I hope each of you and your families are well this holiday season. I write with a report on the December Board meetings, acknowledging that reports on Board action this fall are past due to you. I will write over the coming week on other Board action; today I write to summarize a busy month.
I was honored to serve as MC for Takis Karantonis' swearing in on Tuesday the 16th. Takis' story is the American Dream. I am grateful for his relentless commitment, compassion, and practical idealism.
The Board acted to approve the development of significantly more housing at a 9.5-hour meeting on Saturday, December 13th. Our approval of the project in the Riverhouse development in the Pentagon City neighborhood is a significant step forward on housing supply, a critical issue for Arlington and the Commonwealth. The action approves 743 new housing units that will be townhomes and 2 multi-story buildings of 7 stories each. It also increased the allowable height for future site plans significantly, which would allow for 3 twenty-two story buildings, pending an actual site plan review which is a critical step worth noting.
I believe our actions are consistent with transit-oriented development and the need for additional housing. The community benefits associated with the site plans approved are significant, including affordable housing, a green ribbon, and transportation infrastructure. The site plans with the townhomes and two buildings are roughly 80% of the density originally planned for the area. After 2+ years of consideration and debate about the project as a whole, this step is both consistent with the area plan for Pentagon City and an appropriate way to balance density and community concerns. This is significant progress on one of the issues I prioritized when I ran for the Board 8 years ago--housing and affordable housing.
I was grateful to join the Regional Elected Leaders Initiatives lunch, honoring Metro Board Member Paul Smedberg, Loudoun Chair Phyllis Randall, Delegate David Bulova, and Manassas School Board Chair Suzanne Seaberg.
The Board also took critical action on budget guidance and priorities for the year to come. Our first action worth noting is that we approved resolutions on investments in our police and fire departments of roughly $5 million in each department.
I supported both resolutions because our level of vacancies in the police department and the hold overs that we have required of our firefighters are worthy of investment as part of our commitment to public safety. Our police department has more than 60 vacancies out of a roughly 350-person force, a vacancy level that is inconsistent with the service we value in Arlington. Our firefighters have been asked to "hold over" (stay for extra work after their shifts are done) far more than is in our best interest. I believe both steps will improve morale and reduce overtime, two strategic factors worth investing in.
Both investments are worthwhile and I fully support them, but it is also important to note that both are expensive ones that will make an already difficult budget year even more challenging.The Board gave guidance to the County Manager that included the investments in public safety as well as direction that focuses on protecting our economy, serving the most vulnerable, providing services that we all expect of our local government, and weathering the Trump Administration's inhumane and inane actions. To read the full budget guidance, go here: _ - Item Attachment - FISCAL YEAR 2027 BUDGET GUIDANCE - 30503090.pdf
In November, I joined the Arlington Community Foundation for its Awards Luncheon honoring Kellen McBeth, Claudia Ramirez, and Nina Janapoul. Pictured here with Takis, Betsy Frantz from Path Forward, and Carmen Romero from True Ground. To give, go here: Arlington Community Foundation
The Board also enacted a $25 increase in ourtowing fee to $160 per tow. We did this because we are legally required to consider the fair market cost of towing by Virginia code. A fully separate issue that must be distinctly considered is our permit system and how towing is done in the County. I support considering that distinctly.
The Board also began a conversation on signage that will help businesses and impact median signs, most often being political signs. I believe political signs do lead to clutter and that restricting the length of time all median signs can be up seems right. I also believe that signs can play a role in publicizing primary and general elections, so compromise seems appropriate. I would welcome your emails on this. For your awareness, sign regulations must be content neutral under the first amendment.
The County Board hearing and discussion of "Form of Government." My comments begin at 2 hours 26 minutes and 26 seconds. My comments are roughly 9 minutes. The public comments and colleagues' remarks are also worth listening to.
The Board also took up "Form of Government" for a second time, following our initial discussion in November. I believe the Board found the right balance in beginning work on the history, legal background, and a survey on how our County is seen by our community. Particular thanks go to Ms. Cunningham and Mr. Spain for finding compromise and to Ms. Coffey and Mr. Karantonis for helping me see that this moment is not the right one for a full advisory group given the operating budget and capital improvement budgets that we must take up over the coming months.
Bottom Line
The Board deferred setting up an advisory panel but acted to begin background work in targeted areas over the coming months. We also set July as the next time we will take this up as a full Board. The Trump Administration's impact on both budgets should be our focus over the next six months.
What is this all about?
