Author: Peter Rousselot

Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com.

In April 2019, the Arlington County Board approved a new Public Open Spaces Master Plan (“POPS plan”). The POPS plan includes a commitment to “add at least 30 acres of new public space over the next 10 years.” Sadly, this commitment is merely an aspiration backed up by zero Arlington tax dollars.

Arlington’s Parks and Recreation Commission has rightly condemned (at p. 3) this lack of funding:

The commission is extremely disappointed with the lack of commitment by the county manager’s CIP [Capital Improvement Plan] proposal for park land acquisition funds… for the next ten years. This decision represents a retrenchment on established county policy to provide funds for strategic and opportunistic park land acquisition. As the county grows in population the need for open space opportunities, both for casual use and recreation purposes, and for natural resource preservation, continues to grow… [W]e believe that a proposal in line with what the current POPS process is proposing of acquiring 30 acres of land over the next 10 years must be supported with a realistic funding commitment…

Arlington continues to fall behind other localities and Arlington’s own prior practices in providing access to parkland

A comprehensive 2016 report from the Civic Federation (“Civ Fed report”) documents how Arlington has continued to fall behind other localities and Arlington’s own prior practices regarding:

• ratio of parkland to population
• dollars devoted to new parkland acquisition

The Civ Fed report explains (at p. 5):

As of 2015, Arlington County had 1,784 acres of parkland within its borders. Of those 1,784 acres, 949 acres were owned by Arlington County, 700 acres were owned by the National Park Service (most of which is Arlington Cemetery), and 135 acres were owned by the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority.

In 1995, Arlington County had 10.8 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. By 2014 the County’s population had grown by over 43,000 residents, and the parkland to population ratio had declined to 7.9 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents.

By contrast, Washington, DC, has 13.2 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, and Fairfax County has 28.3 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents.

The Civ Fed report also traces the history of Arlington’s declining investment in acquiring new parkland (at p. 3):

[B]etween 1995 and 2008, funding for parkland acquisition per two-year bond cycle was between $4.0 and $8.5 million, with most cycles at $8.5 million. Since then… there has been a decline…. Over the six years between 2008 and 2014, land acquisition bond funding totaled only $3.0 million, but [was]supplemented by a total of $5.47 million in pay-as-you go (PAYGO) annual budget allocations. Yet, the total funds of $8.47 million available for land acquisition during the latter six-year period was still far less than the $8.5 million that was typical for each two-year cycle between 1996 and 2004 (an eight-year period).

The next CIP must fully fund the open space acquisition targets in the POPS plan

In accordance with prior practice, all relevant County departments and agencies already are planning for the next CIP (covering fiscal years 2021-2030). The next CIP will be adopted one year from now.

Arlington County’s latest population growth forecast (Profile 2019) projects (at p. 5) that our population will rise from the current 226,400 to significantly more than 270,000 by 2040. Without allocating enough Arlington tax dollars for new open space acquisition, Arlington’s ratio of parkland to population will continue to degrade.

(more…)

Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com.

In the wake of the mass shooting at a Virginia Beach municipal building, Virginia Governor Ralph Northam has set July 9 for a special session of the Virginia legislature to consider new gun safety legislation.

Rising above political polarization

Gun violence, mass shootings, and what to do about them have been incredibly politically polarizing nationally and in Virginia. Calm, rational conversations in which people listen carefully to each other before inflexibly insisting upon their own points of view are rare. That’s a shame.

Sure, partisan politics are involved: Virginia Democrats are trying to take control of the legislature, Virginia Republicans are trying to retain control, and Governor Northam is trying to repair his reputation.

Nevertheless, our elected officials were elected to solve problems. Our tax dollars pay their salaries. We are entitled to a full public discussion, followed by up-or-down votes, on proposed key gun safety legislation because gun violence and mass shootings can kill any of us anytime.

Gun safety legislation that might be introduced by Democrats

Democratic Governor Northam is considering recommending legislation on the subjects discussed below, among others. If he or a Democratic legislator does so, that legislation should receive a full hearing and up-or-down votes on the floor at the special session.

