected officials come through our doors on a monthly basis talking about climate, water, public safety, fire. your CAOs come meet with us. So that's across about 24 jurisdictions. God help us. And you do very, very well with that many different political representatives from that many different jurisdictions coming together around these cooperative and coordinating programs, and they're complex because they cut across so many different areas. and just so people are aware, there's a world that happens outside this dais for the mayor and the city council here

because we collectively sit on 21 boards, regional boards, and commissions. So this is an active part of our engagement. And just to cap also a little sense of the, well, I guess the scale you mentioned that the COG region would be equivalent to the 14 largest state in the country. I think that's Michigan or something very close to it. Close to that. Close, close enough anyway, which is equivalent to about the size of Belgium, which is the 23rd largest country in terms of economy. So we're a big kid on the block and it does speak to the degree of not just cooperation that's needed, but honestly the degree of sophistication that is needed in terms of the approach. And so really, I want to express

great thanks and gratitude for the professionalism and the skill and the ability that you and the entire team at the Council of Governments provide to help us sort through all of that because as you indicated, this is a daunting task. So again, very much appreciated. I might have a question or two in a minute after others chime in, but again, I just wanted to thank you for the support that you've been providing us. Thank you. Councilmember Hall. Thank you very much for the presentation. I was not feeling worth a lot of this information, so it's very helpful because it's not one of the boards I sit on, clearly. So I understand from the staff report that we're going to be asked later on to approve

and move forward with this without knowing what our potential share of the $430 million will be. Is there an expectation of what that number will be? Do we have any idea? I can give you an approximate estimate of what that number would be. Okay. I would only... I won't hold you to it. Yeah, yeah, okay. There are a couple reasons for it, and that is... Let me get my number here for that. And the important reason for that is the way the WOMADA bill is calculated, they use funding formula. If you use the formula for FY 2028, fiscal year 2028, you get a certain number, but those formulas are updated every month by the board, so that... When it changes, it might... When the formula is updated, there could be

a little bit of a change. So that's the point. In terms of Virginia's number, it would be about 136 million of the 460 million. For the city of Fairfax, the city of Fairfax currently pays into WOMADA. The way the Virginia money that goes to WOMADA is being handled historically, hopefully that will change, is the state provides 50% of the WOMADA subsidy and the local jurisdictions pick up the remaining 50%. It's distributed amongst the local jurisdictions. I think Mayor Reed will know more about this than I do. But the city of Fairfax's share of that 50% of the 136 million, it could be about an additional $620,000 per year. So I think the city, at least in fiscal year 2026, provided about $800,000

in its annual subsidy to WOMADA and that could go up by about $620,000 per year. Okay. And then that would be anticipated moving forward for the foreseeable future and then with roughly a 3% increase annually? Yes. And the DMV Moves also, working with your Q staff, has identified that the Q system that's operating today, it's working well. It can provide even greater service, meet more needs, and get more people to ride transit within the city and through the city. providing that enhanced level of service would require additional operating funds. That's about $220,000. So, you know, $620,000 plus $220,000, $840,000 if you want to do them all together at the same time. obviously, with the Q, WMATA can

ramp up their service fairly quickly, but with smaller systems, there is a lead time, you need to get the capital, you need to invest on the buses, you need to order the buses and they need to come, you need to have the drivers, so it takes a little bit of time. so there could be a longer pathway to achieving that full level of enhanced service within the local systems. Okay, so just rough numbers, we'd be looking at roughly $1.6 to $1.7 million annually. Currently, we're paying about $800 and some thousand? Yeah. Okay. Thank you for that information. I also was looking at the map that's on, it's not a real map, but on slide 13, it's got the kind of layout overall, of the bus priority lines.

Is there any plan or conversation regarding bringing the bus rabbit transit lanes to the city? Are we part of any of the models that have been reviewed? I want to say, I think Mr. Peterson may know more about this than I do, regrettably. I'm unable to recall there are 28 corridors that the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority has identified. I suspect there are a couple that goes through the city. I'm not sure. But the two that have currently been selected are not within the larger population of 28 corridors. So these are again seen as proof of concept, if you will. need to to be able to design, implementing, and operating a bus rapid transit system will require a lot of coordination on a number

of things, including how the bus stops are designed, what type of buses are procured, what is the fare. You would not be expecting to pay for the fare once on the bus, it would be all offline. So a number of those things. So that's what these two that have been selected are. But I can get back to you on which other corridors are within the 28 corridor list. Okay. I appreciate it. It sounds like it's a lot of what if, when if, where if, but it sounds like you're asking us for a commitment to move forward with a lot of unknowns. And I just want to make sure I understand what those unknowns might be and how those will be calculated later. Yeah. If, if this is a blueprint, this is where we would like

to go, we have modeled and we have projected what the benefits in mobility and accessibility would be if all of this happens. So the unknowns are how quickly can we get there and what the contributions, when I say contributions, it is not necessarily only financial, it is also contributions in policy, contributions in procedures, that sort of thing. How quickly can we move on that? And I say that because we recognize that these policy level actions, there's a lot of considerations. If you ask somebody like me, who is a technician and a planner, I can make some assumptions, I can run my models, I can tell you what this is. But that's not what you all deal with. There's a lot of things you have to

balance. So there are, yes, you are right that there are some unknowns, but the unknowns are how quickly can we get there and what benefits and how quickly can we avail those benefits. Yeah, well, I agree, and it sounds like with the expectation of growth in the region, you know, the upgrades that are needed to WMATA at this point in time and the 14 different bus systems that are running, I mean, it sounds like there's a ton of moving parts and I give you all a lot of credit for the work that you've done to get to this point. So thank you very much. I appreciate a great presentation. Thank you for being here. My question, and this may not be a tonight question, but I would be curious on some

of the investments that are being made, how does that translate into cost savings or cost recovery that we could potentially factor in in the future? I'd be curious about that, be it any type of green infrastructure or are there dilapidated systems in certain places that may, down the line, if we make these adjustments sooner than later, avoid some type of pitfall moving forward? Oh, absolutely. After today, I will send you a link to the DMV moves. We did produce a technical report. We touched on it briefly. I'll just cite an example. Bus rapid transit systems. Let's say, for example, you're running a bus on Route 29. And during peak period, because of the congestion, a route or a line that is

supposed to take 20 minutes, ends up taking 30 minutes, just because of congestion. So you are able to run only two frequencies during the peak hour. But if there is enough demand for three, what do you do? You end up buying a third bus, hiring a third driver, incurring the operating and maintenance cost of a third vehicle, and so that you would have three buses within that one hour. But with a BRT system, if you can provide that 20 minute assurity or reliability that it will happen, you can do it in two buses. A bus today costs about $150,000 to $200,000, just a bus alone. Operating costs. So you are saving that money. How you invest that money is up to you. you can start operating a new route to

a new destination, or you can use that money to upgrade some of your infrastructure. Let's say the green infrastructure or do safety upgrades. So there are critical advantages for some of these things. Some of these things cost upfront money, but in the longer term, they do save money. Other questions? Councilmember Peterson? Just to maybe offer a response and a question on the BRT question, because this has come before the Northern Virginia Transit Authority, Transportation Authority, and where a lot of this road mapping, no pun intended, is playing out. I think that the sense, maybe I'll put this in the form of a question, and that is for that particular program, and this relates to other ones.

What is the degree of flexibility and self determination that the individual jurisdictions have in the actual design and implementation and service levels? Because at the micro scale, this makes a very, very big difference. With BRT, there are question marks of whether there will be a reserved lane, literally shutting down a lane, for instance, and that may or may not fit everywhere. generally speaking, how should people understand the level of flexibility that we would have here in the city of Fairfax around the actual implementation of a program like that? I'm glad you asked that question. Both DMV moves, and although I was not involved in the NVTA study, but having read it, one thing that stands

out is it is not prescriptive, it is descriptive, meaning it describes, here are the systems you can have, and here are the different tiers. If you have a BRT system that is 100% dedicated bus lane, this is the benefit you will get. But if it is something less than that, you will get less benefit. So it is not prescriptive, it's not prescribing that all of these should have this, this, and that, because these are essentially cross-jurisrictional routes, it will have to differ to what is viable, what is practicable, and what is agreeable to the local jurisdiction. So I think to that extent there will be full participation and the relevant and the related jurisdiction will have the say in how these things

are designed. But there's always a give and take. If you can do this, you can get more. If for good reasons you can't do this, you'll have to settle for something less. Thank you. And then another question, you mentioned some of the growth forecasts that are driving the longer-term planning and investment expectations. And we're always trying to stay ahead of that curve by forecasting forward what those growth rates for housing demand for travel demand are. But they change over time. And so my understanding is the last time we had a regional housing forecast was like three years ago. And I'm not sure how far back we've done the most recent travel demand forecast. But I think what I would just note and

then put this in the form of a question, we're seeing some major changes in the region right now. It's unclear how long they will last, but they could be persistent. We certainly have seen major changes just in the last year in the rate of population growth, 28% less in Virginia, for instance. But we're also seeing record declines in two key areas of employment, federal jobs and then business and white-collar professionals. And those are the two leading employment indicators and variables in terms of forecast impacts on the region. And these are all happening at the same time. And those two employment indicators are down at record levels simultaneously, possibly for the first time ever. I can't recall

exactly what the history is, but it has the potential to really impact what we're looking at in the future. So you mentioned the size and the scale that was the result of some past planning efforts. When will these forecasts be updated? start to capture the changes and conditions that we have experienced within this last year and that we potentially anticipate going forward? Yeah, I'm very glad you asked that question. I didn't delve on the details of the various benefits that being a member of Council of Governments provides. One of it is we have a committee of the planning directors of all 24 jurisdictions. projections. Mr. Brooke Harding, your planning director, is a very active participant of

that committee and one of your planning staff, Eric Foreman, also participates in that. That group of planning directors of each of the 24 jurisdictions, they get together every month. In fact, their meeting is next Tuesday, next Friday. They revisit those projections. What is the population projections? What are the employment projections? What are the total household projections on an annual basis? And they end up updating it. Not all of them. Once every three to four years, the Council of Governments, what they call it as a major update, we ask all 24 jurisdictions to re-examine and give us updated projections. We do that once every four or five years. But every year, any one of those 24 member

jurisdictions is welcome to update their projections. Because that growth change, as you talked about, it is not always uniform. It might go up in Fairfax a little bit. It might go down in Montgomery County. It might come up in City of Fairfax. It may go down in City of Alexandria. So it changes. So the planning directors are the ones who are working with their economic development directors and their housing directors who are able to say, what did we see last year? What do we need to change? So they can change those projections. So we update that every year. But once in every four or five years, we update the entire region's projections. So the numbers that I cited was cooperative forecast 10.0, and that

was adopted in 2025. 2025. Yeah, in 2025. But they started working on it in 2024. So the full impact of the federal disruption was not fully captured in their crystal ball, but I'm hoping that they are all monitoring, as you said, and we will see some projections. The second thing I will say in terms of federal disruptions to federal jobs, I know the region has this reputation that they are a federal town. Not really the case, if I may say so. We have about 3.8 million jobs in our region. The number of federal jobs is around 330, 350. So about 10%. Right? So I wouldn't call it a federal city. We have lots of other things. Now, that said, there are a lot of federal procurement related jobs that are

in this region. So when you add that, the federal presence becomes very meaningful. So in the past, we have had, I think, President Reagan ushered in the privatization within the federal government. When that happened, there was a downturn in federal employment, but there was a compensatory or corresponding uptick in federal procurement. government. So the private sector jobs went up. So on the whole, I don't know if the total number of employment in the region changed as much. So these are things that we monitor on an yearly basis. Well, thank you. And if I could just maybe make two observations. First, the process by which we forecast that growth essentially is a bottom-up process that comes out of the

jurisdictions. It does not come top down out of COG. So the second thing is just to go back to your last point. The part of the uniqueness of the period we're in now, and there's been quite a bit of research done through a regional center at George Mason and the Northern Virginia Regional Commission has been doing this as well here for the Northern Virginia portion. So unlike the past, when procurements have replaced federal jobs, FTEs, and there's been a compensatory effect, procurement is down as well. So we're seeing both of these coming down simultaneously at record levels at the same time. And then as you alluded to, there's a multiplier effect because for each dollar that goes through either the job or the

procurement, there's a ripple effect that goes through the economy that is dependent upon that. The consequence of that is a magnifying of these two things that are going down at the same time. And I think that's why there is quite a bit of interest and concern about trying to get a better understanding of what impact this really has because the early indications are things like household growth in any particular jurisdiction can actually be significantly affected by the changes that are taking place. So it's just a pitch, I think, for us in the city when it's our turn to submit inputs here. And Conti, when you go forward with the aggregation of these, to just be sure we're on top of these issues

because they're being spotted as potentially significant things. Thank you. Any other questions on DMV moves, which is what we're going to be addressing here shortly? Any other questions? Conti, thank you so much. Thank you. This has been very, very helpful. Thank you. We'll move on to the adoption of the agenda. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? Councilman? I move to adopt the agenda as presented. Is there a second? Second. The motion's been made and seconded. A roll call vote. Councilmember Amos? Aye. Councilmember Hall? Aye. Councilmember Hardy-Chandler? Aye. Councilmember Peterson? Aye. Councilmember Bates? Aye. Councilmember McQuillan? Aye. Motion passed unanimously. We will go on to initial

general public comment. I had nine people sign up by 5 o'clock p.m. today, and if there's anybody else in the room that wants to speak, we'll have another option on agenda item number eight to speak on any items that's not on the public hearing. So I will call our first speaker up, which is Sherry DeFranzo. Honorable Mayor, members of the City Council, my name is Sherry DeFranzo. I reside at 3552 Sutton Heights Circle, Fairfax. I'm here this evening on behalf of the Sutton Heights community to endorse the introduction of an ordinance to amend Chapter 38, Article 2, to amend the city's noise regulations. Sutton Heights is a new townhome community located directly north of the Pickett Road tank farm.

In 2025, a plan was approved to replace 10 fuel tanks with two large warehouse buildings totaling approximately 31,000 square feet. The development is in close proximity to our community as well as Barrister's Keep and Pickett's Reserve. We're deeply concerned about the increased noise that will inevitably result from these warehouse operations. While a traffic study was not required for this by-right development, we anticipate that truck traffic patterns will shift significantly with the arrival of 53-foot tractor-trailers. We believe this will worsen traffic congestion and noise along the Pickett Road corridor between Route 236 and Route 50. Developers estimate 100 to 150 trucks per day, matching current tanker volume.

However, unlike tankers that arrive empty and leave full, warehouses require separate inbound and outbound logistics. This will likely result in a much higher volume of tractor-trailer traffic than currently exists. According to 2024 Virginia bidirectional traffic volume data, daily traffic on Pickett Road is substantial. Residents can already hear tankers and modified vehicles clearly from within their homes. Recent unofficial readings using a NIOSH sound level meter app recorded car traffic at 63 to 73 decibels, while empty tankers reached 85 decibels, and cement trucks hit 87 decibels. The proposed amendments to the maximum permissible sound pressure levels in industrial districts are essential to

protecting our residential environment. Currently, idling diesel trucks emit approximately 85 decibels. Under the proposed ordinance, noise levels from an industrial zone would be limited to 72 decibels during the day and 60 decibels at night when measured in a residential district. This change, along with the clarification of day and night, is vital to mitigating the impact of constant reversing alarms and idling engines at the loading docks. Current noise levels along the Pickett Road corridor already exceed healthy limits. The addition of significant tractor-trailer traffic will only worsen this issue. We strongly endorse the proposal to limit maximum permissible sound pressure levels to protect the

health and well-being of our community. Thank you for your time. Our next speaker is Amelia Nicholson. Ms. Shinneberry, we can't see the clock. I have the time. I'm not sure what's going on. We noticed that last time, so we're not sure if there's some kind of... Let me see if it shows. Let me see if it shows. Do you know there's a... I have a timer, so it'll buzz. Okay. Yeah. Amelia Nicholson, 3548 Sutton Heights Circle. Honorable Mayor and members of City Council. I'm here as the Vice President of Sutton Heights Homeowners Association, which is the southernmost residential neighborhood on Pickett Road, and ask that the City Council address the noise that is steadily getting worse. With the tank farm redevelopment to

logistical warehouses, it will become even worse. This is the main artery from the Beltway and 66 joining 236 of 29 and 50. So along with all the cars, there are plenty of tanker trucks serving the tank farm daily, day and night, delivery trucks to the shops and the mall, the school bus depot, businesses that line Pickett Road, Woodson High School at the southern end of 26, cement trucks from Old Pickett Road, traffic to Home Depot on Old Pickett and the post office. We would like to encourage the City to go ahead and amend the City noise regulations. This is what we would like to see from the study of the noise. Agree on operational times, not 24 hours, for the new warehouses and the tank farm, based on an agreed limit to the number

of trucks a day. Operating the warehouses during business hours, as our community will be about 250 foot from the new buildings, and the beeping of reversing trucks through the night, idling trucks, trucks arriving, trucks leaving, will be heard easily by residents and impact our sleep. Measure the noise of the 18-wheeler coming up the five-degree gradient, which is what is proposed at the tank farm. Monitor the noise of the tanker trucks when they downshift with air brakes at the light right outside the houses bordering Pickett Road. Monitor the speed and thus the noise of the cement trucks at the northern end of Pickett Road as they approach the hills. Monitor the effect of the noise on the babies and young

children who live in the houses bordering Pickett Road, and those in Sutton Heights that will hear the delivery trucks. Consider the limitation of truck deliveries on Pickett Road and elsewhere in Fairfax City to the hours of 8am to 6pm, so children will not be woken at night. The most annoying noise is the muscle cars with modified musclers that race at night waking up the communities, and we suggest a speed camera on Pickett Road. With the fast increase in technology and not knowing who is to lease these warehouses, we ask that the noise regulations also look at the new problem of delivery drones. We believe that the city has the authority to regulate the takeoff and landing of drones, and ask that they investigate this and

act accordingly before it's too late and we have difficulty stopping them. It's a real threat to the residents living near the warehouses, and this could be a thing of the near future for the last mile delivery. They are not small and they are not quiet. We respectfully ask that you please consider those living on Pickett Road and how the increase in noise and traffic impacts us. With the increase in the traffic from the tank farm redevelopment, we see this problem getting worse. Thank you. Our next speaker is Art Hammerschlag. Good evening, Mayor and members of the City Council. I'm Art Hammerschlag, City Resident at 3843 Far Oak Circle. I'm speaking tonight on behalf of Fairfax City residents for smarter growth and to voice our strong support for the

Wheeler Sherwood Center. Our support is based on a number of factors. One, Green Acres is totally inadequate as a senior center, and while the city has made a valiant effort to repurpose the old elementary school, in reality it is somewhere between a joke and a disgrace. Fairfax City residents deserve better. Two, the new facility is a first-class addition to the recreation facilities in the city. It will make a, it will serve city residents for years to come, and this is the kind of facility that will make Fairfax City a desirable place to live well into the future. Three, there's the issue of commitment and continuity. The city has promised this facility to its residents. We have been following its progress

and are eagerly awaiting its opening. It would be inappropriate at best and mean-spirited at worst to deny your constituents what they have been promised. If you do vote to kill this project, we will want to know what is your plan to replace Green Acres? What will it cost? When will it be available? If you can't answer these questions, there will be a lot of very unhappy seniors. Four, this project is the result of a partnership between Fairfax City and Fairfax County. The city has committed itself to this project. To kill this project would be a serious breach of our commitment. The county is the most important of all our local government partners. Pulling out of our commitment. Our commitment to this to the county would

damage our relationship for years to come. The old saying is that a man's word is his bond. I hope that is true for the city's word as well. Lastly, canceling this project would leave indefinitely two abandoned boarded up buildings on a prominent corner of the city. A sad and lasting testament to a very poor decision. We understand that you as a council get pulled in many different directions. We hope that in this case you will make the right decision, the honorable decision, the decision to proceed with a project that has been under development for many years, a long-standing promise to your residents. In closing, let me say we hope you will hear what city residents are saying. We want this facility. I sincerely thank you for your service.

Our next speaker is Jennifer Passy. Jennifer Passy. Good evening, Mayor, Council members, and members of the community and city staff. My name is Jennifer Passy. I reside at 10109 Farmington Drive, Fairfax. And I'm here once again to speak in strong support of the Willard Sherwood Community Center project. I have sat in your seat. I have been on the Planning Commission and I was the Planning Commission rep to the PRAB. And we have been on the Planning Commission. I'm here with the Planning Commission, which was over 10 years ago. So we've been talking about this project for a very long time. This project represents far more than a building. It represents a commitment to community, one that reflects the values of Fairfax City and the real needs of the people who live here.

A community center at Willard Sherwood would provide a shared space in a premier location for families, seniors, youth, and neighbors to connect, learn, and thrive. It is an investment in health, inclusion, and long-term quality of life. As you embark later this evening on a work session regarding this project, it is important to remember a key fact. This land is owned by Fairfax County. The vision we are discussing today exists because of a collaboration between the city, the county, and the residents who care deeply about this neighborhood and the city. That partnership is not automatic and it cannot be taken for granted. If we do not continue working collaboratively with Fairfax County, the county retains the right to move forward with other development options on this site.

Those alternatives could include uses that may meet county objectives, but do little to serve the needs or the character of Fairfax City. In other words, the choice before us is not simply community center or nothing. The real choice is whether we actively shape the future of this land together or allow decisions to be made without the city's voice or vision at the center. The Willard Sherwood Community Center is a thoughtful, community-driven proposal that balances county ownership with city priorities. It reflects listening, compromise, and shared responsibility. Walking away from that collaboration risks losing not just this project, but meaningful influence over what ultimately happens on this land.

