Fairfax County General :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Fairfax Co. budget, tax rate proposal signals new normal
Posted by:
byjdt
()
Date: February 15, 2017 11:35AM
http://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2017/02/fairfax-co-budget-tax-rate-proposal-signals-new-normal/
FY 2018 Advertised Budget Plan (February 14, 2017)
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/fy2018/advertised/fy2018-advertised-cex-budget-presentation.pdf
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/fy2018/advertised/fy2018-advertised-budget.htm
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/fy2018/advertised/budget_narratives.htm
By Max Smith | @amaxsmith February 14, 2017 4:41 pm
FAIRFAX, Va. — A few months after Fairfax County voters rejected a meals tax to support local schools, county officials have proposed a budget that would provide a small increase in school funding but would not pay for some of the county’s top priorities.
County Executive Ed Long, the county’s appointed manager of day-to-day operations, presented a budget proposal Tuesday that would keep the tax rate flat, provide a $51.69 million increase for schools and add 50 county positions.
“County needs are much greater than what the resources are that we have available,” Long said.
The proposed budget would increase average property taxes by $40.69 across the county based on new assessment data.
“There are significant unfunded priorities that we’re not being able to address in 2018,” Long said.
Programs not currently slated to receive funding include the county’s efforts to provide mental health treatment as an alternative to jail.
Public safety staffing and other changes recommended by the county’s police reform commission formed in the wake of the shooting death of John Geer don’t receive funding.
Additional support for residents with disabilities, an increase in the base salaries for many county workers and funding for basic sidewalk, trail, parks and other facility upgrades and maintenance also wouldn’t be funded in the coming year’s budget.
“A lot of the public safety things are not funded here,” Supervisor John Cook said. “The staffing plan, the ad hoc commission, span of control, body cameras. I mean these are all things that we know there’s a benefit to doing.”
The board can adjust the plan based on feedback from the public at upcoming meetings and later formal public hearings.
The funding boost for schools in the proposed budget is less than half the increase the school system requested. The schools had said much of that would be used for teacher raises in the school system’s $2.8 billion budget. The majority of the county budget goes to the school system.
Supervisor Kathy Smith suggested that residents who want more programs funded would need to make their voices heard over the next two weeks as the board of supervisors decides whether to advertise a higher tax rate.
Supervisor Jeff McKay called the proposal sobering, but not surprising.
Several other supervisors were happy the budget proposal kept the tax rate flat after a 4-cent increase last year. The board can adopt a tax rate below the advertised rate, but not above it.
Long does not believe there will be any significant change in funding for the county from Richmond this year, where legislators are finalizing budget amendments to send back to Gov. Terry McAuliffe. The board of supervisors has long complained that they are limited by the state in what taxes or fees they can impose to move the tax burden away from the county’s heavy reliance on property taxes.
Long cited county residents’ vote against a meals tax this fall as a signal that voters did not want the property tax rate increased this year either.
“You can’t increase tax rates every year to make up for what the needs are, so it’s going to be a real challenge in going forward,” Long said.
Money is only expected to get tighter in the face of sharply increasing costs for Metro, pension costs that still need to be addressed and an apparently stagnant regional economy that could be dragged down further by federal spending cuts or upcoming sequestration cuts.
“There is great uncertainty out there in terms of the effect of the new administration,” Long said.
FY 2018 Advertised Budget Plan (February 14, 2017)
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/fy2018/advertised/fy2018-advertised-cex-budget-presentation.pdf
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/fy2018/advertised/fy2018-advertised-budget.htm
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/fy2018/advertised/budget_narratives.htm
By Max Smith | @amaxsmith February 14, 2017 4:41 pm
FAIRFAX, Va. — A few months after Fairfax County voters rejected a meals tax to support local schools, county officials have proposed a budget that would provide a small increase in school funding but would not pay for some of the county’s top priorities.
County Executive Ed Long, the county’s appointed manager of day-to-day operations, presented a budget proposal Tuesday that would keep the tax rate flat, provide a $51.69 million increase for schools and add 50 county positions.
“County needs are much greater than what the resources are that we have available,” Long said.
The proposed budget would increase average property taxes by $40.69 across the county based on new assessment data.
“There are significant unfunded priorities that we’re not being able to address in 2018,” Long said.
Programs not currently slated to receive funding include the county’s efforts to provide mental health treatment as an alternative to jail.