Expand local options to prohibit guns in public buildings

Virginia localities like Arlington have very limited powers to regulate the use of guns. An analysis of the current law is here. Virginia law should be amended to give localities the option to limit the possession of guns in public buildings to only certain categories of owners (e.g., police officers).

Universal background checks

Private sellers of guns in Virginia are not required to conduct universal background checks. This loophole should be closed.

Virginia law should be amended to require private sellers to:

• conduct background checks through a central law enforcement agency that has access to federal and state databases of prohibited purchasers
• maintain records of all firearm transfers for a lengthy period
• report all transfers to state and local law enforcement

Red-flag law

A red flag law permits police or family members to petition a state court to order the temporary removal of firearms from a person who may present a danger to others or themselves. Even Donald Trump has endorsed red flag laws. Unlike 15 other states, Virginia doesn’t have a red flag law. Virginia law should be amended to add one.

Reporting stolen firearms

Virginia does not require firearm owners to report the loss or theft of a firearm. Virginia law should be amended to require individuals to report to law enforcement the loss or theft of a firearm. Examples of laws like this that have been adopted by other states are available here.

One-a-month limits

Laws limiting the number of firearms an individual can purchase per month help reduce the number of guns that end up at the scene of a crime. For that reason, Virginia used to have a one-gun-a-month law. But Virginia repealed that law in 2012 at the request of the NRA. That law should be re-enacted.

(more…)

Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com.

In these increasingly fast-paced times, Virginia’s 31st Senate District (where I live) needs a state senator who can quickly grasp our rapidly changing economic and technological challenges and champion innovative, new regional and state solutions.

We need a senator free from multiple conflicts of interest to advance solutions that are in our best interests, not some special interest. To develop sound energy and environmental policy that is best for us and fit for the 21st century, we need a senator who is free from entanglements with Dominion Energy. Nicole Merlene will be that senator.

Why Nicole Merlene should be nominated

Arlington is Merlene’s hometown. She’s running for Virginia’s State Senate after several years as a Virginia renter’s rights and transportation advocate. She is an economic development professional who has served as a leader in our community, including as an economic development commissioner, and on the boards of the Arlington County Civic Federation, Rosslyn Business Improvement District, North Rosslyn Civic Association, and a local transportation advisory committee.

Merlene has a detailed policy platform outlining her positions on major issues, including: workforce livability, transportation, protecting our environment, education, healthcare, equality for all, and family.

The issues that Merlene has highlighted during her campaign are the top priorities of the district as evidenced by questions raised in recent debates. We need Merlene’s fresh perspectives and know-how in Richmond.

During the 2019 first quarter, Merlene raised $20,936 from 293 donors, all of whom were individual contributors. Not a single dollar she raised in this reporting period came from a corporation, corporate entity, or corporate PAC. Adding to the grassroots nature of her campaign, Merlene’s average contribution was $71.45, and 92% of her contributions were $100 or less.

Why Barbara Favola should not be nominated

Barbara Favola has a continuing practice of representing clients or donors whose interests can conflict with the public’s interests, most significantly when those clients or donors require action by governmental bodies. For example, Favola has represented the following with major business interests in Arlington, the 31st District, and the Commonwealth of Virginia:

• Donor, Advanced Towing, seeking to weaken towing regulations while Arlington County was trying to strengthen them.
• Employer, Marymount University, seeking to aid Marymount in obtaining state grants and local permits.
• Employer, Virginia Hospital Center, in negotiations about eminent domain and the hospital’s land-use plans, and introducing bills relating to health insurance that Virginia House Democrats opposed.

Even when these and similar entities are not doing business in the 31^st District, there is too great a risk that Favola will end up representing those entities’ interests rather than the public interest.

The Virginia Public Access Project (VPAP) has posted a cumulative list of Favola’s top campaign donors since she was first elected to the Virginia State Senate in 2011. A few top donors on that list are:

Favola only announced this year that she wouldn’t accept any more Dominion Energy cash after learning that Merlene wasn’t accepting any.