So tonight, I urge you to ask questions. I think we should have deep discussions in the work sessions that you have amongst yourselves, and continue to get input from community leaders as well as residents and city staff. Supporting the Willard Sherwood Community Center is not just the best option, it is the most responsible one. Let's continue working together with Fairfax County to ensure this land becomes something that truly benefits the city now and for generations to come. Thank you. Our next speaker is Tom Ross. Tom Ross. Tom Ross. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Tom Ross. I reside at 3520 Country Hill Drive, Fairfax. I want to start with a quote which I think will frame what we're to talk about tonight.

A quote was sent to me by a friend of mine earlier today that I saw. The decisions we make are for the future. A society grows great when old men and women plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit. Think about that for a moment. Tonight I speak as a citizen of this community who has been involved in civic affairs since my arrival in 1980 and continues to care deeply about decisions that will shape our future for the next 50 years. I speak in support of fully funding the Willard Sherwood Community Center. Beginning in 1993 as a young professional and later as an assistant director with the National Park Service, I chaired the city's Parks, Recreation, and Culture Program subcommittee of the Fairfax 2020 Commission,

formed to provide a roadmap and perspective on our future. Created and supported by city council, this citizen-led group, chaired by Dale Lastina, involving literally hundreds of citizens of all ages and backgrounds from every part of the city, made a wide range of recommendations in 1994. Today the work of that commission is reflected in the city we see today. A healthy, vibrant, small city with a sense of community that is unsurpassed. That report recognized that the city was growing in population and the future would be more urbanized and much more diverse, and so it has. We clearly recognized and the council endorsed the need to take the necessary steps to prepare for that future. One of our key findings was the value and importance of park, recreation, and cultural programs

in building community and specifically called for the establishment of a performing cultural arts center and a community center. So yes, the vision of a community center is more than 30 years old. Today we have the Sherwood Center thanks to the incredible contributions of the Sherwood family, and we are closer than ever to having a valuable health community center done in partnership with Fairfax County to help create the kind of community that the 2020 commission envisioned. You, as our elected representatives, have a chance to help envision our future. Yes, it will require a financial commitment, and I recognize this will place a burden on our taxpayers and myself. But as an almost 80-year-old, a few months to go, I'm not there yet,

I still believe in the need to invest in our community, in future generations of all ages and backgrounds, and in our future. I believe the majority of people in this community do as well. And as we invest in schools, libraries, infrastructure, and public safety, we should also invest in our community's future through the fully funding the Wilder Sherwood Center that is important to our future and those of our children and grandchildren. Let's get this done. Thank you. Our next speaker is John Russell. Thank you. Madam Mayor, members of the City Council, my name is Cappy Russell. The clerk has my exact address, but I live in the Daniels-run Woods neighborhood. Tonight I want to speak to you about my support for the planned revitalization

of the Willard Sherwood Community Center, which I understand you'll be working on later tonight. To the extent that you are counting supporters for the project, let me raise my hand and say that personally, selfishly, I would love a full-size fitness center a mile down the road from my home. This is precisely the kind of amenity that residents of all ages would take notice of and think fondly of and be grateful to have. Who doesn't want affordable, accessible recreation? But of course this project is about more than just me and my narrow self-interest. I come to you tonight hoping that you view your position in city government as more than a bean counter or a pollster. To sit on that dais is to have a privileged vantage point into the future of the city.

To see the whole of our interests, present and future, even if we can't see them clearly ourselves, and maybe especially when we can't see them clearly ourselves. So in that light, let me suggest to you that Willard Sherwood is much more than a nice gym for me and those like me. It's also an opportunity for our city to reaffirm our partnership with the county. This partnership in and of itself is something of an ethereal or an invisible thing, but its effects on us are very real and very tangible, and they're all around us. They're in our schools with our emergency response arrangements, most impressively to my mind, in our library. So we can all see and enjoy the benefits of projects on which the city and the county work hand in hand,

and I think Willard Sherwood fits very neatly in that lineage. So I hope you will preserve and further that partnership by supporting the Willard Sherwood project, funding it, not just because I need a gym today, but because you can see very clearly that the future of Fairfax City is brighter when we go into it alongside our friends in the county. Thank you for your time and your consideration. Our next speaker, Doug Cox. Oh, does it work up here either? I got it. Okay, okay. I thought it just wasn't invisible on that side. All right. Good evening, City Council. Doug Cox, Fairview. Actually, it's that time of year for budgeting. You know, what got me out of my house and started showing up at these things

is because I didn't like the size of the check I was paying to the city. You know, back in 2022, I was paying $4,926. 2026, $6,060. 29.11% increase in four years. Now, when you're budgeting, folks, if I know everyone, a lot of folks go, oh, it's your assessed value. It's not the assessed value that's the problem, guys. So if your assessed value goes up 5%, annual inflation is 3%. I accept there's a lot of things that go up more than the 3%, like fuel and stuff like that. But if you have an expanding tax base, that makes up for it. You have assessments. You have expanding tax base. You have real estate rates. For the last four years, we have gone up on all three simultaneously. Tax rate has gone up every year.

Rate. Assessments have gone 5%, 6%. And then the tax base has expanded. It should never be that way. Fairfax City does not have a money problem. We have a spending problem. If you look at 2024 when our tax rate was 1.03, we would have been the fourth most expensive county in Virginia. Real estate tax. There are a lot of cities that are more expensive, like 13 or so, but they're all independent school districts. So it's apples to oranges. Get a handle on the money and where it's being spent. Look at these things. $25,000 for furniture down there by the fountains. Two years in a row, $25,000. There's seven things of furniture down there that cost $6,300 at Home Depot. Where'd the money go? Where's the money going for total maximum daily load and encasement?

Old Robin led a contract, $327,000, according to Engage Fairfax. But $600,000 was allocated. Where'd all the money go? Audit. You guys are at a bit of a disadvantage because over the last four years, we increased staffing by 11% in the city. That's big bucks. Before you decide projects, make sure it benefits the majority of residents. Start doing metrics and cost-benefit analysis. How many people use Willard Sherwood right now from the city? Heck, if I know. Been there once. That's just me. My kid went there for an evaluation. All good. But how many people are actually using the thing? How many people are using green acres? What I've not seen yet is what's the cost of city residents for Willard Sherwood?

$54 million? How much of that's financed? So what's the end number that we're paying? By the time that debt's paid off, $70,000, $80,000, $80 million? What are we paying? Thank you. Our next speaker, Sabrina DeWald. Good evening, Councilor Mayor. I actually came here because I want to talk about the snow removal and the whole issues. That's a whole other issue that's still being dealt with. I'm still dealing with the city on that. And also the trash can issue. But really, people aren't realizing I'm going to change because the Sherwood Center, people don't realize that's a minimum of $0.05 added to our tax bill for $100 on our assessed value. Minimum. It can go easily up to $0.09, higher than that.

But in reality, are you guys going to pay for my assessed value? The additional tax dollars they're spent? You have to look at our return on investment. We buy houses and we pay the taxes on our investment. Your house is your biggest lifetime investment that you are going to buy in your life. What am I getting back in return for those tax dollars? Really, looking at the city, someone told me, find the good in the city. Well, I really still have been digging for that good because lately there have been shortfalls and shortfalls and shortfalls. And the council just sits here and approves everything. And that looks at the dollar and how it's going to affect. You have to look back at the dollar.

There are other daily increases. Dominion just increased their rate of electricity, which affects the entire city. That electricity rate hike is not $10 a month. It's reflecting to be over $50 a month. I did the math. I compared my kilowatt usage for January this year versus last year. It was less. But my bill was $50 more. That is the reflection of daily expenses that are reflected on everyday people. Also, Fairfax Water is currently evaluating a raising hike in their rate of water. So what are we going to do? You're going to add more tax dollars to us. But every other way, they're pulling more costs to our daily life, whether it be electricity, water. But taxes, you know, that's something that has gone up and gone up.

But what are we getting back in return? There's nothing. And people speaking here who support Sherwood, great. I would offer you to pay the increased tax dollars. Look at the dollars, not the numbers. It's needs versus wants. We really need to visit that and slow down and think, not just have a tie and pass a measure because, oh, it sounds good. Let's relate the dollars and how that really affects our everyday life. Thank you for your time. And I urge you to reconsider the Sherwood Center as a no. Thank you. Our last speaker is Toby Sorenson. Good evening, Mayor, City Council, staff. My name is Toby Sorenson. I live at 10137 Spring Lake Terrace. I come here tonight because I am so excited to listen to the presentation about the new Willard

Sherwood Health and Community Center. From what I've seen online, it is a beautiful building and will be a wonderful addition to Fairfax City. This project has been a long time coming. When I was on the Green Acres Feasibility Study Committee many long years ago, I would never have imagined the possibility of having a comprehensive community center at the Willard site. The committee knew it was a great location, but the site belonged to the county, and they were actively using it. But here we are on the verge of having this project begin in a practically perfect location near Old Town, the public library, Van Dyke Park, the police station, and three schools and public transportation. A state-of-the-art community center combined with a new and improved county health department.

Preschool opportunities. When people talk about who it will serve, it will serve everybody. And I know that that health center is used by a lot of people. I work part-time at Fairfax High. When kids don't have their shots, I say, just go down a half a mile down the street. You can get your shots for free. People use these facilities, and we deserve a beautiful facility. So, as you can tell, I'm a huge supporter. But I'd like to complete my remarks by sharing an email that a friend and neighbor sent to me because she described her support so well. I firmly believe now is the time to act. Fairfax City needs to continue to modernize amenities, which in turn will support local businesses, real estate market, etc.

As a resident, I believe we want to continue to support the Old Town Fairfax term, while at the same time providing resources, which most communities in Fairfax County offer. Fairfax residents, as well as county residents, need the availability of a local fitness center and community center. Young families continue to move into city neighborhoods. The need for these amenities is great. I am in support of the new Willard-Sherwood proposal. Again, I'm really looking forward to tonight's presentation, and thank you for listening. We can move on to the consent agenda. All right, then. Are there any questions on any of the items on the consent agenda? Council Member Peterson. I have a clarifying question on the noise item.

It's been an active month for noise. And I know there have been a number of things that have come up related to this. One of them is the issue of snowblowers. Another we've heard a lot of comments about tonight, which is kind of this intersection between transportation and noise. I wonder if you could just help us sort of understand how to understand the current ordinance proposal that we have and what may have changed since the last time we spoke about this. Sure. Just on those two issues, because there have been a number of changes. I can do a brief summary of the changes. That would be welcome. That would be welcome. Now, it won't be exhaustive. I encourage everybody to read the draft ordinance.

It is intentionally set for public hearing at the end of March to allow for public comment, public input. It is the first change to the noise ordinance since 2010 when jurisdictions in Virginia had to make changes to the noise ordinance because of Virginia's Supreme Court decision. A number of the changes are kind of tinkering around the edges, but there are some changes that are more substantive. The first thing I want to say is the number of track noise complaints in the city has been relatively constant, and they're focused on certain types of noise, loud music in parties, commercial vehicle deliveries, trash removal activities, and animal noise, and then a litany of miscellaneous complaints.

One of the difficulties with the existing noise ordinance, and frankly with the suggested modifications to noise ordinance, and it's the same across every jurisdiction is many complaints occur outside normal business hours. So enforcement ends up being primarily the responsibility of police departments. And the other issue is that many noise violations are intermittent in nature, so by the time anybody shows up to enforce, the noise has either been abated or the issue is resolved. So just going through some of the changes, and these are the most common issues that have been arising. So one of the things that everyone needs to remember is that by living in a suburban area, there's a certain level of ambient noise.

So unless you're going to have completely quiet areas, there's going to be a certain level of noise that you have to tolerate as far as your daily living. We have included a number of definitions because there were areas in the previous noise regulations that were a little too subjective, so we put some more standards in for that. We also have clarified responsibilities for enforcement. It will be centralized under the city manager's office, and the manager will work with staff on which department or departments are appropriate to enforce. We've also updated the penalties for noise violations. There's always been a sort of a structure with criminal and civil penalties, but we've clarified that, what the violations are,

and we've included the ability to seek injunctive release and a graduated level of enforcement for, I call them the frequent flyers on noise violations, and luckily we do not have many of those within the city. And then there's also, and at least one or two other jurisdictions have tried this and decided that we would try this as well, residents will have the ability to go to a magistrate in particularly egregious cases where the city is not able to enforce because we are not on scene or not able to witness the violation, go to a magistrate and see if a magistrate will swear out a warrant for a violation. So it's another avenue available, again, for the egregious cases. We have updated the exceptions and exemptions from noise regulations,

and we've added the ability for the city manager to temporarily suspend enforcement of noise regulations. You asked the question about snow. That came up this last time, and there were comments that Fairfax County in their noise ordinance specifically exempts snow removal activities from noise regulations and allows it essentially 24-7. The comment that I had on that was the county has the benefit of having a number of areas that are not densely populated, more rural, and in discussing this with some of the county enforcement people, they have had issues with certain areas where there were individuals or companies that did their snow removal activities during the night, even when there was no pressing need for it.

So what we've included in this draft would be the manager's ability to waive enforcement on selective areas of the noise ordinance, in particular on snow. So with a storm that we just had recently where it was difficult to get contractors and others and sort of the repeat need to remove snow and ice, the manager would have the ability for up to seven days to waive certain provisions of the noise ordinance. So we have that in there. We've updated that, and one of the speakers who came up and spoke earlier, we've updated the maximum permissible sound levels in the various zoning districts, introducing a differing standard for daytime and nighttime. And I know the hours seem somewhat arbitrary.

These, in discussions with other jurisdictions, these hour distinctions seem to have worked well. So the suggestion would be is that we try that, and if that doesn't work, we can certainly try something different. But ultimately, on the noise pressure levels between areas, it requires somebody to stand with a noise meter and measure it, and they have to monitor the violation. The city has to see the violation. I mentioned about residents being able to go and attempt to swear out a warrant, but it requires staffing. It requires enforcement, and those are issues that every jurisdiction faces. So we'll talk about that more as this proceeds through public hearing. And then specific areas. So amplified sounds and music.

Currently, the prohibition on playing music or, for lack of a better term, blaring music equipment, radios, et cetera, the restriction starts at 11 o'clock daily p.m. and ends at 7 a.m. the next day. The proposed ordinance, and a couple of our neighboring jurisdictions that have done this, would remove the time restrictions and instead prohibit any such sound that's plainly audible in another person's residence with the doors and windows closed. That's a differing standard, but, again, it's something that seems to have worked better in terms of enforcement. Animal noise, again, a minor point. We've changed in the proposal. We've changed it to conform with Fairfax County requirements. The number one complaint, as you can imagine, is dog barking, and not necessarily dog barking,

but repetitive dog barking for 10, 15, 20 minutes at a time. Obviously, exceptions for if an animal's in distress and other exceptions for that. Loading and unloading of vehicles and related matters, the commercial vehicles. Currently, it's restricted to in-residential areas and after 10 p.m. daily. The proposed ordinance would change the standard to one of noise associated with the activity being plainly audible by person in the residence, doors and windows closed. Across property boundaries, that one would have an hourly restriction to commence at 9 p.m. daily. So the loading and unloading of commercial vehicles would be time-restricted and area-restricted. And then trash collection. We get several complaints about trash collection within the city.

The city's trash standards are actually more stringent than all of our surrounding jurisdictions. We are not proposing any change to the hours. What we are doing, however, is adding language regarding the emptying and moving of trash dumpsters to make it more clear that it's not just the collecting of trash. It's the emptying of dumpsters, the moving of dumpsters. And then the last thing, there was discussion in the work session about possibly banning gas-powered leaf blowers. You'll recall that staff was opposed to that. I know that the city of Alexandria did that. Regardless of the arguments that people have made, they have a peculiarity in their charter that they believe allows them to do it.

I think the best indication of the fact that jurisdictions believe that that's problematic is that there have been bills introduced both in last year's General Assembly and this year's General Assembly to give localities the power. We just found out that for this year, both the Senate bill and the House bill were defeated again. So our position is it's questionable whether there's authority to do that. Staff continues to look with the city fleet at making it moving toward electric and taking advantage of those opportunities. But that's a separate issue from the noise. The other question that you didn't raise but some of the speakers did about noise from vehicles, there already are robust standards in the noise ordinance for vehicles.

You're not allowed to race vehicles. You're not allowed to rev them. You're not allowed to disable mufflers. You're not allowed to retard the spark plugs to allow the engines to be noisy. We all know that those vehicles, regardless of noise ordinances, are everywhere. That is an enforcement question. It's a difficult enforcement question because, as you can imagine, the vehicles aren't stationary, so they're writing off. And so people observe the violation, and by the time anybody shows up, you know, those are gone. Those were illegal before, and they are illegal now. The penalties are higher. So if individuals are caught and cited and they continue to do it, if that ever happens, again, there are mechanisms for dealing with that.

Idling of trucks. That was another concern that I think some of the residents said. There is already a prohibition, and there will be a prohibition for longer than three minutes unless the vehicle needs to run for refrigeration or other reasons related to the operation. So I would suggest that these changes are reasonable. Again, it's the balance between sort of the environment that we live in and the need to understand that there is a certain level of noise that everyone has to tolerate, but also modernizing and putting all of the provisions in one section of the city code to the extent possible. We don't anticipate that it's going to take another 16 years to amend this again. I think we're going to see, assuming that the council were to enact this, I think we're going to see that hopefully this is a little bit of a living document

and we'll continue to learn from what other jurisdictions are doing and what we're able to do under law. And with that, I'll stop my 15-minute discussion on what was supposed to be a couple minutes. Happy to take any questions. Councilmember Amos. No, thank you for that. That was a great summation. I had a comment and then just two questions. First comment is when I worked on the county side, one of the most difficult things I had to deal with was noise complaints, specifically because of the enforcement. It's extremely difficult to track, often not stationary. I remember one of the most intense cases was Costco on West Ox Road, and that was just impossible. You had trucks coming in at 4 or 5 in the morning,

and code enforcement went out to track the decibel levels at that location. And it just gets more difficult when you're working with industrial zoning or commercial partners. So greatly appreciate that. My two questions, one, going back to what you mentioned about the dumpsters, is that inclusive of services that are not provided by the city, like American Disposal, who operate at our multifamily complexes? There's no differentiation. Okay. The noise is the noise. It's not the company or the type of use. So a dumpster is a dumpster. Perfect. And the only other thing, because it was one of the comments that was mentioned, was is there any anticipation of concern with drone noise? Is that something that's anticipated, something that we should be prepared for?

Just some clarity on that. We've looked into issues of drones in the past. First of all, I would say that because one of the good things, I think, about living in the Washington metropolitan area is a lot of this is preempted by federal and state. The ability of localities to regulate drones, and again, without even doing the research, I know that there are significant restrictions on drone flying. I think a lot of the drones that people see flying around, there are some exceptions for hobby, flying, et cetera, but I think a lot of the drone activity that folks see is probably illegal, but it's not anything the city would enforce. That's federal and state. And, in fact, you can get into some pretty significant issues with the FAA,

depending on how high and where you're flying. So in terms of regulating it from a noise ordinance standpoint, again, I don't think there's enough experience with drone flying to really have a standard. I did, independently of this question that came up, I have done some research sort of on what some other jurisdictions are doing. There's no regulation, at least locally. So I think it's evolving, and this goes to what I'm talking about, with that this document will probably go through evolution over the next few years as technology changes. I was going to ask about other jurisdictions, so thank you for answering that. Yeah, we'll have a more robust report on that as we move forward. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And thank you for addressing some of the questions that were brought up by some of the speakers. If maybe you can just answer this a little bit more clearly. So the by-right development that is being considered, it seems like there's some concern that that might bring trucks around at different hours, different times. Are you fairly confident that with what our noise ordinance is now proposed to be that we will be able to target some of those concerns and be able to reach out to the individuals that are running the businesses and that type of thing to remind them of what the noise ordinance is when it's enacted? So enforcement is a complicated question with uses like this.

I would argue that, and I don't want to get too much into the detail. We haven't really gotten into that use yet, and there are things that we may want to do that we don't necessarily need to talk about right now. I think it's very easy to argue that these enforcement things are a noise issue. There are other avenues. I mean, access to roadways. There's many ways that these things can be regulated and controlled. And without getting into the specific of this particular operation, you know, these are by-right projects, and they're on a road that's already very busy, and, you know, the property zone industrial heavy. So there are limitations on what the city can do, but I think staff is hearing some of the comments and will always look to, you know, try to protect the interest of residents where possible.

Thank you very much. Other questions? Other questions? Okay. So are there any items council would like pulled from the consent agenda? Okay. Seeing none, is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? I move to approve the consent agenda item 6A through J as presented and the accompanying motions in the staff reports. Second. A motion's been made by Council Member Hardy-Chandler and seconded by Council Member Peterson. Are there any items council would like pulled for additional discussion? Seeing none. A roll call vote. Council Member McQuillan? Aye. Council Member Bates? Aye. Council Member Peterson? Aye. Council Member Hardy-Chandler? Aye. Council Member Hall? Aye. Council Member Amos? Aye.

Motion passed unanimously. We will go to the public hearing. We only have one public hearing tonight, which is a public hearing and council action on the adoption of the Urban Forest Master Plan and PRIN's UFMP. I'm going to recognize Anna Safford, Urban Forester, to provide the staff presentation. Thank you. I'm joined by our consultant, Matt Urb from Davie Resource Group and Dr. Garrett Wolfe from Marcel Day. In today's presentation, I'll begin with some acknowledgments for those that have participated in the effort of this planning process. Then I'll provide an overview of the project background, goals and timeline, engagement activities, followed by an overview of the Urban Forest Master Plan itself, during which we'll touch on minor changes that have been made since our last presentation in December.

