FY 2018 Budget Priorities Public Input

What priorities should be considered?

Prioritize preserving green space and natural space in Arlington, whether county or privately owned. "Developer contributions" can be carried too far and end up with the unintended consequence of far too much green space and irreplaceable trees and wildlife disappearing. We can leave some of the affordable housing stock we have by offering incentives to homeowners/builders who renovate these homes on the existing footprint while preserving trees.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

Any school building from now on should be focused on using existing buildings, building field space on top of the buildings, and leaving what natural green space we have left untouched.

What priorities should be considered?

I would like to see the county take a more strategic approach to the budget and to governance in general. For example, the projected population increase over coming decades will put every aspect of life in Arlington under extreme pressure, whether we're talking about roads, schools, human capital, or natural capital. We are losing control of the governing process because we are not seriously considering the enormous impact of projected population growth. As others have noted here, we need to be doing much more to protect and nurture the natural environment, including the tree canopy, while there is still some greenery to protect. Arlington needs to invest in staff who can monitor and inspect house construction, destruction of habitat, and so on. There is too much focus on making Arlington into an award-winning "city;" however, our staffing and enforcement mechanisms are woefully inadequate to the task.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

We need serious impact studies of the projected population of Arlington. We need aggressive moves to market Arlington as a place to do business so that we can fill up empty office space. We need sufficient staff to monitor and enforce existing regulations. From my front door I can see two construction projects that are routinely violating county ordinances, yet nothing is done. Metro is broken and yet many in our population are totally dependent on it. We must have reliable mass transit, now and in the future. We must provide for and shelter those who need extra help. At the same time, we need to examine the CONSEQUENCES of all our existing policies and whether some of them are not working at cross purposes with each other.

I would be willing to pay more taxes to a county that took a more holistic and realistic view of the county's increasingly challenging future.

One area that could be cut is the enormous cost per student in our public schools. I am proud that Arlington has some of the country's finest schools. At the same time, we have to realize that good schools can be built without being "overengineered." That might bring the cost down.

What priorities should be considered?

Arlington bills itself as a world-class, sustainable community. Its Urban Forest Master Plan, adopted in 2004 (https://www.arlingtonva.us/trees/how-arlington-rates-trees/), states:

Arlington County will strive to have a sustainable urban forest that contributes to the livability of our urban community. Our trees are recognized as part of our green infrastructure that provides economic and environmental benefits. The current trend of tree canopy loss will be slowed and efforts made to reverse this trend through best practices in tree planting, preservation, and maintenance while fostering a sense of stewardship among residents.

Page 3.

To implement this vision, the Master Plan provided 42 recommendations. The very first recommendation, with a short-term target (1-2 years), was:

1) Determine the best methodology for refining our GIS analysis of the tree canopy. The most appropriate imagery should also be determined. New higher resolution satellite imagery is becoming increasingly available for analysis of tree canopy coverage.

Page 14.

Other recommendations included:

16) Proactively share our data, standards, regulations and policies with other stewards of our urban forest such as property owners and the development community.

Page 19.

25) Continue to monitor tree health, forest structure and the occurrence of invasives in Parks and naturally forested areas throughout the County.
26) Begin to inventory trees in parks, natural areas and other public facilities.

Page 23.

31) Ensure that best management practices (BMPs) are used when providing tree maintenance in critical areas such as riparian stream buffers.
32) Use the street tree inventory to determine conflicts with the built environment (sidewalks and tree grates) and prioritize their mitigation.
33) Update the GIS street tree inventory with tree maintenance and removal data.
34) Continue to systematically review potential tree hazards using the tree inventory. Consider the development of a Tree Risk Management Plan.
35) Using the tree inventory, develop a realistic plan for a five year pruning cycle of the trees in the street ROW.
36) Create a GIS mapping program for invasives to track progress and assist with management.

Pages 24-25.

We have not accomplished the goals we set for ourselves twelve years ago.

For example:

-- Arlington has some GIS data, but we don’t have near what the Master Plan said we would have. For example:

-- The latest tree canopy GIS data is from 2011 – five years ago - and the data did not even come from Arlington County; it came from the University of Vermont with funds from Casey Trees. (See https://www.arlingtonva.us/trees/how-arlington-rates-trees/ and next links below.)