Public safety staffing and other changes recommended by the county’s police reform commission formed in the wake of the shooting death of John Geer don’t receive funding.
Additional support for residents with disabilities, an increase in the base salaries for many county workers and funding for basic sidewalk, trail, parks and other facility upgrades and maintenance also wouldn’t be funded in the coming year’s budget.
“A lot of the public safety things are not funded here,” Supervisor John Cook said. “The staffing plan, the ad hoc commission, span of control, body cameras. I mean these are all things that we know there’s a benefit to doing.”
The board can adjust the plan based on feedback from the public at upcoming meetings and later formal public hearings.
The funding boost for schools in the proposed budget is less than half the increase the school system requested. The schools had said much of that would be used for teacher raises in the school system’s $2.8 billion budget. The majority of the county budget goes to the school system.
Supervisor Kathy Smith suggested that residents who want more programs funded would need to make their voices heard over the next two weeks as the board of supervisors decides whether to advertise a higher tax rate.
Supervisor Jeff McKay called the proposal sobering, but not surprising.
Several other supervisors were happy the budget proposal kept the tax rate flat after a 4-cent increase last year. The board can adopt a tax rate below the advertised rate, but not above it.
Long does not believe there will be any significant change in funding for the county from Richmond this year, where legislators are finalizing budget amendments to send back to Gov. Terry McAuliffe. The board of supervisors has long complained that they are limited by the state in what taxes or fees they can impose to move the tax burden away from the county’s heavy reliance on property taxes.
Long cited county residents’ vote against a meals tax this fall as a signal that voters did not want the property tax rate increased this year either.
“You can’t increase tax rates every year to make up for what the needs are, so it’s going to be a real challenge in going forward,” Long said.
Money is only expected to get tighter in the face of sharply increasing costs for Metro, pension costs that still need to be addressed and an apparently stagnant regional economy that could be dragged down further by federal spending cuts or upcoming sequestration cuts.
“There is great uncertainty out there in terms of the effect of the new administration,” Long said.
Re: Fairfax Co. budget, tax rate proposal signals new normal
Posted by:
mhHKy
()
Date: February 15, 2017 12:12PM
re: County bus service in budget
Reduce Fairfax County bus service costs and increase revenue from it in this upcoming challenging budget season. I live in western Fairfax County
You can post comments at at http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/fy18advertisedbudgetinput.htm on transportation and other county budget items i.e. schools.
* Fairfax Connector's vendor MV Transit is paid $105 per hour for many trips where there are less than 5 or 10 passengers on the bus (route details at http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/fcdot/pdf/connections2015/fairfax_route_sheets_06022015_tagged.pdf ). Dozen routes under 100 passengers per day, and over 30 under 200 passengers per day.
* Unreliability and safety issues of Metrorail have caused some of ridership decline (10%+ on trains) on commuter bus routes also, other bus routes have had low ridership not serving a Metrorail station. People flocking to their cars and Uber/Lyft for all or part of their commutes. Google wmata unsuck for posts of daily problems.
Suggestions to reduce costs and increase revenue and ridership:
* For routes carrying fewer than 100 passengers), if not reduce or eliminate service, form a partnership with Lyft/Uber http://therideshareguy.com/how-are-uber-and-lyft-working-with-public-transportation-authorities/ to cut costs, many cities small and few large are doing. Fairfax Connector 432 in North Vienna, 31 passengers per day with buses 8 hours a day, 250 weekdays, x $105, $210k annually, $6775 per year to transport each of those passengers. $10 Lyft/Uber subsidy daily, $77.5k, $2500 per year per passenger. To keep costs under control, limit use by time of day and number of times, within 1/4 of highway/2ndary road, maybe just disabled, senior citizens, or low income riders.
* Like Lyft/Uber, Fairfax Connector may as soon as next month have GPS on buses working, some commuters and others more likely to use buses, if not have to wait in bad weather longer than needed for one. Connector revenue increased with less taxpayer funding.
* Evaluate all Connector routes less than 200 passengers by run, and reduce little used service, unless the bus serves a particular purpose, such as Connectors shuttling between Wiehle-Reston East Metro and Reston Town Center and to Dulles Airport and beyond. Also evaluate little used route segments. I used my local Connector neighborhood bus midday only twice in five years, and only 3 passengers per bus both times, and we are paying $105 for that with a challenging budget season. Over 80% of the Connector buses have been on or seen on the area roads near where I live in the last three months have had less than 10 passengers, with vast majority of my bus trips for commuting.