And then we'll wrap up with the Urban Forest Master Plan implementation, as I know that was of interest and there were questions around that during those December presentations. And then, of course, open up for questions and discussion. So, again, before getting into the presentation itself, I wanted to acknowledge those that have participated in the project over the last 18 months. The city project team was led by myself, Anna Safford, Urban Forester, and supported by Paul Nafty, our planning division chief, with his planning expertise, and Sophia Chapin, our stewardship coordinator, who kept us all in the community up to date and engaged throughout the process. We had a robust steering committee made up of our directors of community development and planning, public works, and parks and recreation.

Our two city arborists, CJ Crabtree and Christopher Fleming, our sustainability division and stormwater staff, as well as Rusty Russell from the Environmental Sustainability Committee, who's also the liaison to the Parks and Rec Advisory Board. And then, of course, many thanks to the boards and commissions, as well as to you all, in engaging in many presentations and discussions along the way. And, again, the project consultant team is made up of Davie Resource Group, Marcel Day, Wetland Studies and Solutions, WSSI. And, of course, many thanks to the community. The urban forest, as we know, is of strong interest and passion to this community, and so I really appreciate their participation along the way.

So, although the project kicked off 18 months ago, the concept for this project started as an action in our 2035 comprehensive plan to develop and implement an urban forest management plan. Without an urban forester on staff, in 2021, the planning division took a first step at conducting a urban forestry program evaluation report led by our city's sustainability coordinator. That identified some key recommendations. First, it reiterated the need for an urban forest management plan, as well as recommended the hiring of an urban forest manager to lead and implement the urban forest management plan. It also identified the Stormwater Utility Fund, which was newly adopted as a funding mechanism to help support urban forestry.

After being hired in 2023, the city applied and was awarded a U.S. Forest Service grant that helped support the Sprout Initiative. The Sprout Initiative was designed to both develop, as well as then move forward with implementation of an urban forest management plan, which we will touch on more tonight. But again, even though the project has been going on for 18 months, there's much background as to how we have gotten here today. And with that, I'm going to hand it over to Garrett to go over Project Goals. Thanks, Anna. As you all are likely aware, this project has produced the first-ever urban forest master plan for the city of Fairfax. It will serve as a 20-year roadmap for the protection, regulation, growth, and management of the urban forest,

as well as engagement with the community for urban forest stewardship. The project involved five pieces outlined on the screen, which include assessing existing conditions, engaging the community, identifying the vision and goals, developing objectives, strategies, and actions, and providing implementation guidance. The plan is grounded in qualitative and quantitative data about the existing conditions of the city of Fairfax's public trees and tree canopy and the non-native invasive species that are present. Community engagement, which was conducted throughout the process, provided valuable insight into the views and priorities of city residents. Building upon the findings of the existing conditions assessment and the community engagement efforts,

the vision, goals, and priorities for the urban forest were developed. The objectives, strategies, and actions turn the vision and goals into implementable tasks that can be incorporated into city operations and community initiatives. And finally, the implementation guidance identifies how and when to enact key plan components, staff roles for supporting the plan, and metrics for success. Together, these five elements ensure that the plan accurately represents the current conditions, captures the community's views and priorities, and provides actionable recommendations to the city. Next slide. This project was completed in two phases. The first phase, shown on the slide here, focused on data gathering and analysis.

Phase one activities included the existing conditions assessment, non-native species assessment, an operations review, public meetings one and two, stakeholder interviews, tabling at public events, a public survey, and development of the urban forest master plan outline. Updates were provided to city council, boards, and commissions throughout last fall. Phase one lasted from June 2024 through early 2025. Next slide. Phase two, which began in spring of 2025, immediately following the conclusion of phase one, and is now nearing its end, as we're here to present these final presentations to you. Phase two involved synthesizing the findings of the assessments and public input gathered during phase one.

These takeaways were used to develop key plan content, such as vision, goals, objectives, strategies, and action items. Phase two also included two additional public meetings, tabling, and additional public events, and the preparation of several draft versions of the urban forest master plan. While the plan drafts were being developed and refined, we've been providing updates via emails and presentations to boards, commissions, city council, and the public to keep you all aware of the project and its progress. Next slide. As illustrated in previous slides, public engagement was an important part of the plan throughout both project phases. Engagement activities included the four public meetings, stakeholder interviews,

bi-monthly steering committee meetings, and a public survey. Together, these events engaged over 150 individual stakeholders. Additional stakeholders were involved through updates to boards and commissions, tabling at various city events, an urban forest photo contest, and as visitors to the Engage Fairfax webpage, of which we had over 2,700 unique visitors throughout the project period. The draft urban forest master plan was available for public review from October 6th to October 29th, 2025. Notably, at public meeting number three in late June 2025, attendees reviewed the draft objectives and strategies and voted on their top priorities. The input received from this activity is highlighted in the plan.

Public input played an important role in revisions to the draft plan content. As a result of public feedback, the plan's objectives and strategies were clarified to improve legibility and accessibility to the community. The community also demonstrated a consistent desire to learn more. In response to this, call-out boxes have been included throughout the plan to provide additional information and context. Species names were also provided on all photos of plants. More details on the community's input are provided in the What Do We Want chapter of the plan, and we'll come back to this in a few slides. A full summary of the engagement process is provided in Appendix D. All engagement activities were tracked in an engagement database

for staff to have as a resource in the future. I will turn it over now to Matt Erb to provide an overview of the Urban Forest Master Plan. Thank you, Eric. So now that we've provided the background on the project, we'll highlight some of the key pieces of the Urban Forest Master Plan. The Urban Forest Master Plan is organized around the four phases of the adaptive management process. These phases are illustrated on the graphic on the screen. Each of the main chapters of the plan addresses one of these questions. The first step, what do we have? Creates a baseline for the planning process by gathering information about current conditions. The second step, what do we want? Seek stakeholder input to develop the plan's vision and guiding principles.

The third step, how do we get there? Outlines the objective strategies and actions to implement the Urban Forest Master Plan. This is also known as the implementation plan. The fourth step, how are we doing? Evaluates the plan's success using progress metrics assessed at regular intervals. Then the process restarts, allowing for an updated baseline and subsequent course correction to ensure the plan adapts to changing conditions as implemented. As we move through the next slide, it's important to keep in mind that this plan addresses a 20-year planning horizon. The city and its urban forest will undergo many changes over the next 20 years. Because the Urban Forest Master Plan is structured around the adaptive management process

and incorporates regular review intervals, the plan itself can be adjusted to align with the changing conditions in the city. We will now give you some more detail on each of the chapters. The first step in the adaptive management process asks, what do we have, which establishes a baseline of the current conditions. There are six components to this in the Urban Forest Master Plan, including an analysis of the city land cover data or tree canopy data, review of the 2023 public tree inventory data, assessment of the non-native invasive species within Fairfax, a review of city operations, benchmarking to similar cities, and estimations of the urban forest benefits provided. Notably, the tree canopy cover makes up 40% of the city's land area,

and there are over 11,000 trees in right-of-ways, parks, and trails. This figure excludes forested areas within parks where there are many more trees, estimated up to 25,000 that have not been inventoried. Fairfax's urban forestry operations tend to be reactive and in response to staff observations and resident requests. Lastly, it's estimated that Fairfax's urban forest provides $1.2 million in annual benefit value while also contributing to mental and physical health, community character, and property values that are not currently quantified. The second step in the adaptive management process asks, what do we want, which forms the plan's long-term vision and goals. Public engagement is critical to understanding what the community wants for the urban forest.

Several key themes emerged from the public engagement activities. These include a strong desire for stricter tree preservation, consistency and transparency in city decision-making, dedicated city resources for managing the urban forest, a desire for expanded outreach efforts, and a consistent interest in learning more about the urban forest and how to be involved. Together, these takeaways shape the plan's goals and subsequent strategies and actions. The goals are shown here, and we'll share some of the strategies over the next few slides. The urban forest goals are to champion and sustain a resilient and equitable urban forest in Fairfax, number two, to increase Fairfax's capacity to care for trees,

and number three, strengthen the community support and involvement in the urban forest. The third step in the adaptive management process asks, how do we get there? The chapter in the urban forest, this is the chapter in the urban forest master plan's implementation focus. It ties the information from the first two chapters, the existing condition, the existing conditions, baseline, and vision and goals for the future into objectives, strategies, and actions that can be used to implement the plan. The objectives shown on the screen are key outcomes to achieve. Strategies are approaches used to enact the objectives, and actions are specific tasks used to complete the strategies and ultimately the objectives.

The urban forest master plan has five objectives, which include to protect, strengthen tree and forest conservation, to regulate, enhance city policies to protect and expand tree canopy, both in content and process, to grow, create space, plant, and care for new trees, manage, establish a dedicated urban forestry division for all urban forestry activities, and engage, foster community stewardship in Fairfax's urban forest. As mentioned on the previous slide, each objective is supported by a few strategies, and each strategy has between three and 13 actions to facilitate its implementation. For example, a strategy under the manage objective is to scale internal capacity through a centralized urban forestry division.

Actions that support this strategy include consulting the 2024 operations review, aligning staff responsibilities within the new division, and supporting staff development. Actions for each of the strategies are sorted by short, mid, and long-term timeframes for completion, spanning one to five years, five to ten years, and ten to twenty years, respectively. Each strategy also identifies existing capacity and partners, resource demands, and metrics for internally tracking progress towards each strategy. The final step in the adaptive management process asks, how are we doing? In this chapter, the urban forest master plan recommends a progress assessment timeline and provides key performance indicators, or KPIs, aligned with the plan's three goals.

The KPIs will be used to assess whether the city is achieving the goals of the urban forest master plan. There are 13 KPIs within the plan. Examples of these KPIs include a five percent increase in canopy cover in low canopy areas, an increase to 90 percent or greater the survival rate of newly planted trees, and increasing the number of volunteer hours served annually to 1,000 hours by 2030. The progress assessment timeline consists of annual reviews summarized in a state of the urban forest annual report. Every five years, a more comprehensive review of the urban forest master plan is recommended. This includes a formal review of goals, objectives, and strategies, as well as progress assessment similar to the annual reviews.

Following the five-year reviews, the city should publish a progress report and plan an update addendum to realign the plan with current needs and opportunities. This would start back at the first question, what do we have to understand the changing conditions that could influence how plan updates proceed? Together, the annual and five-year progress reports will provide the public with information about the city's efforts and successes in implementing the urban forest master plan. The annual and five-year check-ins over the urban forest master plan's 20-year planning horizon will allow the plan to be adapted to address the dynamic nature of the urban forest and city operations. After 20 years, it's recommended the city develop a new urban forest master plan

to comprehensively assess the city's condition and provide new recommendations to address changing conditions. So now that we've covered the main points of the urban forest master plan, we want to briefly highlight how the plan has been revised based on feedback that we received during the presentation to city council in December. We received some great questions about how to predict changes to the urban forest, climate impacts, invasive species, and other factors that affect urban forest health. In response to these questions, we've added an action item to strategy 1.2. Strategy 1.2 involves conserving, connecting, and expanding tree canopy through strategic conservation and land use policies.

The new action item recommends partnerships with regional jurisdictions to support urban forest forecasting and modeling of canopy change and climate impacts. The urban forest master plan alone cannot be used to forecast these changes, and such data is usually addressed at a county, state, or regional level. For these reasons, the urban forest master plan also recommends alignment with the Metropolitan Washington Council of Government's regional tree action plan, the city's comprehensive plan, and other long-term planning documents to integrate urban forestry into these long-range planning considerations at multiple scales. We also heard strong interest in the first steps for implementation,

and I'll turn this back over to Anna, who can talk through those first steps. Thank you. Yes, so in the December meetings, both with you all as well as Planning Commission, we heard a lot of questions around implementation. We acknowledge there's concerns about budget and resources with implementation. As we've just heard, there's five objectives, 21 strategies, and over 170 actions. It's a lot of work in one plan. I have started to take a deep dive into it. Over 50 actions are already underway, with many more considered ongoing tasks that are built into staff's everyday work. And so the way we've designed the plan is to help already integrate with initiatives and projects that are already in motion to a certain extent.

It's good to reemphasize, again, it's a 20-year planning horizon. The intent is for it to be a living document through that adaptive management approach as we do the one-year check-ins and five-year progress reports. But then I want to take a moment and tie this back to earlier in the presentation on the project's background. The city completed that urban forestry program evaluation approximately five years ago. I would say we've accomplished a lot over the past five years. And since then, we've had a lot of changes in resources managing the urban forest, as well as, of course, our urban forest continues to change. The thought is this plan now provides us better guidance and a more strategic plan to do work moving forward.

It provides a bit more transparency as to how we're meeting community priorities as well as where the priorities are for the urban forest needs. And then second, I want to reiterate the Sprout Initiative and how that was designed to implement. It was not just designed to develop the plan, but again, to implement it as well. It is not a coincidence that it touches on all five objectives of the plan. Its foundation is in community stewardship as well as engagement. It's taken an all-hands approach on invasive species management. It prioritizes tree planting to maximize community benefit. And, of course, it is rooted in that strategic planning as well as communication to the public at very frequent intervals.

And so the Sprout Initiative is how you can see how implementation will continue forward after adoption. And then lastly, I want to share the Urban Forest Master Plan project does have deliverables beyond the plan itself. It does include some activation of implementation. We've already begun working on an annual work plan as well as drafting guidance for a natural forested areas assessment from Strategy 1.1, as well as drafting workflows and materials for priority policies and identifying how to integrate this plan into other city plans like the comprehensive plan. And so that's kind of a quick snapshot of implementation, but happy, of course, to answer further questions once we've opened that up.

And so with that, I just want to say having an urban forest master plan is a great achievement and milestone for the city in terms of managing its urban forest. And I always like to conclude with big tree celebrations with a tree cheers. And so tree cheers to the city. And, again, with that, open up to questions and any discussion. Thank you very much. That was very thorough and a nice follow-up to the work session that we had in December. Are there questions? Council Member Amos? Not questions, just comments. I mean, excellent work. You all managed to do quite a lot with quite a few. So we greatly appreciate that. I mean, I'm not going to reiterate too much of what we already said in December, but I mean, happy to see partnerships all over this thing, like with George Mason.

Excited to see that continuing forward, like with doing the tree assessments and the GIS programming. And just want to reemphasize the importance of the multilingual component when it comes to education and partnering with apartment complexes and making sure that information is disseminated well and evenly. But thank you again. Looking forward to the public hearing. Council Member Peterson? I think I have a procedural question, and that is whether we will be discussing this again when the item comes up for adoption and that would occur after the public hearing or whether our only opportunity for discussion is now? No. I mean, following the public hearing, you would have a motion to approve, and then there would be discussion and comment, as always,

and the opportunity to make any amendments if that's the will of the Council. I think then I would like to wait on some questions and comments I have until we get through the public hearing to give people a chance to speak before we do that. Thank you. Any other questions from the dais before we open the public hearing? Okay. Okay. Seeing none, I will open the public hearing. Ms. Shinneberry, has the public hearing been properly advertised? Yes, it has. No one has signed up prior to the start of the meeting, so if there is anybody who would like to speak on this public hearing item, they may come forward. Hi. Hi. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Judy Fraser, 3514 Spring Lake Terrace.

I totally applaud this work. It's a great achievement. I agree. It is wonderful for the city, for the first time, to be considering a master plan, an implementation plan for our urban forest. Many people over many years have supported this effort and worked to make it happen, so I hope no matter what tonight you celebrate that and acknowledge that this is a very important milestone for the city. But with that, I have to say it's not ready for your approval, in my opinion. It jumps from one and two were great on this assessing existing conditions, amazing, engaging the community, stellar, and the third one, though, identifying the vision, goals, and priorities. It falls short of being something very actionable for us.

Then it jumps into the implementation part with the objectives, strategies, and the implementation guidance, which you can tell staff is ready to dive into and already is. But those goals are weak. They are like increase, strengthen, champion. How do we get to those? How do we accomplish those? Those are not actionable in a way that we need. They should be more concrete. If we don't have concrete goals, why do we do a master plan? The master plan needs to put those goals very, very visible at the end of that 20-year plan, and we know when we've achieved them. We're already accomplishing the goals that are there. We are strengthening this program. We are increasing capacity. If we want to just keep improving, that's great.

Go for it. But if we want a master plan that really describes where we want to be and what our vision is, and we're accomplishing that, we need to strengthen those goals. And I would say that is over to you all as the decision makers, because you are the ones who need to set the goals and make the priorities for this program. You are going to be the decision makers about what gets done. What will we pay for? So you need those goals to be clear in your mind. And so I challenge you to see this as a handing of the baton from staff and their great work to you in the last lap to make sure that we get good goals. You are defining them. You are prioritizing them. And they will guide you through this implementation in a meaningful way.

Again, very excited that this is going forward. And I look forward to a really robust plan that does not just sit on a shelf gathering dust, because it's not concrete enough. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. get everybody excited. It would cause more engagement. So I would love to see more specific goals with more defined metrics and specific timelines, especially with regard to the establishment of the Urban Forest Division. Thank you. Is there anybody else in the room that would like to speak on the Urban Forest Master Plan? All right. Seeing I will close the public hearing. Is there a motion? Council Member Hardy-Chandler? I move that City Council adopt the Urban Forest Master Plan,

approving and adopting the Urban Forest Master Plan in the draft dated December 2025. Is there a second? Second with the provision that I would like to have some discussion around a possible modification of that motion. Well, that's what we're doing next. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Peterson. Thank you. And just to restate what others have said, not just today, but in the work session, this came up and it's really been a chorus of thanks to all who were involved in this. It's been a combined effort by so many people in the community. We thank the staff. We thank the consultants. This has been a really important engagement on a really important issue. And it really speaks to the opportunity

for the city now to prioritize the protection and management of its forest in ways that have not been done to this point. That said, when I reviewed this, it's a detailed plan, very good read, but I had the impression that it did not include, to the degree necessary, targets and timelines for the actual achievement of things that are laid out as general goals. And so I sort of liken this to, you know, the process of playing tennis without a net. What this doesn't have is a safety net that's spelled out clearly enough in my judgment, specifically for losses in forest land and tree canopy, but it also speaks to, I think, some of the issues that were raised here earlier about tightening up the implementation timelines

and targets associated with the plan. So I actually decided to double-check myself and ran this through, imperfect though it may be, an AI review of this, and it spelled out a series of strengthening measures that would be recommended for the plan. And I think they are worth considering, and I think the question I would have for city manager is whether there is an avenue by which we might include a commitment to understand how we would proceed to tighten this thing up a little bit. Let me just read for you the couple things that came out of that. Number one was clear enforcement and accountability mechanisms for regulatory protections. The second was to establish explicit numerical canopy targets

and timelines. The third was more robust private property and development protections. The fourth is expanded equity and climate resilience considerations. And the fifth is defined funding, staffing, and long-term maintenance commitments. The first two or three, I think, are particularly important because, again, I think, because of the importance of establishing a safety net for forest protection, we heard that Fairfax County has tried to do that. It's not an uncomplicated process to establish targets and timelines, and yet it's essential to do so. And so what I think I would like to suggest is to hear whether the staff has thought a bit about how we might include some definition of the process by which we might use

to move forward to do that, then that might be folded in the action that we take today. Mr. Alexander. Yeah, thank you for the question. I think it would be useful for staff probably to address some of this as I look into the plan, particularly as we get into KPI baseline targets and status. It might be helpful to cover some of that, be responsive to some of the questions that were raised, and then continue the discussion accordingly. Sure thing, one second. So I'm just pulling up table eight within the master plan, the KPI table, to make sure we're all kind of looking at the same information as to what is in the plan and happy to try to answer questions and then also probably get some clarification.

And so regarding the explicit numerical canopy targets and timelines, I just want to show what currently exists within the plan. So on this table, they are mapped to the three goals, one, two, and three, that you see on the left-hand side. The first two talk to tree canopy percentages, the first one being citywide. It identifies the baseline as 40%, and then the target being to maintain or to be greater than 40% and increase one to 2% over the next 10 to 15 years. I want to provide background or more context to that. We do have our canopy data within a software where we have the data on each census block group. And so we know then what each canopy percentages are for each census block, as well as it gets updated

as new imagery becomes available. And so staff is already tracking that. And then the next one being to increase canopy in those low canopy areas. Again, we have the information as to which census blocks fall below the 40% that exists citywide. And then we're proposing to target 5% canopy cover in those low areas by 2035. And again, tracking that through the canopy software. And I would say, like one thing that I want to also add, in our canopy study from the 2023 assessment, we saw that over 10 years, which is just one time frame to look at, the city has had consistent 40% tree canopy coverage over that time period. So we haven't seen significant losses or gains necessarily. To me, though, we look around

and we see that our canopy is covered in invasives or we had dead ash trees that haven't been removed. The quality might not be there. And so when developing the plan, it was really intentional to focus on the quality aspect. And that's why there is a lot of metrics around volunteering and acreage of invasive removal and things like that is to really focus in on quality. Above this table, we do also, though, acknowledge the urban forest is a regional resource. We also are a partner in the region. And so it's to participate in COGS 50% tree canopy goal. One of the strategies and actions is to, once they've adopted their action plan, is to realign our goals and this plan with that. I do sit on the regional tree

action committee on COG. And so they are in development of that plan. And so it felt premature to set a metric. And the last thing I will say for the canopy targets is it's based off of you need to have a plantable area, you need to have the mechanisms in place to grow canopy. It's not just planting or preserving. It's a combination of all of those together. And so there's a lot of thought that needs to go into what's feasible for canopy goals. And so I think this is the starting point, being able to start moving us towards those goals and collecting and establishing the programs and the data needed to refine goals into the future. So there's a motion on the floor. Did you want to make an alternative motion

or amend the motion, Councilmember Peterson? Well, before I do that, let me just see if there's anything else to be added in terms of what might possibly... No, I think that there's certainly opportunities to create more specificity around timelines here, for sure. I think there's some opportunity to develop some teeth as it relates to our code regulations and how we approach this, comparing ourselves to other jurisdictions. The question really, again, is this a point of departure or do we need to amend anything in this plan in order to create that more granularity in the plan? So I think that's a perfectly reasonable discussion. And there's certainly an opportunity for us to build on to what we have here.

