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.
Where is this headed?
Posted by:
UnderDog
()
Date: February 26, 2008 01:59PM
Fairfax Budgets for Lean Years Ahead
First Revenue Declines Since 1992 Projected
By Amy Gardner
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A01
The region's worsening economic climate has hit Fairfax County with its most difficult budget crunch in nearly two decades, prompting officials yesterday to propose flat spending on schools and government services for the year beginning July 1.
Fairfax is among the first localities in Northern Virginia to reveal in detail just how seriously declining home values and consumer spending will affect government services. After years of booming growth, the county is projecting a decline in residential property values of 3 percent -- and a decline in revenue for the first time since the 1992 recession.
County Executive Anthony H. Griffin said the slowdown in the nation's housing market, fueled by foreclosures and the subprime mortgage crisis, is mostly to blame for the bleak financial outlook. Declining interest income resulting from lower federal rates, as well as reductions in state funding, are also factors.
Griffin predicted that the crunch would last beyond the coming budget year.
"The residential real estate market is continuing to go south," Griffin told the county Board of Supervisors. "It hasn't hit bottom yet. It may be calendar 2010 or calendar 2011 before it does."
As a result, he said, prudence must be the county's response. His proposed $3.3 billion spending plan would keep the property tax rate at 89 cents for each $100 of assessed value, producing a tax bill of $4,450 for a $500,000 home. It would cut scheduled pay raises in half for county workers and fund virtually no new programs. That includes Fairfax's school system, which requested, but did not get, a 4 percent increase.
"We can't expect that all of our worthy causes are going to be fully funded," said Gerald E. Connolly (D), chairman of the Board of Supervisors. "We can't expect to fund new initiatives in this context. And we have to recognize that this is going to be a two- or three-year process."
The budget would raise a series of smaller taxes and fees, including charges for refuse collection, parking violations and county parking garage use. It also would add a 12-cent surcharge to the commercial property tax rate to help pay for transportation improvements, an increase permitted by landmark General Assembly legislation last year.
Because of declining home assessments, supervisors could choose to raise the property tax rate by 3 cents, to 92 cents for each $100, and still keep average property tax bills flat, Griffin noted. Such a rate increase would generate an additional $68 million. The supervisors will approve a final budget this spring after public hearings.
Griffin's budget is notable for what it leaves out. In addition to halving scheduled pay raises for public safety workers, the proposal wants to do the same for merit increases for other government workers. He has also proposed delaying approximately $40 million in transportation and storm water management projects to pay for other government obligations.
And he chose not to fund a $1 million expansion of the county's code enforcement strike team, a conglomeration of county offices seeking to crack down on zoning offenses as a way to fight illegal overcrowding in residential communities. The decline of older neighborhoods has become a critical issue for some supervisors, and several said yesterday that they want to see additional money for code enforcement in the final budget.
"It's the most important part that's missing from the budget and would be required to be in there to gain my support," said Supervisor Jeff C. McKay (D-Lee), a new board member who campaigned in large part to do more to fight blight in his district.
Other supervisors criticized the budget plan for its diversion of dedicated sources of revenue to cover general operating expenses. Most notable is Griffin's plan to use a portion of the increased commercial property tax receipts to fund the payroll of the county's 93-person Department of Transportation. The approximately $53 million raised by the new tax was intended for new transportation projects.
"We just fought a hard-fought battle in Richmond to get more money for roads and transit," said Supervisor Pat S. Herrity (R-Springfield). "The entire transportation staff is being paid with this. That's a huge, huge, problem for me. And it's going to be a huge problem with the General Assembly."
Griffin also proposed spending about $12 million of new state recordation tax receipts -- also part of the General Assembly transportation package -- to pay for existing Fairfax Connector bus routes. Budget officials said some of the routes are expanded or previously run by Metro, and they said the $12 million will cover new costs, not existing ones.
Other shifts include:
¿An $8.5 million transfer of new transportation dollars to help pay part of the county's contribution to Metro.
¿The expenditure of $7 million from the county's Penny for Stormwater Management Fund to pay for existing staff positions. The fund was set up to spend the equivalent of 1 cent on the property tax -- $22.8 million for the budget year beginning July 1 -- on storm water management projects across Fairfax. Diverting the $7 million will delay a number of those projects.