Though buses needed to help traffic some on I66/I95 and those most in need like the disabled who cannot drive, why we are paying millions of $ for little used bus service?, but above can help. Too much transit in an area, either rents/prices increase or otherwise with moderate housing prices it increases county policing costs with county budget challenges, look at areas of Lincolnia, central Annandale, and Culmore/Bailey's Crossroads with frequent and near round the clock bus service running seven days a week.
Reduce Fairfax County bus service costs and increase revenue from it in this upcoming challenging budget season. I live in western Fairfax County
You can post comments at at http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/fy18advertisedbudgetinput.htm on transportation and other county budget items i.e. schools.
* Fairfax Connector's vendor MV Transit is paid $105 per hour for many trips where there are less than 5 or 10 passengers on the bus (route details at http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/fcdot/pdf/connections2015/fairfax_route_sheets_06022015_tagged.pdf ). Dozen routes under 100 passengers per day, and over 30 under 200 passengers per day.
* Unreliability and safety issues of Metrorail have caused some of ridership decline (10%+ on trains) on commuter bus routes also, other bus routes have had low ridership not serving a Metrorail station. People flocking to their cars and Uber/Lyft for all or part of their commutes. Google wmata unsuck for posts of daily problems.
Suggestions to reduce costs and increase revenue and ridership:
* For routes carrying fewer than 100 passengers), if not reduce or eliminate service, form a partnership with Lyft/Uber http://therideshareguy.com/how-are-uber-and-lyft-working-with-public-transportation-authorities/ to cut costs, many cities small and few large are doing. Fairfax Connector 432 in North Vienna, 31 passengers per day with buses 8 hours a day, 250 weekdays, x $105, $210k annually, $6775 per year to transport each of those passengers. $10 Lyft/Uber subsidy daily, $77.5k, $2500 per year per passenger. To keep costs under control, limit use by time of day and number of times, within 1/4 of highway/2ndary road, maybe just disabled, senior citizens, or low income riders.
* Like Lyft/Uber, Fairfax Connector may as soon as next month have GPS on buses working, some commuters and others more likely to use buses, if not have to wait in bad weather longer than needed for one. Connector revenue increased with less taxpayer funding.
* Evaluate all Connector routes less than 200 passengers by run, and reduce little used service, unless the bus serves a particular purpose, such as Connectors shuttling between Wiehle-Reston East Metro and Reston Town Center and to Dulles Airport and beyond. Also evaluate little used route segments. I used my local Connector neighborhood bus midday only twice in five years, and only 3 passengers per bus both times, and we are paying $105 for that with a challenging budget season. Over 80% of the Connector buses have been on or seen on the area roads near where I live in the last three months have had less than 10 passengers, with vast majority of my bus trips for commuting.
Though buses needed to help traffic some on I66/I95 and those most in need like the disabled who cannot drive, why we are paying millions of $ for little used bus service?, but above can help. Too much transit in an area, either rents/prices increase or otherwise with moderate housing prices it increases county policing costs with county budget challenges, look at areas of Lincolnia, central Annandale, and Culmore/Bailey's Crossroads with frequent and near round the clock bus service running seven days a week.
Re: Fairfax Co. budget, tax rate proposal signals new normal
Posted by:
Bill.N.
()
Date: February 15, 2017 04:03PM
I have not gone through the numbers, but the message Long sent with it was encouraging. At least he understands that if we want to keep Fairfax tax rates on residents comparable with other close in localities such as Arlington and Alexandria, we need to base our spending plans on the cash flowing from existing taxes rather than insist that the cash flowing from taxes must match our spending plans. (In other words the County needs to live within its means.)
At a time when the cost of providing government services is rising, that will mean actually cutting programs, which means real pain for those who rely on those services and on those who are employed to provide those services. That means the next few weeks will not be pretty as everyone is going to be fighting to maintain his or her bit of turf, even if it means cutting programs that are more important or cost effective, and even if it means trying to force County politicians to raise taxes. Those who favor maintaining current tax rates need to contact your supervisors and indicate that if it comes down to cutting programs or raising taxes, that they should cut programs.
One disappointing thing missing from the message was that Fairfax needs to look to enhancing revenues. Taxes are not the only source of cash for the county. There are also fees for services. While there may be policy reasons for exempting certain county residents from paying for certain services and their may be economic reasons for granting special tax breaks to certain businesses and residents, each dollar not received is the equivalent of another dollar spent.