Councilmember Hardy-Chandler, do you have a question, comment? It's more of a comment, and I'm not sure if the motion is still active, but I just wanted to add my perspective is that this is sufficient to start because, as you said explicitly, it's a living document. And what gives me comfort is the annual updates, the five-year reviews. I see that cycle as an ongoing cycle, so I would not expect all of the matrix to be in this version of the plan, but for some of those things to evolve as more information becomes available. So the fact that it's a living document that will be reviewed on a regular basis, for me, this is sufficient as a starting point. That cycle is circular. It doesn't go linear,

right? And so I'm looking forward to the specificity to be built in as the process moves on and as there's expansion in the capacity to do that. So thank you. Council Member Peterson? Yeah, so I guess my follow-up would be there's really two issues here. One is targets and timelines, the other is teeth or regulatory requirements here. and it seems to me it would be good to have something a little bit more specific about the timing of when we intend to proceed to put in place those kinds of standards that will pick up some resolution of the targets. And again, that's not an uncomplicated process, but I think my request would be that we add something that becomes specific about a commitment for when that will happen,

even if it's a matter of approving this with the expectation that sometime soon you will be coming back to us to explain how you would go about doing that and when you would do that. So that is more clear than it is currently. So that would be my request if there's a way we could do that. I'm going to respond with, so our next step is creating that annual action plan that will at least identify within this year what we're planning on working on. I'm also going to use the example of our comprehensive plan if Paul Naphtyn wants to add anything to this. But the comprehensive plan, you guys are familiar with the implementation guides that have those dates and the leads and support roles. Those were,

that implementation guide was developed post-adoption of the comprehensive plan. It was developed and coordinated among staff once the plan was adopted as to how we were going to go about doing so. And so I'm actually developing a similar thing within a online project software, Asana, in terms of putting in dates as to when certain projects either have already kicked off or would kick off. So those details are still ongoing through the implementation process. I think there's a component of the planning process and then there's a component of some of this is done at implementation. It might be helpful to speak to, you know, a specific time to come back. When's the next time we plan to come back?

And we speak in terms of annual plan, but, you know, council may be looking for something a little sooner. Yeah. And so for an annual plan, I anticipate having that done within the first quarter of the year. So sometime by the end of March, having an annual plan in place, if not sooner. And then again, at minimum, it would be reported out as we've done in the past through the state of the urban forest report in terms of progress, but certainly can share the annual plan with you all once that's been developed. Council Member Peterson? Well, I think... Oh. Well, and just to clarify that point, so that would mean that by the end of March or so, you would be coming back with a description of how the necessary

regulatory standards and the necessary targets and timelines would be further developed and implemented to pursue these objectives, which would include addressing the loss of forest canopy and forest land loss. so we would have a clearer picture at that stage of how that would be done and that would include an understanding of the actions the council would need to take to ensure that necessary standards are being adopted if they come out of that process so that that wouldn't be an open-ended and unclear process. We would have some clear understanding of the need for us and the opportunity for us to be able to take action to ensure that this is actually advanced. Is that a fair is that the kind of thing

we're going to be getting at the end of March? As I said, by the end of March, what you would be seeing is the annual component. So for 2026, as well as we are working on a kind of a five-year outlook, with it being a 20-year plan, it wouldn't be assigning necessarily year targets to the full plan, similar to how the comprehensive plan does not do that to the entire comprehensive plan. and then in terms of how we are strengthening the bullet points that were provided, the regulatory components, policies, and things like that, some of that would be included in that depending on how it would fit into the annual plan and the five-year outlook. Well, if I might, just at that point in March, would we have

an understanding of how the city would be wanting to approach doing something similar to what Fairfax County did with its 60% goal so that we would, by the end of March, have some understanding of the procedure, the trajectory in terms of when and how we would do that. We would become involved in an active, long-term, target-setting process. Is that something we can have as a part of this first annual examination of this in March? So I would say the development of a canopy goal and the development of more specific targets, that in and of itself could be the priority undertaking if that's the directive given from you all to the city manager to me. I would say that, of course, comes at a cost of doing other

implementation projects and so just trying to balance where the priority is. I think a lot of the targets, again, get refined through that both annual and five-year process and I think that we have a starting point of the KPI table that I shared a little bit ago that would continually to get updated as projects are implemented. Council Member Amos? I'll only add that I'm always a fan of prioritization in a tiered framework. I do want to point out that I recognize that a lot of this is contingent, one, on staffing and I think that was a discussion that we also had during the climate action plan which is you don't have the sufficient staffing to do a lot of this quickly. So completely understand

that and that's on us to discuss this prioritization as well. And the other side of it is we, you know, throughout this plan we also have discussions about assessments to figure out where we are so we can actually set realistic but achievable goals. So I would like a report back. It doesn't necessarily have to be March and I think the annual reviews may start touching on that but I always think prioritization in a tiered framework is helpful but I understand that's an evolving process. That's not something that you'll have to us in a month. But I think in terms of a framework to build off of, as long as we're building off of it and it's not sitting on a shelf, I think this is sufficient to push through tonight.

Councilman Peterson. Just to add, so I wouldn't be expecting an assessment would be completed by March but what I would suggest we could and should do is establish this as a priority for a report back in March to understand how we would move forward with the necessary steps to put in place the targets and timetables and teeth around this issue area. It's a very, very critical one. I mean, in the work session, I won't go back through all the numbers again, but the documented decline in forest land loss regionally and it's up and down in localities but we've really felt this quite a bit is substantial. 4,000 acres a year the size of City of Fairfax is lost. In this city, that has been, we've been on track

with that and losing, again, not every year but up and down. So it's a critical issue that I don't think can wait for many years down the road. I think the long-term planning needs to start now to understand how we get ahead of that curve. So I would just appreciate it if we could have a commitment that in that report back in March we include an understanding of how we could proceed in this area. Mr. Alexander. Yes, someone that does math better than me recognizes that next month is March. So I do want to be, I do want to be a little more realistic and I think we'll be talking about a lot of other things during that time so it may be if the council pleases, you know, the next quarter that we come up

against if that's more realistic. Thank you. There's a motion on the floor. Is there a substitute or an amendment to the motion or are we ready to vote on this motion? Mr. Councilmember Peterson. Yeah, I would make a motion to amend to simply add that by the second quarter of the year we receive some kind of a report back on how to progress in this area and take necessary actions. Is that in the form of a substitute or an amendment to the motion? Mr. Lubkerman? It sounds like it's just a simple amendment. Simple amendment. And you're the seconder if the maker's okay with that they could just simply be included as part of the motion. And I think based on what the manager said I think staff understands sort of

the spirit of what's intended regardless of the language that's in the motion. I think staff will proceed based on what you all have discussed assuming there's consensus. Councilmember Bates. I just you know again first this is a night of adoption of this plan. First I've heard of a desire to amend it anyway and I just want to make sure that whatever we do you know there was a concern raised about you know if we tried to kind of take on too much in addition to this would that take away from the important work that staff is already planning on doing to implement the tenets of this plan. and so I just want to make sure that whatever we do here you know I am just fine passing the approving the plan

as is with the understanding that as was raised as an excellent point there is a strong precedent for creating supplemental policy documents such as implementation guides that supplement plans that have already been approved already been passed but are meant to guide the implementation of those plans so I'm prepared to approve this plan as is with the understanding that this is as was put earlier a launching point for further work and further implementation of the goals of that plan so that being said you know certainly open to further guidance just but would not support anything that interferes with the work that staff is already planning on doing to implement this so you make an excellent point about

the adoption of this plan which we had a work session on and there was feedback in the work session and we do a great job at allowing public hearing and testimony to give feedback feedback but workshopping a plan from the dais is not really our role we have professional staff we have consultants and a lot of work has been put into this plan for us to be second guessing or making amendments or workshopping it from the dais during a vote from my perspective this is not good practice that said there is a proposed amendment to this motion on the floor the maker of the motion is now in a position to accept this amended motion council member hardy-chandler I'm not clear on the amendment so I'm staying with

the motion to adopt the plan there can be a second amendment a second motion is there a second to council member peterson's motion to amend the original motion I'll second it with a comment certainly council member I think the plan that has been provided and is in place is great I mean I think there's a lot of effort into it I understand that a lot of time 18 months you said has gone into this I also think that there have been questions and concerns that have been raised that are appropriate and reasonable and I don't think if we exclude the March conversation which is next month if we're looking at the end of June let's say I don't think it's unreasonable to come back with what you're talking

about with the implementation plan to try to come up with some of these other key factors that are maybe a concern for council member Peterson so I mean I really could go either way but I don't I don't think it hurts the plan itself it sounds like you're going to do exactly what you're going to do regardless and that all of these things are going to be covered in whatever it is that you're planning on doing anyway so are we clear on what the amendment is to this original motion council member Peterson well I think the second sample motion that we have is the approval with revisions and it's the same as the first motion but subject of the following modifications and that would simply be in the

report back that occurs in what appears to be now July that this be an item of discussion for us to review so there has been a substitute motion this has been seconded Mr. Lopcomen so now I am thinking of questions and the one that comes to mind is you would like a report is it just what it sounds like a report or is this something that you would propose the council would hear and make some sort of determination on because that would be as Ms. Safford outlined typically with these type of processes there is general guidance but then staff creates sort of the implementation documentation are you anticipating wanting for lack of a better term another bite at the apple on this in which case taking

action on this tonight may be premature I don't know we are just trying to understand what the goal of that report I mean a report can be given without actually having a meeting on it if that makes sense so the thing that is missing from the plan before us that we can adopt is an explanation of how we are going to be going about establishing these targets and timelines and for lack of a better term teeth it just simply isn't spelled out adequately as it is spelled out it will become more clear whether or not and when council action is required but there's an important point of clarification that I think is missing from this and it speaks to this very important issue of dealing with forest land

loss and getting a commitment that's clear that we are going to actually understand how to go ahead and do that and not leave it unclear so at some point this certainly could and I suspect would lead to council action because it could lead to regulatory actions it could lead to any number of things but we simply haven't even clarified how we intend to go about a target setting process target setting is an essential part of all kinds of things we do here but it would be really helpful I think to understand more clearly how we're going to do that and how people are going to be involved in that but is that issue something that keeps you from approving the plan or something as Ms. Safford said is part of a living

plan that evolves and there are opportunities to make changes to it as time goes forward in other words this isn't the end of the process of proving the plan this evening it's not clear that this is a priority that follows in a timely manner and that is the concern I'd like to see that this is a priority that follows in a timely manner okay the mayor I would just argue that then it just becomes a question of whether there's support for that amendment so a substitute motion has been made with a report in July it has been seconded by councilmember Hall a roll call vote Ms. Shinaberry before we do that I want to respond to a comment that was made just so it's clear following our work session when this issue

was raised I specifically asked for follow-up on this issue through the city manager with staff and had extended conversations discussions about this so this issue was discussed at some real length it's not a surprise for this to be under discussion this evening based on that just wanted everybody to be clear on that thank you a roll call vote councilmember Amos and just for clarity this is on the amendment piece yes the amended second motion councilmember Hall aye councilmember Hardy Chandler nay councilmember Peterson aye councilmember Bates nay councilmember McClellan nay okay motion failed two to four back to the original motion roll call roll call vote okay councilmember Amos aye councilmember

Hall aye councilmember Hardy Chandler aye councilmember Peterson aye councilmember Bates aye councilmember McQuillan aye motion passed unanimously we will go on to the second general public comment is there anybody in the room that would like to speak on any item that was not on the public hearing yep you can come forward and if there's a line we'll just have that lined up by the window you can come up first you can go ahead I'll start do I need to give you like information or yeah you just state your name and address and then your comment that's it now I'll get that sounds good hi my name is Amini Elizabeth and I believe the clerk does have my address already so mayor members of council and neighbors

I want to begin by clearly saying that I support the Willard-Showord project I came to that support thoughtfully and I want to share why for me this project became personal through a recent conversation I had with the director of the preschool that I attended right here in Fairfax City the same place where I learned my letters and made my first friends is still serving families today when I reached out to ask how this project might affect them their response was simple they would welcome the opportunity to be part of this new center that moment grounded this project for me not as just an abstract budget line but as something that directly touches families children and working parents in our city

I grew up in Fairfax City I attended preschool here high school here and college here I may be young but I am deeply invested in this city's long-term success not just for today but for the families and seniors who will be here decades from now that's why I support the purpose of this project accessible health services matter ADA accessible spaces matter and I believe that community recreation matters and of course child care matters so many long-time residents have shared how difficult it has been to fully use our existing facilities green acres where my preschool is located it's far beyond small fixes there's accessibility challenges outdated restrooms ventilation issues and basic functionality

that affect whether seniors can participate with dignity and ease I think that Sherwood works better today because it's designed to meet modern needs the Willard Sherwood project gives the opportunity to meet the same standard across services the health center component is also really critical city residents already rely on the Willard site for real everyday needs from preventative care to travel vaccines many of our residents will continue to use the Willard portion of this partnership child care especially the part that I really care about is not just a side benefit it is essential infrastructure for working families and our local workforce it is also one of the strongest opportunities within this project

to support long-term sustainability through partnerships that serve families while helping support ongoing operations I want to acknowledge the importance of our partnership with Fairfax County this collaboration reflects years of trust and shared investment and maintaining it matters not just for this project but for future joint ventures as well but at the same time I think it is reasonable for the city to be clear-eyed when it comes to long-term responsibilities capital costs happen once operating responsibilities last for decades asking how we can sustain this facility over the next 20 to 30 years I don't think is really opposition I think it is stewardship so with thoughtful partnerships

resident priority access and clear cost sharing as it grows I believe this project will remain both accessible I believe this project can remain both accessible and financially responsible that is it thank you good evening mayor and council Kelly O'Brien 10213 Sager Avenue here tonight to speak in support of the Willard Sherwood Health and Community Center I know many residents have real concerns about the size of the project the cost and what it means for the city's long-term finances those concerns are valid and they deserve to be taken seriously supporting this project does not mean ignoring those questions it means weighing them carefully against long-term community needs facilities like this

take years of planning coordination design permitting and financing in this case Willard Sherwood has followed that long and deliberate path it has been studied refined authorized at multiple stages throughout the CIP process this is not simply a building it is a coordinated joint facility with Fairfax County that brings together public health services child care recreation senior services and community and arts programming in one accessible location it replaces aging facilities and consolidates programs that are currently spread across multiple sites delaying this project would not pause community needs it would extend reliance on aging buildings increase barriers to accessing accessing essential

services and likely increase overall project costs due to escalation and redesign the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board has formally endorsed this project as a keystone partnership with Fairfax County and an opportunity to create a modern citywide community center that we currently do not have as you should have all received by email there are real limitations to continuing to rely on Green Acres site as the city's primary community and senior center it is valued but it has access parking and structural constraints that would require significant reinvestment to serve as a long-term solution at the same time I fully agree the council must continue to scrutinize operating costs long-term maintenance

and affordability for residents transparency and fiscal discipline are essential but we should also be honest about the alternatives restoring or delaying this project would not eliminate cost it would shift cost increase uncertainty and postpone needed services this project represents essential community infrastructure it is a multi-generational investment it strengthens our partnership with Fairfax County and it reflects years of careful planning to address a demonstrated need I respectfully encourage council to continue moving this project forward with transparency fiscal discipline and clear communication as final approvals are considered thank you for this opportunity to speak Katie Johnson

Spring Lake Terrace affordability cannot just be a buzzword the Willard Sherwood cannot be viewed in a vacuum it must be viewed with a broad clear lens it must be viewed alongside the school bond property yard the firehouse the vehicle fleet that will be needing to be replaced all the other CIP projects as well as the debt services that we have to pay together their economic impact must be fully understood and clearly communicated to the people we must fully understand how the additional four million dollars to our annual operating budget will be paid for and those are 2025 numbers how high are you willing to raise our taxes what services will be sacrificed the Willard Sherwood sounds like a great project

but comes at too high a cost to the city residents and city businesses that will be left to pay the bill if affordability is a priority we must prioritize keeping the city affordable for those living here now thank you good evening mayor and council members my name is Christina I will provide the address to the clerk but I live in the Mosey Woods development I'm speaking tonight as a long time Fairfax City resident nearly 14 years and while I also serve on the school board I want to be clear that I'm here in a personal capacity as a taxpayer who deeply cares about this wonderful community we live in I strongly support moving forward with the Willard Sherwood Center like many others before me

I will emphasize that this project is not a luxury but essential community infrastructure that serves residents across generations children, families working adults and seniors all in a single accessible location it creates a multi-generational hub that combines county health services child care senior programs and city run recreation additionally it is current and proposed location centrally located on a bus line within 10 to 15 minutes of a walk from many neighborhoods makes it easier for residents to access the services they need every day I know some members here are concerned about cost and this project is not simply a line item to cancel it's a long-standing investment in our city for today's residents

and the next generation of Fairfax citizens canceling this project would only increase costs and push needed services further out of reach of our city residents and as Ms. Swarson shared our students finally this project reflects a strong partnership with Fairfax County six years ago I probably would have stood here and said let's cancel it and any other county project too let's be fully independent but over time through lived experience serving this community and frankly completing a second master's in public policy I've come to the understanding that no jurisdiction especially one as small as ours truly operates in a vacuum our ability to offer the level of services for our residents that our residents expect

depends on that partnership and this project shows why aligning city services with county-run health programs strengthens both our relationship with the county and our ability to serve residents efficiently avoiding duplication and maximizing value to taxpayers the Willard Sherwood Center is the right project in the right place at the right time it honors years of planning meets the needs of our community now and will serve residents well into the future I urge the council to move forward with the project thank you for considering the future of our city good evening mayor and city council I have Mike Fabio 3920 Chambridge Road I too support the Willard Sherwood development the important role

of a community center cannot be overstated it provides a safe inclusive space for civic management and engagement and promotes economic development this is not about a gym membership which we can get anywhere this is about meeting our neighbors and getting to know one another a sense of place a people place where you want to spend time it might be like cheers where everyone knows your name get a meeting room for your favorite hobby and form a group attend a concert get the idea that's what this is all about the present Sherwood Center is well known the proximity to Old Town will be synergistic with the Old Town small area plan the central location will be easier to reach from all corners of the city

the multimodal plan for Blenheim Boulevard has already been incorporated into the design of this structure we will also get a wider sidewalk on Layton Hall Drive these features will allow more people to get out of their cars and walk there and reduce traffic but if you do have to drive there you will be provided with a safe and sheltered space for parking and convenient elevator access important to those who are less able not only will this increase your enjoyment of the city but it will make it more attractive to newcomers so when you decide to sell your home you will get a better price that will more than compensate for the cost at the center of the project here at the start of the project

the city's previous study has shown that the existing community center is beyond cost effective restoration partnership with Fairfax County eliminates the cost of land acquisition at another location combining resources with the county provides advantage in scaling and shared funding we hope you will take all these advantages in mind as you consider the city's financial commitment to move this project to completion even the planning commission and its capital improvement presentation tonight will advise you that you must recognize the urgency of this project it has been years in the planning has been vetted by Fairfax residents during several public presentations and has received staff approval

abandoning this project now with no clear end game would be a disservice to our community which I don't think you are going to do I think you are going to do the right thing and I applaud all the time and effort you put into it thank you is there anybody else in the room that would like to speak all right I will now recess the regular meeting to go into a work session we will take a five minute recess to go into the work session room of the design of design design of design Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. and design of the property obviously is the extreme step, right? There's also opportunities just to use space differently. Obviously the police department took advantage of the library parking lot during the snowstorm, right?

As covered parking that's available to them. That's a short-term temporary use, but are there sort of longer-term mutual aid agreements that could be reached across departments and facilities to better use what we do have? The next item is phrased, consider longer-term plans for sites or facilities when prioritizing short-term or partial improvements. An example that came to mind as we were considering the capital improvement program is in the context of the property yard. This is just one example. There's an item in the CIP currently that also involves a fairly significant expense for replacing the fuel island and the underground storage tanks there. While the environmental concern with leaking underground

storage tanks is real, I spent my career in corrosion in the petroleum industry. This is something we dealt with at service stations. We need to think about how we want to address this in the context of a plan already envisioned to do something completely different with a property yard. What we're thinking about is making sure as we look for these larger projects, if we have interim things that need to be done there, are we looking at them in the most cost-efficient way for the potentially short-term life that we need them? We can do a complete rehabilitation of the fuel island, for example, and have underground storage tanks in a new facility good for another 30 or 40 years. But will they be there in five or ten years?