-- We do not have a GIS street tree inventory with tree maintenance and removal data.

-- If we don’t have good, up-to-date, public GIS databases then we are not going to be able to track what’s happening to our trees and we won’t be able to preserve and grow our tree canopy as the 2004 Master Plan committed us to do. The consequences of such negligence are clear:

-- Contrary to the 2004 Master Plan vision statement which said that the trend of tree canopy loss will be slowed and efforts made to reverse this trend, the data shows that our tree canopy actually decreased from 43% in 2008 to 40% in 2011.

https://arlingtonva.s3.dualstack.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2013/09/Tree-canopy-analysis-2011-36-36.pdf

https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2015/02/Loss-Gain-Large.pdf

So we’re not meeting our own promises, and we are not doing as well as, for example, Washington, DC and Palo Alto, California:

http://opendata.dc.gov/datasets?q=Tree

http://canopy.org/tree-info/trees-in-palo-alto/

http://199.33.32.49/OpenGisData/

We bill ourselves as a world-class community. We need to step it up so we actually do what we say we’re going to do. That means we need to put more resources into the County departments that work these issues.

This would include:

* Stronger enforcement of laws and regulations that affect mature trees, wildlife habitat, water and waste management on building sites, etc. This will require more resources and people in, e.g., the building inspection department. From what I’ve seen in recent months, teardowns and building projects are going on in residential areas without adequate attention from the County. A number of projects do not even post building and other permits.

* More resources and staff in the County's urban forestry office in the Department of Parks and Recreation. It appears that this office is significantly understaffed and under resourced if we expect it to fulfill its assigned tasks.

* Provide resources and direction necessary so the County can finally implement the 2004 Urban Forest Master Plan, including the GIS tree database.

* Provide more funds and resources for conservation land acquisition (e.g., to protect wildlife habitats).

* Set up a process whereby property owners can receive property tax breaks when they reduce the value of their property by donating conservation easements to organizations like, e.g., the Northern Virginia Conservation Trust (http://nvct.org/). This could create incentives for current property owners - even those who haven't started to consider selling their homes: For example, a lot owner who donated a conservation easement to protect mature trees on his/her lot could receive years of property tax breaks while still living in his/her home. My understanding is that Arlington does not have such a procedure in place, although Fairfax County does.

* Put more people and resources into creating and publicizing a better visualisation for residents and County Government of what a 30% population increase over the next 25 years (as contemplated by the GLUP) would mean for trees, wildlife, quality of life, climate change, traffic, noise, exhaust, air pollution, the environment generally, and County finances and government.

The point is: The County puts out a lot of words about how great we are at protecting tree canopy and the environment but we’re not walking the walk. Let’s do it.

Bill Roos

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

What priorities should be considered?

The Affordable Housing Investment Fund is essential to addressing the County's affordable-housing crisis, meeting the goals of the Affordable Housing Master Plan, and helping to sustain a healthy and diverse economy. The FY 2017 allocation of $13.7 million must be increased by at least $10 million in order to begin to make realistic progress toward meeting the AHMP goals. If the resulting $23.7 million total is not likely to be sufficient, together with projected AHIF income from loan repayments, developer contributions, etc., to finance the affordable-housing projects now in the pipeline for FY 2018, I urge you to raise the allocation to fund those projects.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

Given the potential for significant cuts in federal spending by the new Congress and Administration, this is no time for Arlington County to be weighing cuts in local programs and services that could hurt individual residents and the County's collective economic vitality. Programs and services should be preserved for FY 2018, even at the cost of a higher tax rate, while the direction that Washington will take becomes clearer.

What priorities should be considered?

The FY 2018 allocation for the Affordable Housing Investment Fund must be increased from FY 2017's $13.7 million to enable the County to make realistic progress toward meeting the goals in the Affordable Housing Master Plan. I urge that the FY 2018 allocation be increased by at least $10 million. If the resulting $23.7 million is not sufficient, together with repayments, developer contributions, and other sources, to meet the need reflected in affordable-housing projects now in the pipeline, I urge the County to allocate whatever is necessary to ensure those projects are funded.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

The FY 2018 allocation for the Affordable Housing Investment Fund must be increased from FY 2017's $13.7 million to enable the County to make realistic progress toward meeting the goals in the Affordable Housing Master Plan. I urge that the FY 2018 allocation be increased by at least $10 million. If the resulting $23.7 million is not sufficient, together with repayments, developer contributions, and other sources, to meet the need reflected in affordable-housing projects now in the pipeline, I urge the County to allocate whatever is necessary to ensure those projects are funded.