Conclusion

Merlene has served our community in leadership roles by mobilizing support for local small business permit approvals, organizing community engagement processes, and planning neighborhood transportation patterns. She will be a strong, fair and impartial representative of all 31st District residents.

Favola says she deserves the Democratic nomination because, in over 20 years in elective office, she has compiled a record as a “pragmatic progressive.” But her representation of private clients and her acceptance of large sums of money from top donors with agendas are not the kind of pragmatism voters should continue to reward.

I enthusiastically endorse Merlene as the next Senator for the 31st District of Virginia. You can learn more about Merlene’s candidacy here.

Peter Rousselot previously served as Chair of the Fiscal Affairs Advisory Commission (FAAC) to the Arlington County Board and as Co-Chair of the Advisory Council on Instruction (ACI) to the Arlington School Board. He is also a former Chair of the Arlington County Democratic Committee (ACDC) and a former member of the Central Committee of the Democratic Party of Virginia (DPVA). He currently serves as a board member of the Together Virginia PAC-a political action committee dedicated to identifying, helping and advising Democratic candidates in rural Virginia.

Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com.

On April 6, the Global Co Lab Network partnered with filmmaker Miriam Gennari to screen her documentary StyrofoamMom.

The event also celebrated the new Teen Eco Action Network, a Global Co Lab Network partnership with the Smithsonian Conservation Commons to build a local and global network of teens to address eco action. Amazon landlord JBG Smith provided support.

The event also unveiled the video contest winners from Teens Dream– a Co Lab initiative. Highlights are here .

More than 170 people participated at the new National Landing headquarters in Crystal City. Twenty teen environmental clubs and environmental organizations presented their work. The Teen Network shared plans for addressing plastics, hunger, climate change and waste management. There was an exhibit on EV charging stations.

Building Maintenance Service, JBG Smith, Eco-Action Arlington and Gennari delivered a zero-waste event.

“We must have the courage to lead by example; the time for making excuses has passed,” Gennari said. “I think attendees are encouraged to know kids are interested in sustainability and want to support their efforts.” Sponsoring organizations included Alexandria Toyota, Radley Acura, Crystal City Business Improvement District, and Arlington Independent Media.

Teens point the way to a sustainable Arlington

Perseverance and resolve were messages that resonated most with these teens.

“The plight of a change maker is exhibited through encounters with policy makers and businesses that stood in Miriam Gennari’s way,” said Sydney Rico, an Oakton student of the Plastic Dream Hubs. “The triumphs of various establishments doing something about the issue are put forth creating a meaningful impact on viewers.”

(more…)

Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com. 

Last week, the County Board adopted its FY2020 budget. The County Board approved a 2-cent increase in the real estate tax rate, effective January 1, 2019. The Board earmarked 1.5 cents of that tax rate increase for Arlington Public Schools (APS).

APS long-range operating budget remains unsustainable without significant tax rate increases

By designating 75% of the projected tax rate increase proceeds to APS, even though APS is only entitled to 47% of locally generated tax revenues under its revenue sharing agreement with the County, the County Board simultaneously:

• enabled APS this year to avoid the most painful cuts to important programs APS said it would have to make without those newly designated funds, but
• did nothing to address the fact that APS’ operating budget is unsustainable over the next ten years without significant further tax rate increases throughout the decade

Why the County Board said APS should get such a large percentage of the new tax revenue

Here’s what the County Board said:

“The Manager had proposed a tax rate increase of one-and-a-half cents (including one cent to Arlington Public Schools to address the cost associated with opening new schools, including Alice West Fleet Elementary School, Dorothy Hamm Middle School, and The Heights Building), when he presented his proposed FY 2020 budget to the Board in February. The Board added another 0.5 cents to increase funding for Arlington Public Schools.”

“The Board closed the funding gap in the Arlington Public Schools by adopting a 1.5 cent tax rate dedicated to APS, and allocating an additional $0.6 million in one-time funding.”

Why this isn’t a “one-time” situation

APS currently projects that school enrollment will increase 24.6% over the next decade.