Don't know. So that's an area that there are rehabilitation options that don't necessarily involve the same significant cost to get us to where we need to protect the environment, have a safe facility. So we just want to make sure that when we're weighing that expense that it's the right expense to serve the need for the time that we need it. There may be other examples like that, but that's one that happened to hit me because of my professional background. And there are other things that could well be considered as well in this context. Next item, again, gets to how we may be able to pay for some of these things, accounting for payoff possibility of revenue-generating projects when we assess

upfront investments. That, again, gets into the realm of our finance people and the city manager is what creative ways we can use to recover investment that we do need to make. So it's just thinking again about the whole finding creative ways to make some of these things happen that we feel are important to do. I know you have some additional comments. Yeah. I mean, an example of this is it's not necessarily relevant to this year's SIP under consideration, but Tice Park, right? Like, the ability to generate revenue by hosting tournaments at Tice Park is phenomenal. Youth sports are an extreme moneymaker. So when we look at investing in things like the KJ turf fields, perhaps that's also a revenue-generating project

if it can host youth soccer, you know, at a concessionaire-type event. Or even, is there a concessionaire who wants to be, you know, co-located with Willow-Jurwood or another place where they're sharing their profits with the city? There's definitely possibilities in lots of these larger projects to have partnerships that are revenue-generating. In addition to revenue-generating, there are several projects in the CAP that are saving money in the future that may not be well understood at the time the investment's made. I want to point out the public works effort to look at the stormwater system and condition issues. They invested in a staff position that involves analysis and cameras and mapping systems

to look very carefully at the condition of the stormwater and sanitary sewer system. Now, it's much less expensive to find something that needs to be repaired before it crumbles and falls apart and the cost escalates 500% to get it fixed in an emergency. The amount of money that was invested in that particular staff position and the things associated with it have paid off in an order of magnitude savings, not just in being able to repair things in a cost-efficient way, but also generating information that was not present before that allows us to be in compliance and to be able to report in environmental channels that we're required to report in. So investments and generating revenue to pay for those investments

is real important and it's also important to recognize projects that may have other payoffs in the future and things that may not be clear right now, but some projects are quite valuable from that perspective by itself. Last item on this list is kind of a catchphrase, but it's something we talked about a number of times. Our CIP should be investing in what makes people want to live here. The CIP is very large. We're not highlighting every item that is out there, but there are certainly things on there that need to be done. You know, there was a question about, well, what about the schools projects? Obviously, the big $22 million or whatever it is, bond project is not that well defined yet. That's not really

on the list at this point, but there are other things like security enhancements at City Hall or at the schools. If we have safe facilities, people want to use them. People want to live here. You can't ignore those as well. I mean, they need to be done. But the bigger projects, too, are things that make people want to live here and want to enjoy their time here like an approved community center as an example. So it's just kind of a context that we should look at a lot of these projects in. There are many things in the CIP that we don't talk about, things like vehicle replacements. I should comment. The process changed this year where a number of things were extracted from the CIP into ongoing things

that are more maintenance-oriented. It's actually a much improved process this year from our perspective. It allowed us to focus more on some of the bigger items. So we're not dismissing, we're not talking about replacing buses or fire trucks or cars. We haven't done that in the past. But these are the kind of things that also make people want to work here, probably. But in terms of the capital investments that are things that are really highly reflective of the long-term goals and visions of the city that are captured in the comp plan and other policies that have been adopted, these are the kind of things that we focus on. So, Mr. Reisner, you had some thoughts you wanted to jump in. Well, I think

you've covered most of it. I moved here 17 years ago from California. I had a lot of options. This was the best place for quality of life. We moved to an area that was walkable. Walkability is real important. Making improvements to the schools is a big seller. People move in because of good schools. What I want to avoid as a city is losing opportunities for culture and arts and things that really matter to people. They're frequently not going to be comparing a chart of relative property tax rates. people don't make decisions based on that primarily from my perspective. Our rate is perhaps the lowest in the entire region. However, they do make decisions based on parks, based on schools, based on cultural activities.

So, we want to make sure that this is a place that people want to live and that will help us long-term support a stable real estate tax base. The real estate tax base is big. We're generating more revenue from that source relative to commercial taxes than we have ever before. We want to make sure that's stable and the way to make that stable is make this a place that people want to live. And so, I think the long-term vision for projects is based partly on our perspective as residents of the city about a place we want to live. So, that's all I have. And then by extension, if people want to live here, businesses are successful here because people need services, people need food, people need to have jobs

that let them live where they want to live. So, it's all cyclical, right? It all, you know, has a business justification at the end of the day. We had the opportunity to speak with the Rotary Club earlier this week about the Planning Commission process and we were able to sum it up in that the Planning Commission's job by charter is we develop this comprehensive plan and it makes us sort of the stewards of the vision for the city. Obviously, every Boarding Commission has a vision. They all play a role in it. We try to go out and pull that in. But, you know, we keep this comp plan that is exhaustive and not just facilities, not just projects, but everything about living in the city. What are the goals?

What are we trying to get to? And we recognize that by turn, by charter, you all are the steward of the resources and those things have to be kept in balance. But the resources will only continue to flow insofar as people and businesses want to be here. So, we feel strongly that by being in conformance with the comprehensive plan, by following these goals and aligning with these recommendations that we're coming forward with, that we are both fulfilling our jobs as being good stewards of the vision and good stewards of the resources. We're optimistic about the future of the city. We have a lot of potential, but we're also residents and taxpayers as well. We're affected by some of the recommendations

we make and the decisions that you make. But we believe in what we're telling you tonight are important things. I'm willing to pay for them. Not solely, but... That's the... This kind of wraps up. It's a place that we want to live. I want to live. The commission unanimously provides, endorses the plan and forward these recommendations to you for your consideration. And we're happy to answer any questions that you might have. Well, thank you for the presentation. Very thorough. Do we have questions for the planning commission? Councilmember Bates? I just want to thank you all for being here and express my strong support for these priorities. And I was particularly pleased to see that the Catherine Johnson

turf project was added to this. And I appreciate hearing the rationale behind that. There are a lot of opportunities for looking into alternatives for the turf material, but I think that something needs to happen there. Thank you. Councilmember McQuillan? No? Oh, you just... Okay. Sorry. I was still reviewing. Anyone else? Councilmember Amos? I will also echo the thanks of y'all being here and say that I'm very grateful. And I know we're all trying to figure out the property yard. and I think it is important to get that addressed before it becomes a larger problem that's more costly. And I know staff are already working on thin ice, so I want to make sure that we get that wrapped up quickly.

Yeah, pun intended. Councilmember Hardy-Chandler? I just really appreciate the holistic approach that you took to this, recognizing that it isn't just plus and minus, but it really is about investments, about synergy between and among plans, about thinking across time. I, too, moved here for quality of life and had the exact same experience. I had the good fortune the first Saturday that I was in Fairfax City, I ran into a real estate agent and I said, where's a good place to live? And he said, he actually gave me really good advice that I've shared with others. He said, figure out your life first and live there. And I figured out my life around Fairfax City and ended up living here. And so,

I just really want to emphasize that, again, it's not a simple equation of plus and minus, but really thinking about these things across multiple complex sort of perspectives and trying to weigh sometimes things that seem to be competing tensions, but are still a part of those big decisions that we have to make. I also really appreciate the comment that the decisions that, or the recommendations that you make and the decisions that we make affect us too. So I think there's sometimes a perspective that decisions are being made and it affects other people, but we're residents, we're taxpayers, we're the ones who also benefit or pay the cost of the decisions that we make. So recognizing that this is a we

sort of situation. It is not a them or they sort of situation. so I really appreciate the comments between the items that really bring your recommendations to life. So thank you for that. Council Member Hall. Thank you. I've long thought about this cross-functional interdepartmental planning and I think it's probably unfortunate that we weren't having these same thoughts a few years ago because I do think there have been some potential opportunities for these programs, these plans, as we're now discussing the Willard Sherwood facility and we're discussing the fire station and we're discussing the property yard and those costs are only continuing to grow and in conjunction with the school bond,

I mean, I was just, you know, rattling off numbers here as everything was going and I know I'm a numbers person and that's, you know, first and foremost where I go with it but it's crazy. I mean, the property yard initially I think was 58 million, 63 million and now we're at 155 million. So those are honestly the things that keep me up at night. I think that the West Drive property yard is a great investment for our city. What we're going to do with it, I don't know but I do agree that that's something that we should purchase and we should hang on to but it does make me think about these other conversations that we're having and what we can do with them and I understand that we want a fire station

and that we may need a fire station but I also understand that we need a place to store vehicles. We need a property yard. You know, we've already lost the opportunity potentially to combine Willard, Sherwood or Sherwood with or whatever it would have been called with a fire station. You know, there's a big community space in there that is currently not really being utilized. They used to do bingo in there so that's an opportunity to use a place that we're not doing and so I want to make sure we're not building more spaces that have these additional resources or spaces that are not going to be utilized and I think jumping into some of these things while yes, they've been in the CIP for years

or they've been on the Amazon wish list as it's been called for years, you know, Mr. Feather, you said, you know, all these cans have been kicked down the road. We're trying to pick up cans as fast as we can with this current council and quite frankly, I'm not aware of any other council in recent history that has been juggling the amount of cans that we have and are actually being expected to make these decisions in one term and I think, not asking for a pat on the back here by any means, let me be really clear on that, but it's a big job. It's a big undertaking. It's a lot of don't raise my taxes, don't do this, we already pay too much so education is the biggest component of all of this and I had one thing

I was going to say later on but I'll say it now so I posted on Facebook earlier and I'm going to pull it up and read it to you and it was just a question because I'm trying to understand what people understand so my question was inquiring minds want to know when you are thinking of the city's capital improvement program and you read something that says, funds already committed or appropriated in the CIP, what does that mean to you? One, the funds have already been set aside for this project. Two, this item is on a wish list or scheduled plan but we still need to either fund the project or borrow money to fund the project. Three, something else, please specify. There are 21 comments. One of those comments

is someone commenting on her own comment but if I tallied this correctly, sorry, I wrote it down somewhere else and then I left it in the other room, hopefully not. either way, there are overwhelming, I think there are three people that actually knew what the answer was. One of them was a previous mayor candidate, one of them works in planning and another one works for the city. One person said the answer was number two, that it means that we still need to fund it somehow. Overwhelmingly, everyone else who lives in the city who answered this thinks that when we say a project has been appropriated or committed, that means we've already paid for it and I bring this up because with Willard Sherwood specifically,

we are being asked to fund $50 million. With these other projects, we're being asked to fund well over $150 million. so education for our taxpayers, for our residents is key and I will say that again, these projects have not been paid for. We have not been putting money aside. We don't have the money. We have a plan to borrow the money and that is critical. It doesn't mean I'm saying no to any of these things, it just means that we are not doing our part or people are not doing their part to listen and be educated and I think that that is critical. So all of you in the audience, go home and tell all your friends what this really means so that they can be educated and engaged and really communicate

with their city leaders here in a way that is going to be most meaningful for them. Thank you. So I do want to respond to that comment mostly about the property yard because we've also seen that property yard number go out, you're right, from like $60 million to $155 million in the current but that's assuming that the property yard plan is to stay exactly there and it's all of the environmental remediation, all of the replacement, all of the construction, all of the property acquisition around the property yard you would have to do to basically like bunker it to make it flood proof which essentially I think we could all agree if we were, you know, off the record that's not the plan. That can't be the plan, right?

That's nuts. You're just chasing fate at that point of the environmental impacts of that site. So there has to be a plan B and probably a plan C and a plan D for if we parse out everything that's at the property yard, where does it go? And I would venture to guess that if you went through those different options, many of them, if not all of them, would be less than $155 million. So yes and no. Like there's understanding that these things are expensive, they have long tails and that's just the construction tail and the operations and maintenance, but also spending some money up front to plan and sometimes it's 10 years of planning as we've seen with Willard Sherwood ideally gets you to the right answer.

Now, 10 years is a long time. A lot of things happen. We've seen seismic shifts in the city with COVID and now with a substantial shift in the federal workforce and tax base. However, good planning, integrated planning should withstand a lot of that. Maybe not all of it, but a lot of it, right? And get you to a good answer and it does cost money. So that's why our recommendation there specifically with regards to the property yard is the feasibility study, which is like the near term line items in the SIP. We think that's extremely important to fund and whether it looks like $155 million down the road, I hope not. But spending that, I think it's $2 million in the first year to execute that study

properly is extremely important. Can I ask a follow-up question on that? Yes, Council Member Hall. Mr. Martinez, correct me if I'm wrong because I actually thought it was the opposite from our November budget retreat. I thought the reason that it was now $163 million was because we had to do it at multiple locations and not because we were trying to do it all in one place. So did I misunderstand that? Even keeping it at the same place would be expensive, almost the same. The reason why the prices went up so much is because as we went through the feasibility study, we learned more. We learned more about the restrictions. We reached out to all the different departments and divisions to look at the needs

for the next 20, 25, 30, 35, 40 years. Electric vehicles, improvements to the fleet garage, keeping the gun range where it was because that's relatively new. As the consultant worked through the feasibility study, the cost became unfortunately higher but more realistic. So, you know, we're sorry that we started out at 60, but that's what we thought when we first started and then as we work through it, as not unusual with projects, prices escalate. And that is very true. I saw with the Willard Sherwood, I think it was 29 million or 31 million in fiscal year 21 and 22, then it jumped to 40 million, then it jumped to 50 million, and then it jumped to 56, and now it's looking like 54.3. So I understand

that happens, but I think having the ability to share that and explain it goes a long way. So thank you. Council Member Hardy Chandler. Just a quick follow-up. I appreciate what you said about picking up cans that have been kicked previously, and for me, that's all the more reason why we shouldn't kick cans for other people. I don't want to put future, and I can't help it, echoing Tom Ross's comment, can't help but think about future councils. I can't think in two-year increments, and I think that really not putting future councils in the positions that we are currently, and recognizing that through no fault of anyone in this room, things are going to increase and change and alter as we get more information.

and so, yeah, I hope that we don't do the things that are challenging to us to future councils. Council Member Peterson? Well, thanks. You guys have a hard job. No question about it. Just, if you could help, because I haven't had the chance to be with you through all of your decision-making, and I'm just curious to know a little bit more on the method that you use for determining conformity with the comprehensive plan. Can you just, for a moment, explain how you go about making that determination? The comprehensive plan itself describes many of these specific items, and the comprehensive plan also describes general descriptions of characteristics of things that we want. When we put together the implementation plan,

it's interesting to hear your discussion about the urban forest master plan. Our implementation plan comes after the comprehensive plan. More specificity comes in there in terms of what kind of things specifically need to be done, but things change, right? We can't predict everything in one comprehensive plan as to what's going to, what the next facility is that may or may not be needed. But so, that's why in some cases there are general descriptions of quality facilities, maintaining facilities, upgrading facilities to provide the kinds of things that people need. staff proposes a plan. They have written descriptions, as you'll see in the CI, you will have seen in the CIP presentation, the plan that we got.

And they make references to the comp plan. We test those against the objectives in the plan. Some are very clear to make, like an upgraded community center. and some are more general facilities related, whether it's state-of-the-art X, Y, or Z, right? So, it's not every, the comprehensive plan is not a detailed, detailed roadmap. It's guidance, it's policy, in general terms, and in some respects. And we just make our judgments based on that, based on what's proposed. If I could just maybe follow up on that, appreciate that, and certainly also appreciate the opportunity to be directed to that kind of assessment so that we could have the ability to review that before we have conversations like this.

But, as you do that, to what extent are you considering the impact, and for that matter, the opportunity for capital improvement projects to conform if they have changes in design or scale or timing and the effect that that might have on conformity. For instance, are there options for improving design and scale and timing that would make them conform even better? And are those design modifications, things that you consider, and are they a part of what these final recommendations are? And for that matter, are you also asking as you go through conformity whether project cancellation is something that would actually be an important consideration and conformity with a comprehensive plan? You're talking

very operational things. Comprehensive plan is visionary. And we're keepers of the vision. And designs change. As you get operational and hone a project, it may change. It may look different. We don't go back and re-look at a project. In fact, one of the other things that happened this year with the way the plan was presented to us, items that were in the previous year projects moved down below the line. They don't even show funding for us to consider or comment on. We don't know what the details are at that point. You or our body prior to you felt those were the right things to move forward. The Planning Commission doesn't get involved later in a project once it's being put on its track for implementation.

we're looking at 2027 and beyond, not what's already been approved. And many of these things are not scoped out in that level of detail. So I don't know. And if we felt like a project that was included was not in confirmation with what we see as the priority objectives or with the comprehensive plan, we would make that recommendation as well. we didn't find anything that we felt was egregiously against the comp plan. I hope that you trust we would if we did. Well, I guess the question is whether you've actively looked at alternatives and the potential that any of these projects might even perform better if there's some modification. Because what we've heard this evening a lot of and heard a lot of

previously is the fact that we've already learned that some changes have made improvements and we may not be finished with that yet. The Katherine Johnson example is sort of a big one. And it speaks to the opportunity to be a little bit creative and see whether we can do better. Part of the reason we want to do that is because of the number of dollar bills that are at stake and whether there are better ways to reach these same goals through modifications of this that might do that. All sorts of different ways. If that doesn't take place in this process, that's just good to know. But that's a really kind of an important thing for us to... your assumption that there's ways to make it better if you've

not bought into the requirement that you started with. So I come from, right, a military defense consulting background. And when you're doing a project, you have a concept of operations, a CONUPS that you start with. That is your left and right laterals for what the project is going to accomplish, right? Whether that's an engineering process or a building or an entire military installation. You have a concept of operations for it, right? And then you move forward on that. Now, defense acquisitions being what they are, right, it can go off the rails. You can end up with requirements being added on top of requirements and scope creep. I'm not saying it's a perfect process. But if you're starting

with that concept of operations and everyone is bought into this is where we're going and the end project maybe doesn't look like what you thought, but if you were all bought in at the beginning, that sort of everyone accepts that outcome. So I think what you're actually asking for is, well, now we know better. Can we do better? Can we change our requirements? Can we reprioritize? And yes, you could. But in that sense, you never execute a project because there's always going to be better ideas 10 years down the road. Did the city have a concept of operations for Willard-Shortwood, which I'm assuming is what you're talking about, when they sat down with Fairfax County? I would argue yes. I would argue that there

was a ton of citizen engagement on both the county and the city side of what they wanted that facility to look like and be like. And now sitting here 12 10 years later, could we come up with something different, better, more cost effective? Sure, probably. However, that work was done, that work was validated, and plans were made and moved forward with in good faith. So to disregard that work and to disregard that process, you would never accomplish anything. Every year, you would be looking at a brand new slate of good ideas, and nothing would ever get done. So if we have a problem where we don't think the city is building a con ops correctly, that we're not starting from the right place of requirements, we have

great examples of where we can do that better. That's a learning lesson that we as a city can take on. But to challenge the moving forward of a project that is in full compliance with the vision for the city as determined by PRAB, by the Planning Commission, seems very disingenuous if you, if your actual concern is just what it costs. So is your concern what it costs or is your concern what it's providing? Councilmember Peterson, anything else? Well, just maybe the other question is, as you're looking at conformity with the comprehensive plan, to what extent are you looking also at conformity with fiscal or tax objectives and concerns of the city? So we talk about those issues constantly. We have a member of our

Planning Commission who has, was a part of the Fairfax vision effort that happened decades ago. So we hear a lot about the finances and that practical side. We don't evaluate every single thing on the CIP based solely on that metric. It's not within our purview. As Chair Feather has said, our role is to look way out in the future, to have a visionary plan that guides the development of projects and ascertain whether they conform. And we've done that. I think one thing we tend not to do to respond to an earlier question is to stop and reevaluate when we're 70, 80 percent through a design build process. It is only because that's inevitably much more expensive. In terms of the Willard-Sherwood,

it's been exhaustively planned. The city has a consultant and a team that just does an incredible amount of work on looking at costs. I was not aware that all of the energy generated in this sustainable building is used on site. I was concerned because I thought that's going to get pumped back out into the grid at a wholesale price. We're subsidizing electoral use elsewhere. We're not. That's being used on site. There are a whole bunch of ways that this project conforms to our sustainability goals, which you were the curator of as the ESC chair. I also want to just make a note that the staff that supports the work of the Planning Commission is exceptional. And when they provide documents to us, they're incredibly detailed and

they go through the effort of citing the exact place within the comprehensive plan that cites the the relevancy of that project. That anchor into our plan is already established by staff before we even see it. The thing that Chair Feather mentioned of trimming out things that are sort of procedural and pro forma and purchasing vehicles, we don't see that anymore. We're focusing on big pictures, really important ideas, and making sure that there is an anchor in the comp plan for it. And so that's what we have presented. Thank you. Mr. Napty, you had something to add? Not necessarily. I think you must have covered it. I just want to say from a staff perspective, the role of the Planning Commission in the process we set up in the

city over the years is we try to discourage them from digging too much into the financial side. We leave that to city council. They do push sometimes. And the way we have kind of allowed them to get into that is recognizing that council's in a position where you have to make decisions and make priorities among things when we want everything. And so we've allowed them to kind of consider costs when deciding how to recommend priorities, recognizing that something that's very expensive. If we prioritize that, we might lose two things that are only half as expensive. And so some of the recommendations in the past have revolved around that. But when it comes to looking at specific costs for a specific project and getting

into the weeds of why it costs that much, we really discourage them from that. And that's something that should fall in the hands of the city council. We do talk about cost sequencing. So if we think there's things that could slide because they are less important compared to other priorities, that was a big part of our recommendations last year. We didn't see as much of a need for it this year. That is correct. I was going to bring that up as well. It's a question of purview. It's a question of purview. You ultimately have the financial acumen and insights, a lot of which we don't have. And we have a very strong professional staff that does a very good job at estimating what a project may cost.

And as it goes through redesign, we don't revisit redesigns. That's outside of our purview as well. But we do have some conversations. There was a good example last year about the cost schedule implications of a particular project that got shifted based on some of our questions. So we do think about it. It's not our primary driver for sure. So you bring up two things here, purview and roles. And that's what I heard. Everybody has a role to play. And there are things that are under the purview of very specific departments, organizations, bodies, and staff. And it's very helpful when people are not confused about what is within their purview. And it's very good when people understand that you have a role to play and we need

to be focused on doing well at the role that we are assigned in this organization that is our city government. And I think we need to keep coming back to what is our role, what is our purview, and how do we work collaboratively and together relying on the fact that we have staff and consultants and people who came before us as well as people who will come after us that have to trust the process. We have to believe our process is good, our structure is valid, and that our staff and the expertise brought to the table is something we can believe. Any other comments or questions? Council Member McQuillan. I just wanted to thank everyone for the time to walk this through. This discussion has been really eye-opening.