What?A directly elected Chair of the Board (as opposed to one-year terms determined by Board Members), the possibility of district representation, the possibility of expanding the Board, the timing of elections, impacts on the school board, whether to become a city, as well as other related adjustments to Board governance, to be determined.
Why? Two things are true at the same time. First, Arlington has a very, very good government. Second, we can do better and it is worth considering how we might do better. Specifically, the problems to be solved boil down to two related concerns: (1) the balance between the staff and the Board is not quite right and (2) we need a more representative and responsive government.
The Balance between Board and Staff
The annual rotation of the Board Chair and the at-large nature of each Board Member sometimes leads to staff offering solutions without fully considered options/alternatives. An example is the widening of Carlin Springs South, which is imminent, but took a year longer than I believe it should have. A second example is the way the conditions at the Serrano were addressed four years ago. I believe it took longer for our code enforcement to respond than it should have, even allowing for the fact that the problems took place during COVID. I could go into more detail and give other examples, but will simply say, that our staff is by in large very, very good. The Board also has larger role to play, balancing the need for customer service with overall fair and equitable policy.
I believe both a permanent chair and a hybrid system with a few districts would have led to faster progress on Carlin Springs South, the Serrano, and on the issues that led me to run for the Board. Consider for example a Boad of 7 with 3 at large members, 3 districts roughly equivalent to the 3 General Assembly Delegate districts we have now, and one Chair directly elected at large by our residents. Also consider that every other locality in Northern Virginia except Falls Church has a permanently elected Chair.
Representative and Responsive Government
On the need for a more representative government, we have had far too few representatives of color, renters, and women. To be clear, a fair consideration of the history of our current system shows that the reason for the at large system was in part preventing black residents from being elected. That does not mean the system is still racist today, but I believe it fair to at least have a full conversation given that one of the motivations for our current system was racist. Renters have been underrepresented as well.
I was originally elected because renters supported me and 60% plus percent of our county are renters. As a Board Member, I have sought to honor the renters who gave me the chance to serve eight years ago. I also am a homeowner; I believe that ultimately there are limits to how well homeowners are likely to speak for renters in the aggregate. In other words, I think the fact only one renter, Ms. Coffey, has ever been elected to the Board is relevant. Delegate McLure's legislative district or a rough equivalent, for example, would likely prove more representative of renters over time. Finally, our history indicates significant barriers to women getting elected. We should consider how we can best ensure women and men have fully equal opportunity to be elected to the County Board.
Only 12 women, 2 Latinos (One man elected and one woman appointed), 1 gay man, 4 Black men, and no Asian Americans have served on the Arlington County Board. We should consider the barriers to representation that are relevant.
Finally, I believe our government could be more responsive and that changes to how we are governed would be helpful. Our email and phone response systems have improved over the last year. Simply being good Board Members and holding our staff and ourselves accountable will help. I do not believe, however, that greater efficiency will be enough for our government to be as good it should be. Examples of how we can be more responsive range from permit systems to our planning process to our report a problem function. When there is no specific Board Member to contact and instead a resident can and will often contact each of the five at large Board Members on a location specific concern, accountability is not best served. On a policy issue, similarly, full debate that involves diverse perspectives can be helpful. To be clear, there are tradeoffs, but ultimately, I think our current system does not lead to the responsiveness that would best serve our community.
The Process From Here
This change would need to be allowed in Richmond. Delegate Patrick Hope's bill on this from 2024 was HR 1225 and can be found and read in this article: New bill could make major county-government changes possible in Arlington | ARLnow.com. In light of the progress we have made, I think his bill as written should be delayed a year. If Delegate Hope makes changes to the bill, I leave open the possibility of supporting the bill this year, though I doubt it under the circumstances. That said, I think broadly that Arlington and not Richmond should decide the details of how we are governed and I have been inclined to support the bill for reasons linked to the progressive changes I believe we need.
The second step that would be needed for the community to go through a process like the advisory panel described above. The last step would be to go to Arlington voters or possibly to the County Board. (I favor to the voters on issues that lend themselves to up or down binary choices which would be most of them. I also think some issues are not best decided in referenda, where nuance is difficult to convey.)
Ultimately, deferring the bulk of this important conversation to July with the exceptions noted makes sense. That said, to be transparent, for me the question is how and when and not if we should have this conversation. It has been 95 years. Our government works very well. But we should consider if changes are worthwhile. This link provides background now and will be updated over the coming weeks. Proposed Charter on Form of Government Advisory Panel – Official Website of Arlington County Virginia Government
Thank you for reading and for allowing me the opportunity to serve you.