Last year, the APS Advisory Council on School Facilities and Capital Programs (FAC) prepared an excellent report on future school facilities’ needs. That report was prepared prior to the latest APS enrollment projections. But, even without the benefit of those new projections, the FAC report systematically and correctly documents that APS continuously is going to be opening new schools throughout the next decade and beyond to educate this large body of new students.

(more…)

Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com.

Last week, ARLnow.com reported on a flood warning from Arlington’s Department of Environmental Services (DES).

A DES stormwater outreach specialist alerted Arlington residents how stormwater runoff can harm County waterways:

• Erosion: High water volume erodes stream banks, compromising trails and trees along our stream-valley parks
• Pollutants: Stormwater washes pollutants like nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus), sediment, bacteria, pet waste and trash into our streams, causing poor water quality
• Temperature: During the summer months, stormwater heats up as it flows over hot pavement, which then increases the temperature of the stream water by as much as 10 degrees Fahrenheit, causing stress or death to aquatic organisms

Last week’s story linked to a County website containing useful recommendations to help Arlington residents prepare for more storms and flooding.

Arlington County government needs to follow its own advice.

Arlington talks the talk about global climate change, but fails to walk the walk locally

Arlington County government has passed a climate change resolution criticizing President Trump for withdrawing the United States from the Paris Climate Change Agreement:

“Arlington County supports the principles of the Paris Agreement and will continue to stand with cities, counties and other public and private sector partners throughout the world to advance action in accordance with the goals outlined in the Paris Agreement.”

But having fired this rhetorical salvo, County government has failed to follow it up locally–choosing not to exercise its municipal powers to take corrective actions that would reduce growing environmental threats in Arlington:

Slow the dramatic increase in impervious surfaces

Arlington’s Flood Frequency Analysis for Four Mile Run at USGS Gaging Station 1652500 has not been updated since 2004. But even 15 years ago, this analysis concluded (at p. 17):

“[H]ow urbanized a watershed is or how developed a watershed is can be characterized by the degree of imperviousness found in the watershed…. [A] more urbanized watershed will have a greater percentage of area covered by impervious structures, i.e., roadways, rooftops, sidewalks, parking lots, etc. The effects of these impervious areas create higher peak flows and lower base flows in the watershed tributaries. These effects are most evident in the higher frequency rain/flood events….”

Flooding is exacerbated by the conversion of previously permeable surfaces into impervious and semi-pervious surfaces. Last year, Arlington County staff reported that 45% of Arlington is now covered by impervious surfaces.

From 2001 to around 2014 (a 13-year period), Arlington increased impervious surfaces by 2%. From 2014 to 2018, Arlington increased impervious surfaces by 3% in just 4 short years.

Arlington’s development activity is now adding nearly 9 acres of impervious surface area per year–adding the equivalent of the Pentagon’s footprint (roughly 29 acres) every 3 to 4 years.

Move more aggressively to protect our mature tree canopy

Mature trees provide significant stormwater volume- and rate-control benefits through soil storage, interception, and evapotranspiration. A tree with a 25-foot diameter canopy and its associated soil can manage 1-inch of rainfall flowing from 2,400 square feet of impervious surface.

Interception and evapotranspiration also decrease runoff volume, with larger trees providing exponentially greater benefit than smaller trees. See more details here and here.

Update Arlington’s Stormwater Master Plan

Arlington’s 2014 Stormwater Master Plan must be updated and refocused to address these threats:

• Global climate change
• Rapid local overdevelopment

Severe rainstorms are now much more common. To adapt, Arlington should enact a plan similar to Westchester County’s (NY) Flooding and Land Use Planning guide. See more details here.

Conclusion

In a recent press release, County government proclaimed, “Every day is Earth Day in Arlington.” It also stated that “few communities can boast Arlington’s ceaseless commitment to sustainability.” Sadly, “Every day is New Pavement Day in Arlington” is a rival slogan with too many County government adherents.