It's been interesting to watch the engagement go back and forth. I do want to echo Council Member Hall's statement about education and communication to the public because that's the situation we're in. And that's why you're getting some of these questions because we do have to, our purview is different and it does, we do rely on our commissions and our boards to be our eyes, our ears, but also our voice. So please, you know, keep that in mind that we're also trying to communicate, educate our public on these things, the processes. Some people don't understand that it takes seven to ten years. So this is a process. We're in our own process as well. And I do see that, you know, we all have good intentions.

We all have the passion here. We want to see growth. We want to see development. We recognize your purview and it's really appreciative that you recognize ours as well and that this is a balancing act. We're competing with a lot of needs, very, very limited resources. So it makes sense that we would have such a discussion like this. So thank you so much. I appreciate it. I really do. All right. Are we good? Okay. Thank you so much for the presentation. Ms. Shinneberry? Our last work session item for the night is an update and discussion on the joint city and county redevelopment of the Sherwood Community Center and Willard Health Center complex. I'm going to recognize Brooke Hardin, our community development director,

to provide the staff presentation. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Again, Brooke Hardin. I'm serving as the city's point of contact for the Willard Sherwood Health and Community Center project. Pleased to be with you all this evening. With me tonight are a number of individuals. Here as part of the presentation team is James Patterson, who's the city's project management consultant with Blue Heron Leadership Group, Stacy Summerfield, the city's director of parks and recreation, and JC Martinez, the city's chief financial officer. There are a number of folks as well in the audience this evening, including Fairfax County's project management team, also from the design and construction team,

representatives from Grimm and Parker Architects, Urban Engineers, and the Christman Company, the project's construction manager at risk, as well as I will note representatives from the programs that would operate in the facility, not only Ms. Summerfield, but also Dr. Gloria, director of health for Fairfax County, and Dr. Jabari are here as well. Any and all are available for questions should anything arise that needs their attention. I also want to mention on the city side as well, representatives from public works and human services as well. So big, big group here tonight. Thank you again for the time. So what we plan to step through in the presentation is a quick overview of the project and the programming associated with the facility.

We will go through the development timeline, where we've been, where we are now, what's upcoming, review stakeholder and community engagement that occurred through the project, as well as the agreements that have guided the work on the project throughout and lead us into the future. We will go through the budget, operating costs, and the financing also associated. What you've seen up to this point has been project estimates. We've now received a guaranteed maximum price from the construction manager at risk, and we'll step through that, and then we'll also touch on next steps. There are no items being requested for action tonight. This is informational and an update and to be able to respond to questions

that the council may have. A quick project overview, just walking through the scope of the project. It basically entails demolishing the existing Joseph Willard building, which was built in 1954 timeframe, and replacing that with a new 102-square-foot combined health facility and recreation center. Two levels of underground parking would be part of the facility. Key features, as you look at the aerial picture there, is some transportation improvements. You're oriented Blenheim north-south on the right side of the sheet, Leighton Hall Drive to the left. The new entrance will be directly across from Democracy Lane to get access to the site. We're removing kind of the dangerous entrance right there at the corner,

and then we're building an interparcel connection, so we feel we're improving the transportation in between the facilities. We're maintaining the back exit for the police department, and then the entrance into the garage is as you go around the building to the right. Specific sustainability goals, which I feel are consistent with some of the things the city's looking at in terms of your green buildings program. The design's complete. We're tracking to get LEED gold plus points. We're shooting for a net zero. We're not going to quite meet net zero. We're going to get about 60% of the way there. We just didn't have enough rooftop for enough solar to do that. We are doing an all-electric building systems

to avoid using gas and fossil fuels. As you look at the schedule at the bottom that we are here, kind of the takeaway is we're ready. This summer, we're ready. If the project's approved, we're ready to go to construction. The design's complete. We're nearly done with permitting, so we're ready to move into the next phase. Next slide. In terms of the programs that will be at the site, basically for the community center aspect, we're moving everything that's currently at Green Acres over. We're moving it over into a modern purpose-built building to house those facilities. So the senior center, the preschool youth programs, gymnasium, fitness center, fitness classroom, multi-use classrooms. And one of the big feedbacks

from the community as we went through it is space for art. So we've really tried to build in a lot of niches for art to be hung on the walls and also niches where sculptures or other art can be displayed. And then building in socializing areas. So it's a place where the community really can come together and meet and greet. So it can really be kind of a hub for the community. And then moving the administrative offices for parks and rec that will move from this building to that building. In terms of the health department, this center is one of five centers that the county has that are spread out. Each of the centers provide the basic same services that this center will provide. These services have been here

for multiple decades. So we're basically maintaining what's been in the Joseph Willard Center all along. But in new modern, when the county look at the facilities, it was a 1954 school building was really in desperate need of modernization. It's conveniently located. I have the service areas, the zip codes. Two of those zip codes are city zip codes. The other two are kind of Oakton Vienna school, Vienna zip codes. But it's a nice convenient space or access for city residents. The services they'll provide, the public health clinical programs, I want to make an emphasis that this is not primary care or urgent care. Sick people are not coming to this building. This is really preventive, educational services

that are provided and educational. They're provided for the community. Women's, infants, and children nutrition program. Vital records like birth certificates, death certificates, marriage licenses, divorce records, etc. Infant-Toddler Connection will provide services for toddlers up to three with developmental challenges that they work with and active intervention. And then early childhood education. And this is really child care with an emphasis in serving kind of moderate and low-income families. And one thing we added to this box is, since this is a county-provided program, similar to the city-provided programs, these services are provided regardless of ability, age, and income levels. And again,

doctors Gloria and Jabari are here this evening and can speak in much more detail regarding the services provided at the facility if there are those questions. In looking at the project development timeline, and I know one of the speakers earlier this evening had a much longer arc in terms of this project for the purposes of this discussion, effectively started in 2013, so about 13 years ago, at this point with the Parks and Rec strategic plan. And the strategic plan identified that the city needed to study green acres. And so in 2015 and 2016, a task force was appointed to study green acres, solicit input from the community, and make recommendations for near-term and long-term use of the property

for a community center either there or somewhere else. The committee found that there were a number of deficiencies with the property in terms of the condition of the facility, the layout, and the location, and investigated 21 other potential properties that could serve as a community center. The Willard site was one of the six finalists. The issue at the time then was it was owned and is owned by the county and was being operated as the health center. And so in 2016 and 2017, the city conducted some alternative analysis looking at three potential sites that were either city-owned or partially city-owned. The results of that analysis were that all of those locations introducing a community center

had significant impacts on open space or tree canopy and or current operations at those facilities. The Sherwood site in conjunction with Van Dyke Park was one of those locations. It was a location that did have interest, but the concern was the impact on open space and not putting buildings within the park. So that did not advance. At about the same time, Fairfax County was exploring a feasibility study at the Joseph Willard Center and found that due to its age and condition, demolition and replacement of that facility was warranted. City reached out to the county at that point in time, seeing the opportunity for potential partnership. At that location, the county was receptive and so city and county

entered into a couple of letter agreements in 2017 and 2019 to explore opportunities for a joint facility there. That was a high-level exercise looking at massing and space planning and seeing what might fit. The product of that exploration was that it looked like a project would be feasible at those locations. So we continued to move forward. The county conducted a bond referendum in November of 2020, including the replacement of the Willard Center in that referendum and the city and county entered into a phase one design agreement. And so that provided the opportunity to begin to scope the project, hire architectural and engineering services, and begin the conceptual planning work that was to come.

In January of 21, both city and county adopted resolutions affirming the commitment to move forward with the project. The phase two design development agreement was approved in December of 2022. And that is what we are currently operating under as a city and a county. And that really contemplated the project all the way from design through construction. The bullets that are falling after that are each one of the steps in the design process. And we'll touch on this in a little bit a little bit more detail where city council authorized the project team to move forward in successive levels of design, which brings us to where we are now in terms of having a final total project cost. So with the project team in place

and the agreements signed, the team began engaging the community and stakeholder groups in the project in earnest. And it was important to get out to the community at a pre-design phase. And so before our architects and engineers began looking at concepts, we held a couple of community open houses, both virtually and in person in January of 2022 to ask questions about expectations, about wants and needs, and to get a sense from the community as to what they were looking for in this facility. Again, before we got into a design phase, similar conversation with the mayor and city council, as well as some of the key boards and commissions, parks and recreation advisory board, the board of architecture review,

and the commission on the arts. And that, as you can see from the slide, was really the process that was taken at every step of the way, community conversations, updates and inputs from the mayor and city council, and meeting with the various boards and commissions. And so that took us through all the steps of design. As council recalls, there were public hearings this fall for the land use applications that were required and the certificate of appropriateness for the design as well. That really brings us to where we are where we are at this point. You know, how did we reach out and who did we reach out to? Again, we worked closely with city boards and commissions listed here are those that we met with repeatedly.

There was outreach to all of the city boards and commissions to participate in ongoing discussions, come to the open houses and community meetings and provide feedback throughout the process. We reached out to neighborhood associations, both those that were within the immediate area and had an individual meeting for those neighborhood and civic associations, blasted out all of the meetings to all of the civic association presidents to share with their membership. We met with the nearby schools and churches and had an individual meeting with them and continued to engage these groups as we move forward. We use both high tech and low tech, so to speak, means of promoting those engagements. We're on all of the social media outlets,

sent emails to our community members, had an engage page on the city website that provided opportunities for online question and answer and input and discussions throughout and also a project website on the county side that provided updates, information reports, et cetera. And so we certainly tried to reach folks where they are. You know, some of those low tech were, you know, posting flyers and buildings and businesses around the city, flyers and buses and any way that we could find to reach out to the community. We heard lots of things. This is obviously just a quick summary here, but things like public art and James mentioned opportunities for public art that will be in the facility space for seniors.

So that third floor, that terrace that is included within the facility is trying to respond to those items. natural light part of the design, as you've seen, has windows that open into the gym out onto Blenheim Boulevard, windows that open into the fitness rooms, providing light and air and being spaces that hopefully folks want to be in and want to engage with. I mentioned the phase two design and construction agreement, and just to step through it here a little bit, since this is what has been guiding our work for for a couple of years now and will continue as we move forward. It covers how costs are allocated. So site and building costs are generally broken down by a pro rata share of the building that's assigned to each jurisdiction

according to program space. And so that's 58% county, 42% city parking costs are allocated based on spaces required to serve the uses within the facility. And that breaks down to 64% county, 36% city. I will note here though, that that's how costs are being allocated. The parking spaces themselves would be shared among all uses. And that was part of the approval that council authorized back in the fall for the special use permits and special exceptions. As I mentioned before, the agreement specifies that each stage of design, the jurisdictions will evaluate proceeding or terminating, you know, and this is what has occurred to this point to advance us to the stage where we are. The agreement also covers the construction manager risk

and the guaranteed maximum price that has now been provided by the contractor. Similar to the design approvals, the city and county can determine whether each wants to proceed when that guaranteed maximum price has been finalized. In terms of ownership and use, the agreement specifies that the county will continue to own the property, but the city will have a 99 year lease with automatic renewals at a rate of $1 a year. So providing indefinite use of this for the city to the property, this was certainly advantage compared to some other sites that were evaluated in those earlier stages that had acquisition costs associated with them. The agreement also specifies an additional agreement an additional agreement that covers operation maintenance

is to be prepared and an administrative committee will provide building governance will be formed when the building is in operation. Finally, the agreement recognized the city's exploring the option to include an addition to the performing arts space at the existing Sherwood Center and or a renovation of the performance space. Fairfax. This is one of a number of agreements that exists between the city and the county, not to go through all these, but noting that health services and the health department is a service that is contracted with Fairfax County, hasn't served that role since 1995, will be a primary program within this facility, along with others that they provide. The city and county have also pursued construction projects

jointly before the city of Fairfax Regional Library in our old town is an example of that where this county operates and maintains the facility and the city financed and has been responsible for debt service associated with that. Turn now to project costs. So getting into the cost, do you see on the top row is the total project cost based on the 58-42 split? The next line down was the contribution. So when the city elected to go with the underground garage, we had to make a contribution to our part of the project towards the county's cost of $3 million. And that gets you to what we call an all-in adjusted total project cost of 127.4 million, 127.5 million, the county share being 73.1, and the city share being 54.3.

The next line down looks at dollars we already spent, and that was pay-go dollars that came out of the general fund. We've spent $4 million. The county spent $8 million on soft cost, A&E design, and other elements. So when you subtract out the 4 million, the remaining amount to be financed, or the remaining amount to still be paid, is 50.3 million. The city adopted CIP for this project's 56 million. So comparing the 54.3 to the 56, we're about 1.6 under the 56 million. The performing arts option has stayed pretty consistent throughout. That's 4 million. And that's for the elements that's either the addition on the back of the existing Sherwood, is one piece of that for the dressing rooms and the storage,

and then the improvements to the actual space, which is the acoustics and the lighting, and replacing the door and flooring, and creating a sound and light room in the existing space, is $4 million. If you remember the last time we came to the city council, we were at 55.925, and we were very worried that we were going to bounce against our limit of 56, would exceed the budget. So we worked really hard and a lot of credit to the county project team, our CMAR partner, the architects, and the city team. We really came up with some target reductions that are listed here that could be made without affecting the basic program needs. So we took these cuts, which totaled to about 1.4 million. The 42% share of that is 580,000 for the city.

The other thing we worked really hard at is we worked to get the bid out in 2025, so we could take advantage of the suppliers, change their pricing to 26s. If you go out in 26, so we got it in in time. So we got the advantage there. And it was also a very competitive market. So in terms of the timing piece, we feel there's about a 3.5 million savings, 1.5 being the city. So the total city share cost reduction is a little over $2 million, which allowed us to go from that 55.9 to where we are at the 54.3 now. Did we lose this slide? It's next. Oh, next. Okay, sorry. The other thing that kind of working with the team that really helped us is we looked at risk reduction. And the risk reduction is just preventing future costs in terms of schedule overruns

or cost overruns. With the CMAR form of procurement, the nice thing is we have the contractor on board from the schematic. So we're reviewing the drawings. They're actually building it on paper as we're going, sort of building in constructability and value engineering. In the process, we're clearing out any things that are unclear. And also the level of review that was done by the project management team. The utility coordination was very big in this job. We coordinated with public works, Mark Pozzoluzny. And not only just looking at there's a lot of utility relocation that's happened for this job, but kind of looking at the future work in the schools, the electrical vehicle stations, the police station work, future Joanne Jorgensen.

So we're trying to make sure what we do now will not have to be redone when these other projects come forward. We did a lot of meetings with Sonny Sarna and public works on the Blenheim multimodal with a goal of really making an integrated design and making sure that we've built into the requirements for both jobs. So there's not conflict when they're going to be under construction about the same time. And then the project bids. A lot of times contractors or owners will go out about 80 percent. We waited till we had 100 percent documents. We'd gotten our first review of comments. So we feel really confident about that pricing we have right now. This slide I realize is hard to see, but I want to walk through this. I actually think this touches on

what you're all talking about in terms of educating the public as we went through the process. The very first meeting, at least that I was a part of, we met with the City Council at a retreat in June of 2021. At that meeting, we were very purposeful to say we shared what was in each other's CIP, but we were very careful to say we did not have design. We did not have scoping documents that cost estimates would be developed as we move forward. But we shared the CIP numbers, which were 87.9 total. 58 million was a bond referendum the county did, and we had 29.9 million in the City CIP at that time. As Brooke said, in January 2022, we went out to the community before Penn went to paper on the design,

because we wanted the community to inform the work the architect was going to do. We shared no numbers. It was truly a listing session of what does the community want in this facility, so that would inform the work of the architect. We came back in November of 2022 with three concepts. We had two above ground garage concepts and one below grade, two-story below grade garage concept. We shared the cost for all three of those concepts. At that time, these were the first numbers we shared in November of 2022. 123.8 million total project cost, county share 73.1, city share 50.7. We did not have operating costs at that time, so that was not shared. In January 2023, we went to the City Council, Mayor and City Council, and they approved moving forward with option one,

which was the 123 million, which was the 123 million, point eight option, and approved the underground parking. We went back out to a community meeting in January of 2024, and we actually did not talk about numbers in that. We're kind of bringing the design back and getting feedback where we're hitting the mark on the design. In February 2024, we went to the City Council for approval to move forward to design development, to go from schematic to design development. At that point, the price went from 123 to 126.8, county share 71.8. You notice it went down. The City Council or the City portion of the cost went to 55. That's the first time we put the $3 million in. That's when the deal was made with the county that would contribute $3 million.

So that's why the City portion of that jumped up. Then in September of September 2024, the price went up to 129.65 with 74 county, 54 city. Now we had the operating costs and we shared that operating costs. That was actually the direction of the City Council. We wanted to be very transparent, share that with the community. So we shared it. We were very conservative in our first cut at the operating costs at $2.7 million. We had a community meeting in November of 2024. The costs were the same, sharing the operating costs with the community. And then in September of 2025, which was the most recent meeting, we were at $131 million for the cost, $75.4 for the county, $55.9 for the city. So we were right up against that $56. That's when we sharpened our pencils and really worked hard with the full team to reduce costs.

And then our current is $127.4, $73.1 for the county, $54.3 for the city with an operating cost of $1.73 million. If you do the math, which I know will be done. If you do the math from the first time we shared numbers of the actual scope of the project, the total project estimate went up by about 3%. The city portion of it went up by 7%. If you take out the $3 million that we had to do to make the underground garage work, the city portion went up by about 1% from November of 2022 to February of 2026. And we try to be very transparent and kind of educate the community like you are talking about in terms of these costs and what it would take. In the slide presentation, we got down to pennies on the real estate rate and the presentation.

So, yeah. And just to chime in on that in terms of the capital improvement program. So, as James noted, in November of 2022 is when those, you know, first round of figures after that more detailed design and engineering work could be done. That was when the FY24 CIP was being prepared. It would come forward to the council in the spring of 2023. And so, as you look back at the CIP and how that was constructed, you'll see consistent figures in FY24, FY25, and FY26 as those numbers were made available. More numbers. So, we looked at the operating cost and cost recovery of the facility and the operating cost and looking at maintenance, utility, security, custodial services. We used a county standard about $8, $8.50 per square foot for those costs.

We added a few things for elevator maintenance contract, security, and some staff to help with on-site maintenance. We came up with a little under $700,000 for the operating cost. We subtracted out the current green acres. They're not spending much on maintenance, but they're spending on utilities and custodial. We subtracted that out. We added the additional staff cost. And then we came up with a total annual operating cost of $1.7 million. All right. So, the development of a cost recovery model to offset the operating cost is clearly vital to the project. So, for the proposed Willard Sherwood Center, we identified 50 peak hours that are the most desirable for private rentals. This includes the 4 to 9 p.m. time slot Monday through Friday as well as full day Saturdays and Sundays.

We then, using market rates of comparable recreation centers and spaces in the Northern Virginia region, we developed a potential rental rate, private rental rate, for each of the rentable spaces in the building. And we only utilized the spaces that are truly rentable. So, we didn't include the preschool classroom, the walking track, the fitness center, things like that. On top of that, an industry standard is about 60% occupancy for the year. I mean, you have high weeks, low weeks, and so 60% is a good number to use. And so, we developed a maximum rental revenue cost recovery by taking that 60% and playing out the numbers as if 60% of our spaces were rented by private rentals at a full rate.

Now, we still want to maintain a lot of community use, which is something that's important to us as a community, that people have access to the space. So, in that first column, that market rate, that's if we were to be fully rented with private rentals at that 60% rate. In the second column, the break even, you'll see we have reduced that down, and that looks at about 20 hours per week of private rental space of those peak hours. So, 20 of the available 50 hours are dedicated to full pay private rentals, leaving the remainder for community use, and those are still peak rental hours for sports recreation groups and different community programs. This model maintains daytime off-peak use hours for senior programs, for youth programs.

It also secures that average 30 hours a week of peak use for community groups, and it holds our fitness programming and fitness classes at their current rates. And so, it still is an affordable, equitable, accessible program to our community members. A couple of important things to note. This model is just simply based on rental revenue, so it doesn't include any projected potential revenue from programming or events. So, we do reach a break even point on rental revenue. And we also did not include a senior fee, which is something that staff are recommending just to bring us in line with what county senior centers are charging to help offset the cost of running the center. The last thing that's important to note is that our current model is a bit turned from this,

which is that we book in as much community space as possible at the free rate, and then we backfill with private rental space. So, if we were to maintain that model, we would potentially lose up to $1.2 million annually. But we want to find a good space in the middle where we are still prioritizing that community use, but also setting a goal for private rentals to cost recover our operating costs. One of the exercises we were asked to do is kind of look at a cost comparison of what would some of the, alternatives be. So, we looked at three. One is the Willard-Chirwood Health Center. And what I want to emphasize on the column that has the Willard-Chirwood Health and Community Center figures, those are real numbers.

So, the 54.3 is actually based on bids that came from all the subcontractors when the Christman Company went out. So, they're very hard numbers. The Green Acres New and the Green Acres Renovation, those are order of magnitude estimates that were made. We didn't do a deep study in terms of doing concept drawings and doing detailed cost estimates. The Willard-Chirwood, you know, we were talking about, obviously, the partnership with Fairfax County. One thing that's not in these numbers is you kind of, you realize the future community value of Green Acres. So, whatever you decide to do with it, the fact that you're moving these facilities to a, getting free land from the county at a dollar a year,

that frees up your options of what you can do with Green Acres. If you had to buy land for a new facility, if you weren't at Green Acres and you had to go buy land, my estimation is you'd need about four acres, which would cost a handsome penny. The Green Acres New Build, what we built into that one, is looking at a completely new standalone building. So, we would scrape the existing Green Acres building. We'd go in with basically the same program we're building at Willard-Chirwood with new above-ground parking because it's going to take about 200 parking spaces. Figuring you're not going to want to remove those fields. So, we're figuring not underground parking, but above-ground parking for the new build.