What priorities should be considered?

I am tired of the Theatre of the Budget we go through every year, in which the school board presents a budget that doesn't balance, and then the county board provides enough money to cover the excess spending, no matter how poor the rationale behind the spending, and then everyone is supposed to act as though this is a triumph of good government.

APS should be spending to ensure that the needs of the economically disadvantaged are met. Kids with special needs or learning disabilities should be a priority. Devices should not.

And what ever happened to that community satisfaction survey? If the pollstress is too busy to provide the finished report (spinning numbers into gilt), hand over the data to the community.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

New street signs when the old ones still work? The thing is, I don't know what to tell you not to do because the bad idea is already unstoppably on the move before citizens find out about it.

I can live with basic bus stops as long as parks and field space are good. I'm willing to pay higher fees for rec as long as there's an offset/scholarship for families with less money.

What priorities should be considered?

Arlington Green Party Statement to the Arlington County Manager on the FY 2018 Budget
December 16, 2016

Dear County Manager:

We present the views of the Arlington Greens for your consideration on the FY2018 budget. Thank you for your work to make our community a better place for all.

We support four items in the budget—
1. A higher living wage for county and contractor employees,
2. More affordable housing funds for housing grants rental assistance program;
3. A new position for an environmental specialist in the Department of Environmental Services to enforce a ban on single use plastic bags, and
4. A temporary new position for a historic specialist in the Historic Preservation Program, Neighborhood Services Division to complete the historic designation of Westover Village.

We ask you to expand the scope of the living wage ordinance, and to more than double the number of households getting a housing grant from 1,300 low-income households to about 3,000. We support funding a solid waste specialist who will work with large retailers in Arlington, such as supermarkets, drugs store chains, big box stores, and national retail chains to ban the use of free plastic bags given to consumers. Finally, we support funding a new temporary position of a historic preservation specialist in the Neighborhood Services Division to complete the required research for historic designation of Westover Village apartments.

Living wage
Last year, to your credit, you recommended, and we supported raising the living wage from $13.13 to $14.50 per hour for all county employees and for those few covered private contractor employees. A living wage ensures that an employee does not have to turn to the county and our community to live above poverty. We Greens want all Arlington employees to earn at least a living wage and live above poverty. We support a 2-percent increase in the living wage of $14.50 to reflect inflation in 2016.
We also recommend that you expand the scope of the living wage ordinance to require ALL contractors with the county no matter where their employees work in Arlington to pay them a living age. The current ordinance only covers contract employees physically working in a county facility. Many, un-covered contractor employees are low-paid healthcare aides, employees of group homes and other nonprofits, or employees of for-profit companies.
We would also like you to require private companies and developers that receive substantial direct subsidies from the county, such as the $55 million of county funds the County Board gave in 2014 to Forrest City Realty the billion-dollar developer/owner of Ballston Shopping Center, to pay a living wage to its employees. We recommend that you add a contract provision for all developers and companies getting any Arlington County funds that all their employees must receive the current county living wage.
Housing grants rental assistance
We support increasing the 2018 budget for housing grants from $9.7 million to $18.7 million. Housing grants are the county’s single most effective housing assistance program, and help seniors, disabled adults, and families with a child. An average household gets about $500 a month, and earns well under $30,000 a year (30% or less of the area median income (AMI). There are now 9,100 households in Arlington who earn 30-percent AMI or less, but only 14 percent (1,300) of these receive a local housing grant. The Affordable Housing Master Plan (AHMP)that the county adopted two years ago called for the county to provide annually additional assistance to about 600 households. Our proposal below would help 1,800 households or cover about three years of what the county board adopted as a goal under the AHMP. This will dramatically help the county government meet progress on this goal.