At a time when the cost of providing government services is rising, that will mean actually cutting programs, which means real pain for those who rely on those services and on those who are employed to provide those services. That means the next few weeks will not be pretty as everyone is going to be fighting to maintain his or her bit of turf, even if it means cutting programs that are more important or cost effective, and even if it means trying to force County politicians to raise taxes. Those who favor maintaining current tax rates need to contact your supervisors and indicate that if it comes down to cutting programs or raising taxes, that they should cut programs.
One disappointing thing missing from the message was that Fairfax needs to look to enhancing revenues. Taxes are not the only source of cash for the county. There are also fees for services. While there may be policy reasons for exempting certain county residents from paying for certain services and their may be economic reasons for granting special tax breaks to certain businesses and residents, each dollar not received is the equivalent of another dollar spent.
Re: Fairfax Co. budget, tax rate proposal signals new normal
Posted by:
Inquisitive One
()
Date: February 16, 2017 04:24AM
Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have not gone through the numbers, but the
> message Long sent with it was encouraging. At
> least he understands that if we want to keep
> Fairfax tax rates on residents comparable with
> other close in localities such as Arlington and
> Alexandria, we need to base our spending plans on
> the cash flowing from existing taxes rather than
> insist that the cash flowing from taxes must match
> our spending plans. (In other words the County
> needs to live within its means.)
>
> At a time when the cost of providing government
> services is rising, that will mean actually
> cutting programs, which means real pain for those
> who rely on those services and on those who are
> employed to provide those services. That means
> the next few weeks will not be pretty as everyone
> is going to be fighting to maintain his or her bit
> of turf, even if it means cutting programs that
> are more important or cost effective, and even if
> it means trying to force County politicians to
> raise taxes. Those who favor maintaining current
> tax rates need to contact your supervisors and
> indicate that if it comes down to cutting programs
> or raising taxes, that they should cut programs.
>
> One disappointing thing missing from the message
> was that Fairfax needs to look to enhancing
> revenues. Taxes are not the only source of cash
> for the county. There are also fees for services.
> While there may be policy reasons for exempting
> certain county residents from paying for certain
> services and their may be economic reasons for
> granting special tax breaks to certain businesses
> and residents, each dollar not received is the
> equivalent of another dollar spent.
The County must also double down on their efforts to recruit new companies to the area for the purpose of cutting down on the commercial office building vacancy rate and increase their efforts to repurpose the commercial buildings that are in undesirable locations or class B buildings.
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have not gone through the numbers, but the
> message Long sent with it was encouraging. At
> least he understands that if we want to keep
> Fairfax tax rates on residents comparable with
> other close in localities such as Arlington and
> Alexandria, we need to base our spending plans on
> the cash flowing from existing taxes rather than
> insist that the cash flowing from taxes must match
> our spending plans. (In other words the County
> needs to live within its means.)
>
> At a time when the cost of providing government
> services is rising, that will mean actually
> cutting programs, which means real pain for those
> who rely on those services and on those who are
> employed to provide those services. That means
> the next few weeks will not be pretty as everyone
> is going to be fighting to maintain his or her bit
> of turf, even if it means cutting programs that
> are more important or cost effective, and even if
> it means trying to force County politicians to
> raise taxes. Those who favor maintaining current
> tax rates need to contact your supervisors and
> indicate that if it comes down to cutting programs
> or raising taxes, that they should cut programs.
>
> One disappointing thing missing from the message
> was that Fairfax needs to look to enhancing
> revenues. Taxes are not the only source of cash
> for the county. There are also fees for services.
> While there may be policy reasons for exempting
> certain county residents from paying for certain
> services and their may be economic reasons for
> granting special tax breaks to certain businesses
> and residents, each dollar not received is the
> equivalent of another dollar spent.
The County must also double down on their efforts to recruit new companies to the area for the purpose of cutting down on the commercial office building vacancy rate and increase their efforts to repurpose the commercial buildings that are in undesirable locations or class B buildings.
Re: Fairfax Co. budget, tax rate proposal signals new normal
Posted by:
Joke Insurance
()
Date: February 20, 2017 12:56PM
I'd like to see the following for a few of the FC routes:
* Combine 461 and 466 into one route
* Combine 422 route and 423 route
* Combine 461 and 466 into one route
* Combine 422 route and 423 route