And then Green Acres renovation is basically taking care of the deferred maintenance. So, using the Moseley study of the facility condition assessment that was done as a starting point. And then also to look at the gym, replacing the gym, so doing selective demolition on the existing gym and going in with the new gym and locker rooms and bathrooms associated with that. So, I go into the numbers side of the slide. The all-in total project costs. So, that's looking at what does it cost to do the full project moving forward. And any costs there's spent in the past. So, the all-in total project costs for Willard-Chirwood, we've talked about, 54.3. The all-in new build at Green Acres would be 55.6.

And the all-in reno at Green Acres would be 58.5. We did the debt service. And JC is going to talk about the strategy for debt service. But for the purposes of comparison, we just said, hey, we're going to lump sum, do all the debt service in year one. So, that equates to that much debt burden. And going forward, we calculated capital reserve. We looked at the total capital cost. We just looked at the first five years. So, not including the capital reserve in this comparison. We did the operating cost. The operating costs for both Willard-Chirwood and the new build are basically the same. Figuring they're both brand new buildings. The staff costs are a little bit less at Green Acres because of some of the challenges with the multiple entrances at Green Acres that you would not have if you had just a sole purpose building.

So, we reduced that for both the new build and the Green Acres reno. The building operating costs a little bit higher on the Green Acres reno because you're talking about a 65-year-old building with old bones. So, those costs are higher. And then we looked at the cost recovery. And we used the break-even numbers that Stacy just went through for both the Willard and the Green Acres new. They're the exact same numbers because both of them would be new buildings. For the Green Acres renovation, we won't have a new fitness center that you'll be able to rent. We won't have the ability to really sponsor fitness classes. We won't have that fitness classroom that we have in the new building. And the rental opportunities are less.

So, those numbers run a lot lower. So, we have the total cost recovery. And then we came down to, you know, total cumulative annual cost without the capital renewal funds. 3.8 for the Willard-Chirwood. 3.5 for the new build at Green Acres. And 5.2 for the Green Acres reno. And then the numbers below that are the equivalent pennies on the real estate tax. 4.3, 3.9, and 5.9. Did you explain the sunk cost and debt service? So, a question that came up previously is when you look at the Green Acres new and the Green Acres reno, we built in the sunk cost. The city's already paid $4 million. That cost does not go away. So, the total cost has to include the sunk cost. So, that's built into that 55 and that 58 number.

When we did the capital costs in terms of when we go out for bond referendum, we took that $4 million back off of all three because we're looking at just what has to be financed going forward. Thanks. In looking at those comparisons at Green Acres that James just reviewed on the last slide, we took a look back at project objectives and considerations. And those are listed along the left side of the slide here. And most of these were identified by that original task force back in 2015, but have really continued to hold true as the project has progressed. The columns on the right referenced these factors related to Willard Sherwood and as well as those two potential options at Green Acres. There was a clear need for a modern purpose-built community center which would be delivered at Willard Sherwood.

A new modern community center could be built at the Green Acres site or as noted in the second row, renovated or expanded facility that would be better than what is there. The Willard site is supported through city policy through the work of the Green Acres Committee, the Old Town Small Area Plan, the conference plan was mentioned earlier. It would certainly contribute to the sense of place and place making on that northern end of Old Town Fairfax. The Willard site is in a central location that's accessible by all modes of transportation. It's located on the Q-Bus route. There's certainly a distinct advantage, particularly as the bicycle and pedestrian access will be further improved with the multimodal project.

Any option to build new or expand existing at Green Acres would impact the park and the green space that's currently there, which isn't the case at the Willard site that already has significant impervious coverage and isn't located within the park. With respect to keeping existing programs and facilities in continuous operation to the greatest extent possible, the Willard site allows Green Acres and its programs and offerings to continue unaffected and largely limits impacts to the existing Sherwood. A new building at Green Acres could be sited in such a way that it could limit impact to the existing Green Acres and would obviously leave Sherwood unaffected, but any alternate location at Green Acres from the current building site would impact green space and the fields.

I noted the central location of Willard and the availability of multimodal access. With respect to co-location, having the facility adjacent to Van Dyke Park with the ability to structure programs that make use of the park and the community center, as well as the opportunity to expand Sherwood into a full service community center were distinct advantages, as well as the partnership benefits of proceeding with the county in terms of sharing costs for design and construction and long-term benefits of shared maintenance and capital reinvestment. As I noted on the slide that covered the phase two agreement, there are no property acquisition costs at Willard, as there also wouldn't be at Green Acres.

So regarding debt service, as noted, this project has been fully appropriated, but that does not mean that debt has been issued against it. And the main reason no debt has been issued against it is because in a project similar to this, the majority of the costs are construction and we're not there yet. So we would be proposing issuing three tranches of debt. The first one potentially here in the next few months, coming before council for a resolution to issue the first tranche of debt as listed in the table below. About 21, almost $22 million would be the first tranche, equaling about $1.6 million in principal and interest payment in year one, which is about $1.85 on the real estate tax rate.

And then coming back almost every year thereafter for the next two years to council wanting to do another resolution or another debt issuance. In year two, about $24.2 million. And then year three, a little under $5 million. Cumulatively, a total principal and interest payment estimated to be about $3.8 million. With a cumulative potential real estate tax rate impact of $4.33. This process or this issuance is very similar to what we would do with schools. Schools is looking at a $220 million debt issuance. We would not take all that in year one. We would phase that out as it is needed while we're doing that construction. It's also the most prudent approach to do. One, you don't want to just have idle money sitting there while it's not being fully utilized.

And then, two, the amount of potential burden on the resident or the average homeowner when it comes to the tax bill. The other potential factor is, as discussed during our budget retreat, we are anticipating inflation or interest rate to actually come down from where it currently is at 4% to about 3%. So that would be something that would also be beneficial when we actually issue the debt. In terms of some considerations in terms of delay or canceling the project, delay impacts. Currently, we're done with the design. We're 100% done with the design. We're near complete with the permitting. We're assuming project approval. If we get project approval, construction would start this summer. Any delays based on $127 million at escalation each month is about $400,000.

Every month we lose. If we lose too much time, the bids expire. The bids are actually good for 60 days. We've built in a kind of a retainer to keep those bids alive for a little bit longer because of the date that we anticipate that we'll be ready for award in late April or May. But if we exceed past that, then the project would need to be rebid, potentially rebid. Moving our cancellations. So the city has $4 million currently that's been expended. Actually a little closer to 4.5 now, uh, the county impacts are restarting the design. The county has $8 million of some costs that they've paid to date roughly. And then it's estimated that the redesign is an associated escalation and extending the health department.

Uh, lease would be another $12 million. Um, so a total impact to the county of about $20 million. The other thing in terms of the green acres, I kind of look at it as green acres has been running on ball tires for awhile. So you run a big risk of, um, a major repair, uh, landing in your lap or loose, losing the service that are provided at that facility. As I mentioned at the outset, uh, there aren't, uh, items where we're requesting action by the council this evening. There's still some work, um, yet to be done before we were re request, um, action. Uh, but, uh, here are the next steps and the anticipated timeline associated with them. Um, we will begin the process to negotiate that guaranteed maximum price with the construction manager at risk.

These would be contract details, terms, exclusions, those sorts of things. We don't anticipate a lot of movement in terms of pricing. Um, we anticipate that that would be completed by April. Um, at that point in time, after the, uh, guaranteed maximum price has been negotiated, the, the county would issue a notice to the city. Um, and, and this is in accordance with the agreement that phase two agreement that we've mentioned tonight. Um, with a 10 day notice for the city to respond, uh, the county would either, uh, notify its intent to award the construction contract to the construction manager at risk. Um, with that negotiated guaranteed maximum price, or its intent to release a new request for proposal for bid build contractor.

That would not be to revisit design, but that would be to pursue a different method of construction procurement or election to terminate the agreement. Um, the city has that 10 day period to respond. Um, we would anticipate, um, coming forward to the council on April 28th, which is a regular meeting date, um, requesting action on, on one proceeding with the project or terminating the agreement. Um, two on, on bond authorization, um, allowing the city to move forward with the issuance of debt, um, for this project. Um, as well as amendments to, to that phase two design agreement, that would be to update the budget with that final, final number, um, as well as the schedule moving forward. So that's what we anticipate, um, in terms of the next steps and the action items, um, for council to consider.

Thank you again for the opportunity to step through this. We're pleased to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you for the presentation. Council member McQuillan. Thank you so much for that presentation. And I do have a lot of questions because as you guys are aware, I only had four minutes at the end of our meeting recently. So, um, I hung on to my questions and I hope you don't mind. Um, I really appreciate you taking the time. Um, so let me start with, I, I have a general question regarding bond referendums. I noticed that in November, 2020, the county, um, put out a bond referendum for their portion of this building. Do you know if the city had similar discussion? Was that. I'm not aware that the city had discussion on that.

I think that may have preceded J J C's time, but he could spur certainly speak to, um, to the bonding process. Okay. So I don't need to know the bond process since I went with that, went through that with the school board, but I was just curious as to, um, if there was any discussion about that since the county was. I recognize that there was going to be public probably want some way in here on this. And I do appreciate going through the timeline. I have some questions about that portion of it. Let me get to it really quick. So during outreach at what point you said that you mentioned the costs associated with the building at certain points during your public outreach. Do you know how well attended those events were?

They were actually pretty well attended. And we also had things, uh, up on the, what's engaged site. So we had a lot of feedback on the engage, the in-person. Um, and I'm kind of going off memory, but 20 or so people come into each of the meetings a little more in terms of the virtual that showed up to the virtual meetings. So we did two virtual one in person. I remember right. Uh, at the early meeting. And that was that first, when we first shared the number was that November, 2022, you can actually go on the county website and you can see the recording of. Yeah. Yeah. And I'm meeting archive page. I love that page. Yeah. Um, so my question, I guess we're operating costs ever discussed that point.

We did not develop operating costs until, um, September. The first time we presented operating costs was September of 24. And that was that 2.7 million. So we, we went in with some high assumptions. Um, so we went in a really high number and the operating costs that came down significantly. Uh, but September 24 and I, um, we were actually directed if I remember correctly, it was either by the city manager or the city council. When we showed the operating costs said, Hey, make sure you share this with the community. So we did that. We took those operating costs out to the community. We didn't have the cost recovery at that time. Um, but we had the operating costs. Now, does the cost recovery model, does that take into consideration the fact that the operating costs, since the majority are, are employee related there to employee people, that's probably going to increase over time due to inflation.

So does that cost recovery model take that into consideration when it's looking at that? Yes, it's actually in our favor in that way, in that we developed the staff pricing based on potential increase for inflation. And what we're using right now are rental rates from this year. So we anticipate that rental rates will also across the area continue to, uh, increase, but we are using just the current rental rates to make that cost recovery number. But we are looking at what it is likely we'll be paying, um, staff in, um, in the projected time that this building opens. Okay, good. Thank you. Um, are there any elements of this, this center that were not included that originally were asked by or thought of as a need from the community for this?

As was stated, certainly the, the, the premise was to, to move the, the programs at green acres that exist to the new facility. And so that was the baseline. Were there things that were requested by the community that aren't included? Absolutely. The one that comes to mind is a swimming pool. Okay. That we heard about, um, a few times. Um, fortunately there are other options that city residents have for indoor, um, swimming available through the county. Um, but that was certainly not something that was within the scope of what the facility could handle nor the budget. Okay. I was just curious as to what was presented, what they, you know, what the meat in those meetings, um, what came out of that, especially as I'm watching other communities deal with a very similar situation.

that we have here. So, um, I'll come back. I'll give a few moments for somebody else to ask questions so I can get my thoughts organized and then I'll ask some more questions. Thank you. Council Member Peterson. A couple of quick things and then I'll let somebody else, um, hop in. It's just term of debt is 25 years. We were projecting at 20 years, four and a half percent. Okay. Fixed. Uh, will we be hiring a new construction manager for this? We've hired the Christmas company as our CMR construction manager at risk. So they carry the project all the way through that. The procurement method is actually you bring your construction manager, which is acts like a GC. You bring them in during schematic with the idea, you kind of work hand in glove with the architect and the owner to get what you want out.

They've now, they bid it to give us a guaranteed maximum price before we award. We're negotiating that now. We'll come back on April 28th with a final number, but that's their number to build it. So we don't have to hire anybody internally. Um, no, we, we, we wouldn't. Okay. Uh, so I think we have some rep, some public health representatives from the city of Fairfax here. I'm sorry. We have kept from Fairfax County. Uh, I am so sorry, uh, that we've kept you up so late. Um, so I want to go back just for clarity and understand, uh, maybe the scope of services for the health side of this. And again, appreciate so much that you're here. Uh, I think I heard earlier that the intention was that this was going to be focused on preventive care.

Can I just understand a little bit more clearly about that? Uh, the reason I'm, I'm asking is I have heard from members of the community and I've since taken a look and this can all be very flawed information. Um, my understanding that this will have a tuberculosis center and that would be designed to, um, engage in preventive care, but also treatment. Is that correct? Um, good evening, uh, Madam Mayor and council members. Um, we have multiple programs at the health department. So a lot of what we do, the number one volume of service that we provide is immunizations. We do provide STI testing and treatment and a lot of those things are centered around prevention as well as the efforts around nutrition.

With TB, um, this is something that the health department has been doing at the center, um, for decades. And this is what we provide in all of our other facilities. It's a standard public health, um, program or service area. Um, what's important to remember is whether we're talking about TB or other communicable diseases, as was mentioned earlier in the presentations, is people don't come to the health department to get, uh, diagnosed with TB when they're actively ill. Um, I think we talked about this the last time. There's two forms of TB, the kind that you're ill, you often have the infection in your lungs and you can spread it to other individuals. When you have TB disease, you are sick. You will wind up going to an ER, possibly your doctor's office.

You're not coming to the health department as a first place. So what happens is we identify ill individuals and then we do the follow-up care at the health department. So it is possible that we have infectious individuals come see us in the initial week. Um, but as soon as we start the medications, usually within a few weeks, those individuals are not able to transmit the illness. When we know about individuals who are actively sick, we have mechanisms for that. We often ask them to come mask. If not, we bring them into the, into the facility where we have negative air pressure rooms. TB, unlike measles, is not something that you can catch from another person by just sitting in the room. I can have active TB disease, coughing, and it really takes hours and prolonged exposure to pass it on.

So when we have folks that get TB, we talk about who's in your household? Who's been with you weeks? Where do you work? It does not get transmitted to other individuals within, within weeks, within minutes or hours of exposure. But again, most of the patients that we actually see are folks that come and get a skin test or a blood test. That means they've been infected with TB. A lot of folks that come from other countries as well might get exposed to TB. The TB bacteria is in their body, but the immune system contains it. So it's called TB infection. You're not able to transmit the disease when you just have the infection. In fact, the reason we do the blood test and the skin test is because the person has no symptoms.

And so when we have children go to school or when we have folks come from other countries in our new-comer clinic, we're testing for infection. They're not able to transmit the disease. The disease is when your immune system can't control the infection, and you're coughing, you're sick, you're losing weight, you're having night sweats, you're symptomatic. And again, those people usually wind up presenting to the ED and not our place. So let's see if Dr. Glory wants to add anything more. Maybe first of all, I should ask if what Dr. Jabari said, is there any question that you have from that? I'm interested in geographically what sort of service area is this encompassing? I mean, this sounds like this is a service that would be available for a market that's bigger than the size of the city of Fairfax?

Is that correct? No, that is not correct. So the Joseph Village Center is one of five centers that provide the same services. We have it in five different sites so that it's easy for people in the surrounding areas to have easy access. So Joseph Village Center isn't the only place where people can come for TB services. There are other centers that do that as well. And so we have all of our sites. In fact, Joseph Village is the only center that is not really co-located with many other businesses and other organizations or whatever. So it is the Joseph Village Center services is what you get anywhere else in our public health centers. Thank you. That's very helpful. And I know there's, I believe, of the 5-1 in Annandale, for instance, and Herndon and West Springfield and such.

That's correct. Mount Vernon. Yeah. And then beyond TB, is this designed to treat a broader range of infectious diseases? So all of our clinics, we have STI services. All of our clinics do that. We have immunization clinics. We have TB services. And that's about it. When it comes to treatment, really we do TB and STDs. So we wouldn't expect STD transmission in a public setting. And so really TB is what we're looking at. And that is, again, as discussed, is in the first few weeks of that initial exposure. So it is after midnight. So the brunt of the work that we do, going back to your point, in public health, what we do is prevent prevention, right? We're preventing the illness. So we're given the vaccines.

We're given the education. With HIV, we test. We don't treat. We refer to our community partners. So the only things we do treat, again, in the health department is STDs and TB. So then just to understand, going back to the original comment and squaring it up with this expanded understanding, please, if you could say one more time, what is the range or the scope of health services that are going to be provided? Sure. So we provide immunizations. We provide maternal child health services. That includes pregnancy testing and referring individuals to places of care for continuation of maternity care. We provide STI and HIV testing. We provide STI treatment. We provide TB screening. So again, folks coming from other countries just needing a blood test or a skin test to see whether they're infected.

And then if they are, we do the diagnosis and treatment. We provide women, infant, children supplemental nutrition programs. So this is a program aimed at individuals that meet a certain income eligibility. Very much similar to SNAP except there's also a health component where we look at the child's hemoglobin level and look at their growth chart. So there's the breastfeeding mom, the pregnant mom, and children up to age five. And then we also provide outside of clinical services, vital records, as was mentioned, which is our death certificates, birth certificates, marriage certificates, and divorce certificates. Those are the key services. Given that this is our flagship facility, our central pharmacy that provides medication for all of the rest of the other five departments would also be co-located there.

And I believe that's it. So is this just, if I understand correctly, is this a continuation of existing service scope and level? Yes. Okay. Thank you so much. I actually only have one more question, but it's not a health question. So if you'll permit me, I just very quickly. Just if I could chime in before they leave. That sensitivity to ensuring everyone's safety is reflected in the building. There will be a direct access into the health department that can be utilized. There are examination rooms where the air is handled with negative air pressure to ensure that that air isn't circulated throughout the building. Again, to ensure overall safety of everyone there. You know, TB is a very basic public health service, TB care.

And we've been doing this for decades. There is no, and we, TB surveillance and tracking all is part of our core functions. Never has there been transmission of TB to anyone in a building in one of our health centers as a result of a patient coming through. So. Thank you very much. And I would also highly recommend John Green's book, Everything is Tuberculosis, which is a fantastic read. And it really does explain all of this. So just, if you want a good book, everything is tuberculosis. I might, one more question, which again, not on health, but somebody else may have one for you. This goes back to a cost issue. If I heard correctly on the history of this, the construction numbers have stayed stable really from the get-go.

They, they're pretty darn close to where they started and whenever that first year was, whether it's 22 or 23, something like that. But if I heard correctly, and I may not have, the maintenance and operations numbers started low and have gotten higher. Is that correct? No. It's actually the opposite. We, we're conservative. Thank you. We're very conservative in our first, if you go to this slide, the first time we shared operation, total operating costs. We actually shared a 2.7 million. We're at 1.7 million now. So we went in very conservative. We assumed it off of total project costs versus construction value, building value. So when we scaled that down and matched what Fairfax County uses for their benchmark costs, about $8.5 per square foot for utilities, custodial maintenance.

And even that number we added security. We added a maintenance, one and a half maintenance people because the county would pay for the other one and a half person. So even at the 1.7 we feel we're conservative. And that's fully inclusive of all labor, all FTEs, all employees, everybody? Yes. Okay. All right. So it started at 2.7 and then it went and came down. Correct. But I will say, unless I misheard you, the, looking at the numbers here, the construction numbers that haven't budged much. Am I reading that right? Correct. I mean, they were at 1.23.8 in November of 2022. They went up as high as 1.31. And that was the September. That was the last time we were here before you all. They were 1.31 and the city cost was at 55.9.

And then we worked hard to bring that down because we didn't want to be bumping up against the 56 million. And I wanted to express appreciation for you doing that. Thank you. Thanks. Council Member Hall. Council Member Hall. Thank you. A number of my questions have been answered already. I did just want to point out, I know we talked about this in our one-on-one last week, but the third floor for seniors, I think that's a concern for me. And I know we addressed it and I'm just going to restate the conversation that we had, which is that my concern is that people will be up there waiting for help should a situation arise. You have assured me that there is an area that they can kind of close off that is a safe space essentially where they could line up some wheelchairs and that it is ready to go for people to be transported downstairs.

Yeah. I just want to confirm that that is not a concern. I just want to confirm that that is not a concern. It's a building code requirement that you have an area of refuge. So you have a fire protected area where people can have access until they can be rescued. So I think Brooke was pulling up that space. Okay. Is it unlikely that a fire would occur in that fire rescue area? It's two-hour fire protected. It's fire rated. So it's fire rated and closed. Okay. Okay. Thank you. And the building is fully sprinklered. Okay. Thank you. The other item or one of the other items that we addressed was the staff at the desks and how the layout lends itself to a larger amount of staff than might otherwise be needed.

And one of the questions that I had asked was, it looks like the city will be providing the staff for when you come in because we have the gym and the main entrance. The question that I had posed was, you know, does the county need someone there? And you said, if I recall correctly, not really. And then my question was, well, if we don't have someone sitting there, then does the county need someone? And so we had talked about possibly sharing some staff for those roles. Yeah. A discussion we can have right now, the county's said they really don't need a security person or a desk person. They have people in their spaces. We haven't worked through one of the agreements Brooke talked about was the operating agreement.