Another $9 million could fund 1,800 households each with a $400 monthly housing grant. To get this $9 million, you could shift some of the current housing funds from less effective housing assistance programs, particularly the AHIF. And, you could triple the current developers’ tax to raise another $7 million a year (see addendum). Developers pay a very low county fee when they choose not to provide at least 5% affordable apartments in new complexes, and this fee should be raised. This would go a long way to meeting the goals of the Affordable Housing Master Plan.
It is far more effective to give tenants a grant, and let them rent their own apartment or share housing in Arlington than building just a few more expensive subsidized apartments. Only current county residents get a grant, whereas new subsidized apartments must be offered under HUD rules to anyone including those living outside Arlington who applies. Arlington housing grant recipients can live anywhere in north or south Arlington rather than only in subsidized apartments built mostly along western Columbia Pike, thus furthering the county’s adopted housing target goal of geographic diversity of housing assistance.
New solid waste specialist to enforce a plastic bag ban
We support the creation of a position for an environmental specialist in the Department of Environmental Services who would develop and then enforce a ban on large commercial retailers giving away single-use plastic bags which clog our steams and public places and create a public nuisance. The Department stopped accepting plastic bags from curbside pickup and for recycling, and today the vast majority of plastic bags are simply burned as solid waste or end up as litter in our streams, streets and gutters. We support funding a new position in the Department to enforce this ban. Under guidance from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, local jurisdictions may ban such materials.

New temporary historic preservation specialist
Finally, we support funding one temporary position for one year of an historic preservation specialist who will complete the research needed for the local historic designation of a new Westover Village Apartment district. The county government needs to move quickly within the next 4-6 months to complete the historic designation or more moderate income rental apartment buildings will be demolished in Westover Village.

Thank you,
Sandra Hernandez and Marie Pellegrino, co chairs, the Arlington Green Party
www.GreensofArlington.org Email Info@greensofarlington.org

Addendum to Arlington Greens Statement on the FY 2018 Budget
How to raise $7 million more for the county housing grants program through
A higher developers’ fee

Under the 2005 Affordable Housing Ordinance, the county requires developers of new housing projects needing or requesting a zoning change for the project to provide that at least 5 percent of the additional apartments added as a result of the zoning change to be “affordable rental units” or to pay a fee. Unfortunately, this ordinance was not tightly written, and, for the most part, developers do not provide new affordable units on site, but rather pay a modest fee that amounts often to a portion of the actual cost of the new apartment.
The county board could increase the required fee under the ordinance much closer to actual costs of new apartments. This could generate an estimated $7 million more annually to the housing program. Developers exacerbate the problem of rising rents in our community by their activities, and it is fair to shift some of the tax burden of housing assistance programs to them rather than to only general taxpayers.
During 2005-October 2014, a total 295 additional units were approved under this ordinance, of which only 30 units were located in the new developments, whereas developers choose to pay a fee for the 265 units not provided in the new developments. Thus, this ordinance applied to an average 30 new units per year. These fees yielded only $36.2 million during the 10 years or $3.6 million annually, the equivalent of $137,000 per new additional apartment. These funds were simply added to the AHIF.
This Affordable Housing Ordinance fee should be changed to increase the per unit fee from $137,000 to the developer’s actual cost per unit which currently is around $350,000 or more per unit. With a fee of at least $350,000 per unit for 30 units, the county would likely receive $10.5 million annually, an increase of $6.9 million a year from the current $3.6 million. This entire additional $6.9 million annually could be placed in the housing grants fund.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

What priorities should be considered?

The FY 2018 allocation for the Affordable Housing Investment Fund must be increased from FY 2017's $13.7 million to enable the County to make realistic progress toward meeting the goals in the Affordable Housing Master Plan. I urge that the FY 2018 allocation be increased by at least $10 million. If the resulting $23.7 million is not sufficient, together with repayments, developer contributions, and other sources, to meet the need reflected in affordable-housing projects now in the pipeline, I urge the County to allocate whatever is necessary to ensure those projects are funded. mmdean

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

What priorities should be considered?

I am concerned that the country will fail to meet its own affordable housing goals if the FY 2018 allocation for the Affordable Housing Investment Fund is not increased from FY 2017's $13.7 million. We can and must meet these modest goals. Therefore, I urge that the FY 2018 allocation be increased by at least $10 million and if the resulting $23.7 million is not sufficient, together with repayments, developer contributions, and other sources, to meet the need reflected in affordable-housing projects now in the pipeline, I urge the County to allocate whatever is necessary to ensure those projects are funded. I want to be proud of my county's efforts to include economic diversity with affordable housing and I am prepared to pay more taxes to achieve the goals outlined in the study.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

What priorities should be considered?