Arlington County government must now take action:

• Slow the rate of increase in impervious surfaces
• Preserve and increase our mature tree canopy
• Reduce and better control stormwater runoff

Peter Rousselot previously served as Chair of the Fiscal Affairs Advisory Commission (FAAC) to the Arlington County Board and as Co-Chair of the Advisory Council on Instruction (ACI) to the Arlington School Board. He is also a former Chair of the Arlington County Democratic Committee (ACDC) and a former member of the Central Committee of the Democratic Party of Virginia (DPVA). He currently serves as a board member of the Together Virginia PAC-a political action committee dedicated to identifying, helping and advising Democratic candidates in rural Virginia.

Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com.

In September 2018, the County Board appointed a new 15-member task force. The Board charged the task force with developing a Master Plan for a 7.6-acre parcel of County-owned land located at 26th Street N. and Old Dominion Drive.

This parcel is often referred to as the Salt Dome site.

Why the new task force?

The Board’s goal was to avert a third consecutive fiasco related to this site.

The first fiasco involved the failure by County staff to justify shifting the location of Fire Station 8 to this site. The second fiasco involved the failure by County staff to provide enough notice that the old salt storage unit previously located on this site was in imminent danger of collapse.

The new task force submitted its final report to the County Board on April 12. Most other critical documents relating to this task force’s work can be accessed here.

Due to skillful leadership, the task force achieved a remarkable degree of consensus.

After 5 months, multiple meetings, and hundreds of hours of hard work, the task force, led by Chair Noah Simon, was able to forge a remarkable degree of consensus regarding the best possible recommendation to the Board given the information available.

As the Sun-Gazette previously reported: “The task force included representation from four adjacent civic associations — Old Dominion, Yorktown, Donaldson Run and Rock Spring — plus representatives from a number of government advisory commissions. Marymount also was represented on the panel, as was St. Mary’s Episcopal Church.”

County staff attempted to make a case that a substantially increased percentage of the acreage on the site should be paved over and devoted to vehicle parking and staging areas to support snow removal equipment (roughly 100 new parking spaces) and the existing leaf storage operations. But when challenged to present operating and other data to justify why it was necessary to expand snow operations, staff failed to provide sufficient data.

Most important lessons learned

The public cares deeply: instead of simply saying NIMBY, most neighbors came together and said essentially, “if in the future you can compile the necessary operating data to make your case, here is our recommended plan for how the site should be re-configured to support those operations.”

Dozens of members of nearby civic associations joined the discussion, providing creative options that included: arranging to park on nearby paved areas; using existing changing facilities nearby, such as Langston; looking at jurisdictions that stopped mulching leaves in an expensive, energy-intensive way; and exploring other systems of loading salt. Others asked why the shift-change facility needed to be co-located with salt storage?

The positions taken by County staff lack supporting data: staff was unable to provide data concerning the number of snow events/year across time, or what volumes/quantities of road salt or brine they distribute. Other jurisdictions, such as Maryland, measure the number of salt/mile of road/inch of snow, work to reduce dependency on salt (vital because of salt’s toxicity), and accordingly demonstrate percentage reductions in salt use annually.

The County should begin to measure all critical aspects of the “problem” to develop meaningful data to drive management decisions. The County should develop similar metrics for the leaf collection and mulching process. How much is “free” mulch costing its residents?

Conclusion

In our rapidly developing County, proposed changes in the uses of land all come with direct and opportunity costs and must be justified by data that backs up proposed changes.

Despite this site being on a precipitous hill, at the edge of a Resource Protection Area, and at the trailhead of Donaldson Run, County staff too often talk about massive soil disturbance as though it comes at no cost — even in the face of tree removal and other proven environmental damage.

County staff is too narrowly focused on short-term construction of facilities without considering medium- and long-term impacts on erosion, water quality, air quality, flooding, or mitigation of climate change. The County is being paved over at an unsustainable rate, and flooding is a severe problem. Shared use of existing paved areas needs to be a priority.