¿The expenditure of $600,000 from the county's Penny for Affordable Housing Fund for existing housing jobs. The fund was set up to spend 1 cent's worth of revenue on the purchase or preservation of affordable housing.
Griffin said that because the budget woes are likely to last at least two years, he has established a review panel to scrutinize county programs with an eye toward consolidation and cuts. But he said yesterday the panel is unlikely to provide recommendations in time for the current budget proposal.
First Revenue Declines Since 1992 Projected
By Amy Gardner
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A01
The region's worsening economic climate has hit Fairfax County with its most difficult budget crunch in nearly two decades, prompting officials yesterday to propose flat spending on schools and government services for the year beginning July 1.
Fairfax is among the first localities in Northern Virginia to reveal in detail just how seriously declining home values and consumer spending will affect government services. After years of booming growth, the county is projecting a decline in residential property values of 3 percent -- and a decline in revenue for the first time since the 1992 recession.
County Executive Anthony H. Griffin said the slowdown in the nation's housing market, fueled by foreclosures and the subprime mortgage crisis, is mostly to blame for the bleak financial outlook. Declining interest income resulting from lower federal rates, as well as reductions in state funding, are also factors.
Griffin predicted that the crunch would last beyond the coming budget year.
"The residential real estate market is continuing to go south," Griffin told the county Board of Supervisors. "It hasn't hit bottom yet. It may be calendar 2010 or calendar 2011 before it does."
As a result, he said, prudence must be the county's response. His proposed $3.3 billion spending plan would keep the property tax rate at 89 cents for each $100 of assessed value, producing a tax bill of $4,450 for a $500,000 home. It would cut scheduled pay raises in half for county workers and fund virtually no new programs. That includes Fairfax's school system, which requested, but did not get, a 4 percent increase.
"We can't expect that all of our worthy causes are going to be fully funded," said Gerald E. Connolly (D), chairman of the Board of Supervisors. "We can't expect to fund new initiatives in this context. And we have to recognize that this is going to be a two- or three-year process."
The budget would raise a series of smaller taxes and fees, including charges for refuse collection, parking violations and county parking garage use. It also would add a 12-cent surcharge to the commercial property tax rate to help pay for transportation improvements, an increase permitted by landmark General Assembly legislation last year.
Because of declining home assessments, supervisors could choose to raise the property tax rate by 3 cents, to 92 cents for each $100, and still keep average property tax bills flat, Griffin noted. Such a rate increase would generate an additional $68 million. The supervisors will approve a final budget this spring after public hearings.
Griffin's budget is notable for what it leaves out. In addition to halving scheduled pay raises for public safety workers, the proposal wants to do the same for merit increases for other government workers. He has also proposed delaying approximately $40 million in transportation and storm water management projects to pay for other government obligations.
And he chose not to fund a $1 million expansion of the county's code enforcement strike team, a conglomeration of county offices seeking to crack down on zoning offenses as a way to fight illegal overcrowding in residential communities. The decline of older neighborhoods has become a critical issue for some supervisors, and several said yesterday that they want to see additional money for code enforcement in the final budget.
"It's the most important part that's missing from the budget and would be required to be in there to gain my support," said Supervisor Jeff C. McKay (D-Lee), a new board member who campaigned in large part to do more to fight blight in his district.
Other supervisors criticized the budget plan for its diversion of dedicated sources of revenue to cover general operating expenses. Most notable is Griffin's plan to use a portion of the increased commercial property tax receipts to fund the payroll of the county's 93-person Department of Transportation. The approximately $53 million raised by the new tax was intended for new transportation projects.
"We just fought a hard-fought battle in Richmond to get more money for roads and transit," said Supervisor Pat S. Herrity (R-Springfield). "The entire transportation staff is being paid with this. That's a huge, huge, problem for me. And it's going to be a huge problem with the General Assembly."
Griffin also proposed spending about $12 million of new state recordation tax receipts -- also part of the General Assembly transportation package -- to pay for existing Fairfax Connector bus routes. Budget officials said some of the routes are expanded or previously run by Metro, and they said the $12 million will cover new costs, not existing ones.