The FY 2018 allocation for the Affordable Housing Investment Fund must be increased from FY 2017's $13.7 million to enable the County to make realistic progress toward meeting the goals in the Affordable Housing Master Plan. I urge that the FY 2018 allocation be increased by at least $10 million. If the resulting $23.7 million is not sufficient, together with repayments, developer contributions, and other sources, to meet the need reflected in affordable-housing projects now in the pipeline, I urge the County to allocate whatever is necessary to ensure those projects are funded.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

The FY 2018 allocation for the Affordable Housing Investment Fund must be increased from FY 2017's $13.7 million to enable the County to make realistic progress toward meeting the goals in the Affordable Housing Master Plan. I urge that the FY 2018 allocation be increased by at least $10 million. If the resulting $23.7 million is not sufficient, together with repayments, developer contributions, and other sources, to meet the need reflected in affordable-housing projects now in the pipeline, I urge the County to allocate whatever is necessary to ensure those projects are funded.

What priorities should be considered?

The county must continue to support AHIF to enable the preservation and creation of affordable housing for low income, disabled, and work force residents.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

The county and schools should continue their shared revenue agreement, adjusting it to address the costs of increasing enrollment. The school capital fund must support the construction of facilities to serve our expanding student population.

What priorities should be considered?

The county must continue to support AHIF to enable the preservation and creation of affordable housing for low income, disabled, and work force residents.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

The county and schools should continue their shared revenue agreement, adjusting it to address the costs of increasing enrollment. The school capital fund must support the construction of facilities to serve our expanding student population.

What priorities should be considered?

Generating income - Filling our vacant office space needs priority as a revenue generator.
Cut and defer discretionary spending expenditures until we have a budget WITH excess.

I agree that WMATA will kill us. We must attack METRO costs and (lack of good reliable) service. A part time rep from the Board on WMATA is not enough - we need to be aggressive in collaborating with other "payers" to demand more and reduce our costs. Hire a consultant that gets paid only based on what they save us.
Reduce Affordable Housing allocations and other programs that have grown over the past 5 years - return to current levels when we can afford it.
Reduce capital projects and do not team with other counties/cities on capital projects (like Aquatics center). Maybe we should consider WMATA a capital project. I love parks and green areas, but with the WMATA bill looming we need to have reserves available.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

Stop building fancy unique schools and contributing factors - such as historical designations.

Eliminate classes with only minimal participation or centralize their location for teaching students from all schools at one place - like we do for vocational classes.
Promote vocational classes more.

Make fully supported varsity sports with minimal participation a club sport with only partial subsidy.

What priorities should be considered?

As Don Beyer stated as recently as Dec. 14: "Climate change remains the world’s greatest threat. Delaying or reversing our efforts to fight climate change will have potentially catastrophic effects on the planet." The budget does not reflect this reality. One concrete way for Arlington to show its concern about climate change is to preserve its natural capital: habitat and tree canopy. Please add staff and resources to the County's urban forestry office (which is woefully understaffed, operating, for example, with 1/10th the number of arborists as in DC). Specifically, please provide resources to MAINTAIN trees; there are not enough resources to carry out even the simple act of watering trees in the County's limited public green space!

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

In terms of things to give up, "gold-plated" schools would be one. Why does Arlington choose to spend 100 million, for example, on a building for 775 students (Wilson)? In lieu of "shiny bauble" school projects, stick to basics and don't allow the idea that spending yet more money per student (above any other jurisdictions!) equates quality education.

For future study, please focus on 1) tracking the County's natural capital, i.e. a GIS system for trees and other measures to quantify and preserve that capital; and 2) study the implications of a 30% increase in population as predicted by 2040, and the many implications - including on natural capital which, as research only underscores, is vital to human health, and a key tool to combat climate change.

What priorities should be considered?

I would like to see a larger portion of revenue sharing for Arlington Public Schools. Given the forecasted incresased enrollment to over 30,000 students, I think capital spending needs to be focused on building enough seats to house those students including a 4th comprehensive high school.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

I would like to see more coordination between APS and the county especially when it comes to capital planning and priorities. I believe there may be some efficiencies that can be realized in areas such as transportation, land use (joint facilities), and IT.