Peter Rousselot previously served as Chair of the Fiscal Affairs Advisory Commission (FAAC) to the Arlington County Board and as Co-Chair of the Advisory Council on Instruction (ACI) to the Arlington School Board. He is also a former Chair of the Arlington County Democratic Committee (ACDC) and a former member of the Central Committee of the Democratic Party of Virginia (DPVA). He currently serves as a board member of the Together Virginia PAC-a political action committee dedicated to identifying, helping and advising Democratic candidates in rural Virginia.

Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com.

On April 1, ARLnow.com reported that the APS 1:1 program “gets high marks from students, but remains polarizing for parents.”

The most up-voted comment to that story cuts to the chase:

“Wow what a surprise, students were for free ipads and laptops, and the parents are wondering if the real estate tax hikes are worth it.” – Black Metal list Krieg

APS staff has been unable to explain how much APS spends annually on the 1:1 elementary iPad program.

On April 2, APS School Board members held a revealing work session with their staff on a variety of budget issues. The discussion of the 1:1 program starts at 3:03:54 and lasts 30 minutes.

On social media, one astute parent accurately summarized the bottom-line conclusion:

“We really don’t know what 1:1 costs us. We have a complex leasing model for these devices, and the tech budget includes more than 1:1. If you drop 1:1 the state still requires a certain ratio of access to devices for testing purposes… They are not saying it, but of course 1:1 has additional costs in terms of staffing and electronic resources that you also save if you drop it… Device budget is somewhere around $4 million a year just for devices, but that does not include staff or subscriptions to e-content…”

But this work session revealed one relevant ball-park number. When APS decided to begin the program in 2nd grade instead of 1st grade, dropping that one year produced a savings of at least $1.1 million.

More studies, analyses, or surveys will not provide significantly more relevant information.

The APS Assistant Superintendent of Instruction is now telling the community that the latest (overly-narrow) evaluation of the 1:1 program will drag on until at least the Fall of 2019. This is simply unacceptable at a time in which APS’s long-term operating budget is unsustainable and the APS Superintendent is suggesting class size increases or cutting much more worthwhile programs like the Outdoor Lab just to balance this year’s operating budget.

The community has been engaging APS in meetings about this program for over five years asking the hard questions. Concerns over elementary school opportunity costs have already prompted a petition asking for low-screen-time options.

Survey results show that half of the class time is spent on devices (40% ES, 53% MS, and 58% HS). The time has come to pull the plug on 1:1 in the elementary grades and go to a shared device model. This will allow access required by the state for testing and allow our youngest learners less screen time. It will give teachers the flexibility to be less tied to the APS Central Office and have more face-to-face instructional interaction with their students. The community has spoken for maintaining the Outdoor Lab. Over time, fewer devices will mean fewer cuts in higher quality experiential activities for children like the Outdoor Lab.

The latest evidence of the health, safety, questionable educational effectiveness, and childhood developmental risks of these devices is disturbing.

We are bombarded almost weekly with mounting evidence that the more time children spend using electronic devices, the greater the risk of physical, psychological, and developmental harm.

A 2015 study reviewing school IT programs in over 36 countries worldwide (not in the United States) concluded that less is better when it comes to using technology, both for reading scores and particularly for math scores.

The health and developmental effects on young children of the current 1:1 elementary iPad program won’t be any clearer 6 months from now, 1 year from now, or 2 years from now.

A report published along with the first phase of APS’s overly narrow 1:1 evaluation was not written by a medical doctor but by a Ph.D. who sells consulting services.  We do not need more consulting on this subject.

Conclusion

Now is the time for the Arlington School Board to lead:

• vote to phase out the 1:1 iPad program in the elementary grades
• shift to a shared device approach
• stop kicking the can down the road for even more studies, analyses, or surveys

Peter Rousselot previously served as Chair of the Fiscal Affairs Advisory Commission (FAAC) to the Arlington County Board and as Co-Chair of the Advisory Council on Instruction (ACI) to the Arlington School Board. He is also a former Chair of the Arlington County Democratic Committee (ACDC) and a former member of the Central Committee of the Democratic Party of Virginia (DPVA). He currently serves as a board member of the Together Virginia PAC-a political action committee dedicated to identifying, helping and advising Democratic candidates in rural Virginia.