And those are discussions we still have to have this with the city. We kind of understand the framework is it's still the operating costs for 5842. But kind of looking at, you know, like the maintenance staff right now, we're saying we need three maintenance staff with the assumption the city's going to maintain it, but the cost will be shared. But to have those three maintenance staff, one and a half of those people will be our whatever 58% of three people is the county would be responsible for. And the city would be responsible for the other. So if we look at are there other things we need to do to adequately staff the space, I think that's a conversation that we could still have. To this date, the county has not said they need a desk person at that location.

Okay. I do honestly just wonder if they would change their mind if there literally was no one sitting there and then their people are walking in not knowing where to go either. But I guess that will be seen at some point in the future potentially. And just if we can go back to the numbers, the cost comparisons, it looks like it will be for the next 20 years at 4.5%. The building costs alone will be an increase of 4.33 cents tranched in over three years, so cumulative. So then for 18 years, roughly, we'll have 4.33 cent tax increase to pay for the building. Correct statement? Okay. Then in addition to that, the way I looked at it was there's three different potential scenarios for what the operating and maintenance costs will be,

assuming the information that's been presented. The first one is that we have a loss of $1.2 million if we continue to operate it at the way we have been with the cost recovery model, which is unlikely. That, if my calculations are correct, would equate to 1.36 cents on the tax rate, which would then make the building 5.69 cents. The next option was the break even, which, again, was not as advantageous, but was kind of that far right column. That then would be a tax increase of 1.96 cents or a total building cost of 6.29 cents. And then the third and obviously most advantageous is projected with market rates, with market rate of recovery at the 30-20 split, which would then be .77 cents on the tax rate for the operating and maintenance costs, which would bring the project to 5.1 cents.

Or 5.10 cents, I guess, is the most appropriate way. So I just want to point those out for those that are number focused like I am. So this, I will say, is significantly lower than what the numbers had been the last time we had this in-depth conversation, which I think was closer to about 8 or 9.2 cents, which was very extraordinary and concerning. So these numbers are certainly coming down. I obviously have hopes that they would continue to come down. Did I do that wrong? Let me just double check with JC and kind of walk through that with you one more time. Okay. The Willard Sherwood at the break even would actually result in 4.33 because if you go through this slide here, we looked at, we included operating costs and we took into consideration cost recovery.

So the total cumulative of all the operating and recovery is 4.33. That's correct. So it's not 5 point. It's the 4 point. It's what's on the bottom of this slide, 4.33. Okay. So 4.33 assumes operating costs as well. That's not just the financing of the building? That includes the financing of the building and the operating and the cost recovery. So that's an all in. The 4.33 at the bottom there is an all in number. Okay. So that assumes the total cost recovery then of the 1.7. So that assumes the break even. That assumes the break even. Yep. So if we use the high end, it would be less than 4.33. Okay. Well, that's great news. And then quickly. Glad I asked. Council Member Hall, just a quick clarification as well.

So it's the equivalent of 4.3 cents. It doesn't necessarily mean that we have to increase it. If we have appreciation and or other revenues, we can go ahead and offset that amount. Yes. I just like to look straight in the eye of things and know worst case what I'm looking at. So that's very helpful. Thank you. And just one question for the health facility. And you can just nod from there. You don't need to come up. But do any of your other facilities include combined childcare and seniors? Or is this a totally new model? No. It is not new. Not new. No. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Council Member Amos. Stay awake, everyone. We're almost there. I only had a couple of questions and then circle back.

I'll just have a few comments. No need to drag it out. Just to go more into that cost reduction slide. And I'm just more so curious about what your thought process was on that. How did we get to those specific changes and make those determinations? Oh, the savings? Yes. Yeah. Let me get to that slide. So basically working with the CMR contractor and actually them working with some of their subcontractors and working with the architect, we look at, hey, what are some things we can trim? You know, what are some things we can work on? So just walking through each one, the foundation and structure. We had waterproofing that went around the basic columns that didn't really affect water coming into the building.

So we reduced the amount of waterproofing around the boot building, which was a significant cost at 63,000 of savings. The $500,000 site playground, to build two levels down, we have to build what's called a supportive excavation where you dig down and you put lagging in, you drop H piles in. We actually were able to reduce the perimeter. And this was something to look at in terms of what's the worker space needed to do the work and what's the type of, or what's the method of construction to do that. This was something that Chrisman company came up with. So we were able to reduce the overall excavation. Um, and we also looked at what Blenheim was doing because when Blenheim comes in, they're

going to lower the grade. And what we were going to do is dig down. So we're actually going to excavate, we're going to say, blow up some money because we're going to excavate some of that dirt, but it saves us on how much supportive excavation work we have to do. Um, there's some minor savings around the playground. So we were able to keep the playground shades. We were able to keep the playground. We want it, but we're able to save some costs working with the playground supplier. Uh, the roofing, uh, it's a single ply roof, uh, uh, white, I believe to be reflective. Um, we looked at the mill thickness cause we were a higher grade mill. Um, and we looked at the county standards. They allowed a little bit lower mill.

Um, so we looked at, we did some savings there, uh, electrical. Uh, we looked at the type of conduit we're using for the low voltage system and we're able to save some money on that type of conduit. We moved the generator from inside to outside. We had two generators. We went to one generator. Um, we still have the emergency, uh, the critical requirements for emergency power. Uh, the hazardous material abatement, uh, there is asbestos. There's other things that have to be demolished. We're still taking care of all that in accordance with the state law. Um, but in terms of monitoring it, the county had already done some of that inspection. So that's something that we were just double counting early.

And then the 50, 55,000 don't test me on that. That was just a lot of miscellaneous little savings of five and 10,000 here and there. The 170,000 equipment was kind of looking at how we purchased. Do we use kind of an existing contract to buy all the equipment for the kitchens in two different spaces, uh, versus bidding it? We bid it, we bid it, we saved $170,000, uh, there. Uh, thank you. Clearly putting a lot of work to it and I appreciate that. Um, a question for, uh, Director Summer, uh, not Summer. Blah. Sorry, Stacy. Summerfield. Geez. I know there was a conversation earlier on. I see you looking at me. Uh, there was a conversation earlier on about, and I just wanted to re circle back to that about different rates for city residents versus county and why that was not recommended and not really feasible.

If you could just state that one more time. Yeah. The council is of course able to do whatever they'd like. Right now we do have reciprocity with the county, which means that if you want to join a county, um, community center, do swim lessons or anything like that, city residents pay the same amount as county residents. Um, this is something that our seniors take advantage of. They join the seat, the county senior centers as well, mainly for bus trips because everyone wants to maximize their bus trips. And so right now our city seniors are able to join the senior center at the $75 rate. Um, the non-resident county rate, if they were a senior joining would be $150 per year. So it's a pretty substantial difference.

Um, so they are able to utilize that, um, that resident rate, the county residents get. So in the spirit of reciprocity, we also offer that same, um, that same, uh, savings to county residents. So they get the same fee as city residents. And, um, we could of course break with reciprocity. Um, there is always the possibility that the county would break with reciprocity as well. And our, um, city residents would then have to pay those higher prices for things like swim lessons or to belong to the senior center. Uh, thank you. And my last question is on that cost comparison slide. And this was just a clarification. I think we had over email, but just wanted to bring it up here too. So for that, I, my understanding is that the numbers related to, uh, specifically the green acres options, those already factor in inflation escalation costs, but it does not factor in sunk costs.

Is that correct? It does include sunk costs. Okay. So it, it does include sunk costs. Okay. Thank you for that. Sure. Um, and I'll probably just go ahead and wrap up cause I don't feel like talking again. Um, so just some quick comments on my end. Obviously I, I am a new homeowner in the city and very appreciative of that. And, you know, in the spirit of that, I'm even more excited for this project because I would be very ecstatic to be able to take my kids here at one point now that I'm definitely, definitely committed, at least for the longterm here. So I definitely appreciate that. And, you know, something I've reflected on that we've dealt with in recent years, obviously the pandemic and how critical that Willard services were when it came to that as a resilience hub for immunization for testing.

We have some critical services that operate at the site, but in addition to that childcare, we're talking seniors. Uh, this is an example of our green building policy, public health and county partner. Um, I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, but basketball and sports tourism. I think that's something that's worth, uh, and I know my basketball group chat would greatly appreciate that. Um, parks foundation opportunities. I, I think that this encapsulates everything that the city wants to be all in one project. And I think it's critical that we keep that moving forward. And one other note that I'll bring up is related to safety and crime, but not within the building itself. An example of this was in the city of Baltimore, the new mayor, one of the first initiatives he did to reduce crime was to extend community service hours.

And they saw dramatic reductions. The, I think the most of the city has ever seen. And so that even shows in terms of crime prevention, what a community center can do for us. So I think it's a great worthwhile longterm investment and, uh, looking forward to more conversations and keeping that price steady. Other questions or comments, council member Bates. So the way I see it, this is one of the core functions of a city is to provide the services that would be provided in this city. And that's something that we are falling, uh, well short of the mark on right now. So then if we can't do this, what can we do? This is something that has been in the works for many, many years and is long, long overdue.

Any other comments, questions for the good of the body? Well, I'll just add my two cents worth. Um, so one of the, the second community meeting was November of 2022. At that point, I was the mayor elect of the city. Um, I was joined at these community meetings by David Meyer, who was the mayor and John Mason, who was the former mayor. And John Mason was very involved in a lot of the projects of the city, pretty much right up until the day he died. Um, where we're gonna be on April 28th is, we're being asked three things, to proceed or terminate the agreement. I don't have a vote unless there's a tie. Uh, as far as the bond authorization and the construction agreement amendment, I don't have a vote at all.

So I just want to be very clear to the community on what my role has been, what my role currently is. And to be very clear that this body will decide one way or another whether this project goes forward. But from the beginning, I have supported it. I was a big advocate for that underground parking. And I do think it is an enormously important project for our city and in the future residents of our city, including Anthony's children, who I've yet to be. Anyway. So, um, with that, we thank you for this and we will come back and we will discuss it some more, I'm sure. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Mayor, you want me to give it a minute? Or no? I was going to give it a minute to clear. All right. We'll keep going. I'll speak loudly and quickly. Power through. All right. I believe as we look at the 17th, and I'll check with the clerk, I don't think that's consent, right? It's not. So all the items you see on the 17th will be? Yeah, they're individual items. So they'll take action on each individual. Okay. So that will allow us to take action on all those items. And so looking ahead, happy to answer any questions on that. On the 24th of note, including the proclamations, there's number three, the presentation by the city manager of the proposed FY 2027 operating and CIP budget.

I believe if JC is still paying attention, we talked about moving that one consent item on the 24th to a later date. So that probably won't occur there. There are a couple of pre-applications that are coming your way as part of work session on the 24th. Update and discussion on citywide level service study and looking at impacts of development on city services and infrastructure. And then we're revisiting police and human services, coordinated response programming as a result of a previous discussion that you had last year relative to that issue. Looking further ahead, and won't go too far, March 3rd work session, budget presentation by schools, and then a follow-up on our retreat. The next steps, we had three or four items that require further action as a result of our retreat.

Happy to answer any questions further down on this or previous items that are currently on the futures list. Any questions or comments? Council Member Peterson. On the 24th, a couple things. The very last item, police and human services, appears to be one of three items covered in a prior resolution. And I'm wondering what became of the other two. And which number and which? Okay, number four, the last thing on February 24th. Top of the page, the back page. The last thing is police and human services. We passed a resolution that included three components. One was the exploration of a partnership between community services and police. The second was the protection of City Hall by establishing this as a gun-free zone.

And the third was looking at the better use of data and communications around it for assessment purposes, for analysis purposes on gun crime, but beyond that as well. So those were three specific things. And prior to this time when this has been on the agenda, they've been rolled together as a response to all of them. But at this particular time, it only includes the health and human service, the police and human services part. And I don't see anything on the remaining futures items where those other items are. And I'm just wondering what may have happened here. I'll check on that. I remember hearing some discussion about this. You want to expand? I was just going to say we just were trying to get a better title for it.

The subject matter that they're going to be talking about is still the same. Good to know. I know it's at least the two. As far as making the campus of the city a gun-free zone, I think, is what you're asking about, because the building already is. Correct. But the campus is really, I think, a discussion more with the city attorney. And it's a council. The council can decide if they want to make it. Well, that's great. But is that going to be before us? And is the city attorney going to be making that presentation at that same time? Because I think the expectation was all three of these items that were resolved by the council would be coming back. I can check with him. I don't believe he is.

When we discussed it in the meeting, Mr. Lubkerman said that it would require turning this campus of City Hall into a park. That's what would require this to be, is to turn the campus into a park. So I do believe that Mr. Lubkerman will be prepared to talk about the pros and the cons of going down that road. Because we did discuss it when we discussed the content of this presentation. And I remember some conversations around zoning and other things that may complicate that. So that all sounds familiar. We'll make sure we're more specific. It's a bucket. And the parks thing is a piece of the bucket. But I think that was a resolved issue. So it really ought to come back with everything else on schedule.

Absolutely. And also, I kind of think that comes first, not last. We're looking at pre-applications, neither of which I'm familiar with. I'm not sure exactly why they're on the agenda. And then the city-level service study. But the gun issue, it was a big one, precedes all of these. And I would hate to see that shoved to the end of the night. Because it seems to me it could involve some quality time, given that there are three things there and each of them are a bucket. So I would advocate that instead of this being the last of those work session items, that it becomes the first so that we have some quality time on it. Yes. If that's the will of the council, I'm perfectly fine doing that. That makes sense.

Fine. That's what everyone wants. You know, I think part of this is that we've got people here for pre-application hearings to answer our questions. And certainly the police department staff is here, too. But, you know, when you end your meetings after midnight, there are really no winners here. So I guess the people who are involved in these applications can go last. I think perhaps the thinking was is that they would go first because they're not staff. But I have no problem with it. It's the last of the first. Yes. Council Member Hall? Another thing I think might be missing from here, or maybe it's just not on here because it's in process, is the efficiency audit that we had discussed. Do we have a status on that?

Great question. That is March 3rd. That's part of that follow-up on the retreat and next steps. That was the second or third item on that agenda. So I would anticipate, if my mind serves me well at a quarter to one, that, you know, we talk strategic plan, we talk efficiency, we talk communications, and we also talk metrics. So all four of those will come back at the same time, and we'll have very specific action steps for all of those. Perfect. Thank you. Absolutely. Anything else on futures meetings? All right, then. If I might just procedurally, and I suspect you're a step or two ahead of me, in a perfect world, this conversation would happen earlier, and we have a little bit more time. And on which item, House Member?

Futures. I think since this is a council thing, I don't know how we can move the futures discussion up any earlier in the agenda. Sorry, could we repeat that last part? We were chatting about what we're talking about. Council Member Peterson was asking to move this whole item of future agenda items up in the evening. Yeah. The actual request is just to ensure that it occurs earlier in the evening, which may require that we adjourn a little bit earlier than we are this evening. And we allocate more time for this because it's a little bit difficult to go through this at this hour. For which day? Are we talking about the budget day? Council Member Hardy Chandler. We have multiple mechanisms in place to review upcoming agenda items.

This is just the general topic. We also get the draft agenda well ahead of time. So we have asked for and have been staff has been very responsive for giving us multiple opportunities. We don't just have the futures list to go through these topics. So I think the discussion of the place of this on the agenda just takes us down a different direction. We requested a review of the futures list. We have that available 24 hours a day anyway and can provide feedback of that. We requested early agendas. We requested agendas with paragraph descriptions. Our requests have been fulfilled, and it's just incumbent on us to take advantage of those. I would like to move on. Council Member McCullin. I agree.

I think it's time for us to just move on. We've been doing really good with our meetings. This is the first one that's gone this late. And honestly, had we not had to pull certain things out and have discussions about certain items earlier that staff had no clue would have taken that time, we wouldn't be in this position. So I think it's heard. We understand. Nobody likes to be doing this, you know, at midnight after midnight. But I think the way it's been working has been fine. This is the first time this has happened. So. Any other comments on this before we move on? Okay. Manager report out and council comments. Mr. Alexander. Just very quickly, because we haven't said it earlier, I just want to thank our entire leadership team, include council, on our firm response.

We had what we call a hot wash today, which is our after action. We'll dig a little bit further, excuse the pun, into how we did relative to that event, get something back to you. But I want to thank everyone, again, from the council on down to the folks on the street, spend some time riding with them. Appreciate you all getting information out back to the public. And, again, I think that overall, everyone did a fantastic job. I just want to recognize everyone for their efforts around Firm. Thank you. Council Member McQuillen. I just want to say that this month is Virginia School Board Association School Board Appreciation Month. And we have the best school board in the world. So I just want to give a big shout out and say that we appreciate you and thank you for all you do.

Council Member Bates. Just want to wish everyone a happy Black History Month. Council Member Peterson. Well, I'll wish everybody a happy Valentine's Day. Council Member Hardy Chandler. I want to express my appreciation for those who put together the Black History Month reception that we had earlier. I wish it was more attended because it was such a fun time and great music and great food. It is, I'm struck by Tom Ross's quote about a society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they shall never sit. And I just want to say that Black History Month for me gives me an opportunity to sit in the shade of so many ancestors and others who work so hard for me to be here, whether they know it or not.

And so that's very important. I also wanted to acknowledge the police department awards and promotion ceremony, which was amazing. Congratulations to all of the officers who were acknowledged for all of the work that they do for their community. You could tell that they were so humbled by it and really did not want to be in the spotlight at all. They felt like they were doing their job, but it is great to acknowledge great work and such tremendous contributions to our community. And then finally, I want to acknowledge the Office of Events Management, OEM. Is that right? Critical, I'm sorry, Critical Events Management. And Mr. English and their recertification as being best in resilience at the diamond tier level.

And I understand we are the only jurisdiction to have ever reached that level, which is tremendous. And I think that's reflected in certainly their response to the recent storm. Not everything goes perfectly every time for everyone, but the responsiveness, the communication behind the scenes was just incredible. So congratulations to them for re-achieving something that no one else has. Council Member Hall. I'm glad you had other things besides the comments about your ancestors, because that would have been extremely hard to follow up on. But very moving and touching, I will say. Huge congrats to Mr. Walter English, who deserves all the thumbs up for all the great things that he does and the entire department.

And I also want to give a huge shout out to the amazing Parks and Rec Department for putting on an unbelievable Chocolate Lovers Festival. There were challenges and weather and wind and tent struggles. And you really would not have even known that they had anything that was wrong, because they just roll with everything and make it look pretty flawless. And even bring the hot chocolate to you when it couldn't be somewhere else. It was an unbelievable event. I have to say, I actually think I like it at Sherwood better. I kind of liked how everything was in one place. Blasphemy. It was great. I am looking forward to Old Town Hall coming back. But I thought it was phenomenal. And I really think that I was shocked by the number of people that were there with the weather and the wind and all of the things.

And I am looking forward to Saturday with our delegates. So hope to see you there. I don't remember where it is, but I will be there. It's right here. It's City Hall from 9 to 11. Okay. Main Street Bagel popped into my head, but I wasn't sure. No. Delegate Bulova and Senator Salim. I know it was coming. I just don't remember where it was. In our chamber, 9 a.m. Thank you. Okay. Council Member Amos. I also want to echo all of our staff, but Parks and Rec staff this weekend really came in clutch over at Sherwood, having to adjust from Old Town Hall, making that space work. And then, honestly, just a horrific cold front that came through, and it was extremely well attended. Only issue I'll take with you on Sherwood is that a lot of people missed the chocolate fountain.

I was a little hurt about that, but that's okay. It was there, but because you don't have to go through it, a lot of people didn't realize it was in the bag. You mean especially if we had some people? I know, but I sat back there and I was a little lonely. The only other few things I'll mention is a happy belated birthday to my dad. His birthday was his past Friday. Thank you to everyone who helped me move into our new duplex. Greatly appreciate that, especially during snow. That was a little rough. And then I want to echo the sentiments that Council Member Hardy Chandler brought up with Black History Month. I wish everyone a happy Black History Month. I hope you take the time to learn more, educate yourself.

But something that I've reflected on that's kind of struck me deeply, I was watching a movie on the flight back from London. I don't know if you've seen it, Judas and the Black Messiah, going over to the Black Panther Party in Fred Hampton. And something that just sat with me is that I'm older now than a lot of those folks who were assassinated or taken away from us early. And that's just something that rests a little heavy on my heart. So, just wanted to mention that. Thank you. So, I will echo, you know, we as a city did well. And that's all of us. And that's all of you guys, too. Everybody managed emails and concerns and complaints. And Walter English was amazing. The fire department was amazing.

Public Works was amazing. So, Parks and Rec, they had a lot on their plate. The snow was part of it. Chocolate Lovers Festival. But I want to say thank you to the Central Fairfax Chamber of Commerce, specifically Jennifer Rose, Tina Dish of the Old Town Fairfax Business Association, Tara Bore Way of Economic Development for putting on the first ever event to support George Mason University's homecoming. So, Friday night and Council Member Hall and Council Member McQuillan were out there to support. We had 155 check-ins. People got t-shirts. All of you have t-shirts now. And, you know, it was really important for the city to really aspire to be the best hometown possible for George Mason University.

They want the relationship. We want the relationship. But it took a lot of partners. And Jennifer and Tina and Tara and Anthony did a lot of the heavy lifting to make this a reality. And the check-in was in the chocolate, liquid chocolate tent was, you know, so we meshed kind of Chocolate Lovers Festival and homecoming and all the things. And truly, this is one of the things that makes our community so unique. It's why people want to live here. There's such a sense of place. There's such a sense of the 34th Annual Chocolate Lovers Festival and having the university next door. And, you know, these are the things that we need to preserve and promote and invest in because it is what makes us different.

All right. And with that, I am now going to adjourn this meeting at 1256 a.m. on Wednesday. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.