What priorities should be considered?

Arlington should consider that its days of being a sanctuary city for illegal (repeat, illegal) immigrants is over. That means that "affordable housing" is currently a sacred cow (i.e., wildly unbalanced budget priority) that will have to be sacrificed (reduced) to reflect downward pressures on the illegal population and Federal funding cuts if not. I'm tired of feeling like I live in some other country. Arlington County needs to refocus on American citizens living in Arlington, not incentivizing illegals to move here because of affordable housing.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

Efficiencies: assume Arlington will no longer enjoy being a sanctuary city, reallocate affordable housing funding accordingly.

Give up things: give up wildly unbalanced affordable housing funding priority.

Potential revenue sources: medical and recreational marijuana sales tax. The rich millennials and boomers will pay a lot in tax to eliminate criminalization of a widely popular plant, which is being increasingly decriminalized in the 50 states.

Areas of future study: research budget implications of Arlington no longer being a sanctuary city due to border enforcement and enhanced deportation of illegal aliens.

What priorities should be considered?

The Arlington Community Foundation requests that the County provide 2018 funds for its Nonprofit Center. At the request of Arlington nonprofit directors, the Center enhances the collective impact of Arlington nonprofits by CONVENING THEM FOR ACTION around specific needs and IMPROVING COLLABORATION with DHS in doing so. The Center has joined forces with DHS to share funding and professional expertise in implementing the Bridges Out of Poverty Framework, which is designed to improve the efficiency with which services are delivered to Arlington's low income residents AND to improve their effectiveness.
The Center's Coalition to Improve Advanced Care brings together Arlington's Agency on Aging, the Commissions on Aging and Long-term Care Residences, Virginia Hospital Ctr., and numerous nonprofits to improve systems and communication around advanced illness care among our aging residents.
Any County funds given to the Center are reinvested in these efforts. Current and prospective Center funders expect to see local government investment. This goes beyond an initial seed grant, but rather ongoing validation of the public/private benefits realized through the work.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

The Arlington Community Foundation is working in strong partnership with the County and the nonprofits in myriad ways, both as a funding partner and also as a catalyst for improving efficiencies and effectiveness in meeting identified needs. ACF launched the Center to further extend its capacity to do so. County funds to the Center will be reinvested in the Bridges Out of Poverty work within this broad network of nonprofits and DHS programs. In addition, the Center is supporting APAH's Columbia Pike Progress Initiative by consulting with them on using the framework to strengthen their outcomes and pilot some of the systems efficiencies identified. The Center is also supporting the Healthy Community Action Teams' childhood obesity work, as well as the County's MAPP process.

What priorities should be considered?

Arlington County needs to be realistic that APS is a major factor in the high real estate values in the county. The division of two different administrative structures seems to me defeatist of resolving the major challenge (overcrowding) threatening the quality of the public school system in Arlington.

I also feel that Arlington County has a bizarre idea that affordable housing is a sacred cow. The graphic on slide 4 (https://arlingtonva.s3.dualstack.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/18/2013/09/Arlington-County-FY-2018-Joint-Budget-Forum-Presentation-11.30.2016.pdf) defies common sense. Building more affordable housing is accelerating overcrowding--a problem that is merely being kicked down the road. The arrow should lead FROM affordable housing TO increasing school population. In fact, affordable housing is creating downward pressure through the entire system: more costs on library, special education, infrastructure. The county needs to think seriously through what is realistic and stop raising taxes and living on issuing bonds.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

Cut affordable housing.
Focus on schools and metro, two major drivers for the real estate values in Arlington.
Resolve the overcrowding problem in APS now.

What priorities should be considered?

The budget doesn't seem to discuss spending to help lower Arlington County's emissions and expand access to clean energy. Since urban areas will be critical to addressing climate change in the next four years, I recommend the budget consider ways to decrease greenhouse gas emissions.

What should County and Schools consider when weighing service and/or program reductions, revenues, and the impact to taxpayers?

The County and Schools should consider the environmental impact of budget decisions. I'm willing to pay more in taxes to fund more extensive programs in things like energy efficiency, mass transit and clean energy.