Other shifts include:
¿An $8.5 million transfer of new transportation dollars to help pay part of the county's contribution to Metro.
¿The expenditure of $7 million from the county's Penny for Stormwater Management Fund to pay for existing staff positions. The fund was set up to spend the equivalent of 1 cent on the property tax -- $22.8 million for the budget year beginning July 1 -- on storm water management projects across Fairfax. Diverting the $7 million will delay a number of those projects.
¿The expenditure of $600,000 from the county's Penny for Affordable Housing Fund for existing housing jobs. The fund was set up to spend 1 cent's worth of revenue on the purchase or preservation of affordable housing.
Griffin said that because the budget woes are likely to last at least two years, he has established a review panel to scrutinize county programs with an eye toward consolidation and cuts. But he said yesterday the panel is unlikely to provide recommendations in time for the current budget proposal.
Re: Where is this headed?
Posted by:
Kiev
()
Date: February 26, 2008 02:15PM
BTW, what is the latest on the metro?
8.5M is a good chunk of change
8.5M is a good chunk of change
Re: Where is this headed?
Posted by:
Mike Sorce
()
Date: February 26, 2008 02:19PM
Nowhere good, but would it have that hard to plan just a little for a downturn? I am not going to jump on the anti-Gerry bandwagon here, largely because I feel that the responsibility is shared by the BoS.
If the transfer to FCPS remains flat and not the requested $55M then the SB is going to have to be very creative in how they fund that shortfall and start thinking about worst-case budgets through at least 2010. The SB clearly overspent for a long time, even accounting for the unfunded state and Federal mandates.
I am sure that someone will bring up the South County middle school as one place to save, but it is going to take a lot more than that. Do we see class sizes increase by greater than .5 or a big reduction in IAs? Probably. It is going to be ugly.
If the transfer to FCPS remains flat and not the requested $55M then the SB is going to have to be very creative in how they fund that shortfall and start thinking about worst-case budgets through at least 2010. The SB clearly overspent for a long time, even accounting for the unfunded state and Federal mandates.
I am sure that someone will bring up the South County middle school as one place to save, but it is going to take a lot more than that. Do we see class sizes increase by greater than .5 or a big reduction in IAs? Probably. It is going to be ugly.
Re: Where is this headed?
Posted by:
TheMeeper
()
Date: February 26, 2008 02:35PM
Latest news on metro: last week a couple US senators (republicans) sent letters to the Secretary of Transportation, urging the department to move forward with the current Dulles rail plan. There's supposedly a big push within the Bush administration right now to make sure that a big chunk of the money comes from private investors (bad idea, IMO, but go figure...) Tim Kaine has also recently asked for DOT's advice on how they can make the plan more acceptable. I don't know what the timeline is for a decision, it sounds like it's all resting on the creaking machinery of the Transportation Dept.
Re: Where is this headed?
Posted by:
Kiev
()
Date: February 26, 2008 02:41PM
aight, lets give them few more years :)
Re: Where is this headed?
Posted by:
TheMeeper
()
Date: February 26, 2008 02:51PM
Kiev Wrote:
>> aight, lets give them few more years :)
Well if DOT can't ship them the money before Bush leaves office, I expect it would be years before anything progresses. But I guess if the Dems were in office they might move more quickly to give a blue-leaning metropolitan area a gift.
>> aight, lets give them few more years :)
Well if DOT can't ship them the money before Bush leaves office, I expect it would be years before anything progresses. But I guess if the Dems were in office they might move more quickly to give a blue-leaning metropolitan area a gift.
Re: Where is this headed?
Posted by:
Gravis
()
Date: February 26, 2008 03:23PM
UnderDog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The region's worsening economic climate has hit
> Fairfax County with its most difficult budget
> crunch in nearly two decades
good, now maybe those douchebags will actually start cutting the fat out of their gluttonous budget.
"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
-------------------------------------------------------
> The region's worsening economic climate has hit
> Fairfax County with its most difficult budget
> crunch in nearly two decades
good, now maybe those douchebags will actually start cutting the fat out of their gluttonous budget.
"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."