Letter to Supervisor Hudgins re CPR/RA-County Discussions of Reston Park and Open Space Planning

Sunday, July 22, 2018

Dear Supervisor Hudgins:

Thank you again for working with the CPR/RA coalition to help develop a better public understanding of the issues involved in the proposed Reston PRC amendments.  We appreciate your dedication and hard work on behalf of Reston and your making available to us the County officials most responsible for working on these issues.  We also wish to thank Goldie Harrison of your staff for her tireless efforts to pull everyone together at the same time and place!

On July 18th, the Parks, Recreation, Open Space, & Athletic Facilities group met.  We began the meeting by looking for high-level areas where we had common ground and common goals, conforming to the Reston Master Plan.  This proved very successful and we had unanimous agreement that:

• Parks, open space, athletic facilities are essential to the health, wealth and well-being of a community.  Open space has direct physical and mental health benefits, is environmentally key to having a safe and productive landscape and brings direct and indirect economic rewards;
• A fundamental characteristic of Reston has been a commitment to preserve natural areas and integrate open space throughout the community;
• Development will be phased with infrastructure;
• High quality open space will be required; and
• Public participation in planning and zoning will continue to be the community’s foundation.

We then set a framework for all subsequent discussion.  That is, all projects and proposals would be measured against four standards:

• WHAT:  What project has been identified – athletic field, pocket park, open space, etc., including dimensions of each;
• WHERE: Where exactly in Reston will the project be located.
• HOW:  How will the project be funded; and
• WHEN: When will the project be open to the public.

It was noted that if all four of these questions could be answered in specific, concrete terms, then we have an actual project.  If three questions are answered, then we have a proposal.  If only two or fewer questions are answered, then any proposal is still in the “wishful thinking” stage.

County representatives then gave an overview of their plans and proposals.  We should note we are aware of the bureaucratic, financial, legal, and other hurdles that must be overcome to bring in a new project and we are cognizant of the often frustrating amount of time involved in shepherding a successful project to its conclusion.  We appreciate the hard work, dedication and good intentions of our County officials.

The participants then discussed specific issues.

First was an update on how the Park Authority plans to meet the Comprehensive Plan’s call for at least twelve additional full sized playing fields in Reston, at least three of which are to be in Reston’s TSA zone.  The County officials stated they expected to meet this goal by upgrading existing fields with artificial turf and lights to extend playable hours and to acquire additional land as part of the proffers developers will give.  CPR/RA reps expressed some skepticism as to whether this all would actually meet the Plan’s intent, especially as it is not possible, according to the County, to exactly identify where new individual parcels of land will be at this time.  The CPR/RA reps requested the County provide as much information as possible in the form of What/Where/How/When and the County agreed to do this.  The math involved in computing the additional value of turfed fields raised questions and the County also agreed to provide information on this.  A CPR/RA rep and later a questioner from the audience noted the Reston Association’s Environmental Advisory Committee is not in favor of crumb rubber synthetic turfed fields due to health concerns and another filler would be needed if this activity goes forward.  RA seeks to be a leader in the County in implementing safer non-grass fields.  The County said funds had already been approved to commission an engineering analysis of the Baron Cameron Park playing fields.

With respect to obtaining additional land from developers, the community reps expressed strong support for the County taking a very firm line to obtain required land in Reston’s TSA (at least 3 full fields) and in Reston’s PRC (at least an additional 9 full fields or equivalent) in their negotiations with developers  The County representatives expressed appreciation for this support.

The next issue concerned Reston’s missing indoor recreation facility.  All parties agreed that Hunter Mill is the only district in the County that doesn’t have such a facility.  The County reps noted they had recently finished a study on athletic facility usage County-wide and needed to assess the impact of a new facility against other facilities, such as the Reston Community Center.  This line of thought was unconvincing to the community, as the new facility has been long promised and is much needed.   Again, the community reps requested a What/Where/How/When analysis of steps toward building the facility.

One of—perhaps the—defining features of Reston is the connectivity of our pathways, particularly the non at-grade road crossings that allow pedestrians and bicyclists to travel from one end of Reston to the other in a safe, efficient manner.  The CPR/RA reps asked why major new developments along major roads weren’t required to put in non at-grade crossings.  The development at Wiehle, for example, should have safe crossings of Wiehle and Sunset Hills built in.  Such crossings would also help alleviate traffic backups as the lengthy “walk” signals would be unneeded.  The County first made the case that separating pedestrians and cars was a bad thing, as pedestrians tended to slow traffic down.   This argument was rejected out of hand, with the observation that Reston has had two pedestrian fatalities in as many weeks along exactly these roads.  Next the County stated that ADA (American Disabilities Act) considerations made tunnels and overpasses unworkable.  This too was refuted, with an observation that other communities, such as Miami Beach, have inexpensive, all weather lifts for just the purpose of facilitating full usage of safe crossings.   Although no consensus was reached, the County asked the community to identify specific crossings that might have the right topographical conditions to support not at grade crossings.

Conversation then turned to the “Road From Nowhere” – the infamous middle of the night, unannounced addition of a road that impinges on the Hidden Creek Golf Course, the W&OD trail, or most likely both.  The community strongly urged the County to remove this road from all maps and consideration as there was no justification for it and the community was never advised of its inclusion in the fine print of a map.  The County rep stated this was a “conceptual road” that only might come into play if the expected redevelopment of Isaac Newton Square required it.   It was also possible the developer would have other options or might scale back development.  As for removing it, this would require an amendment to the Comp Plan.  Community reps again stressed the road could not be built without destroying needed recreational space and the County has never been able—or willing—to explain who put it there, for what reason, and why the community wasn’t informed of its presence.  The community reps encouraged the County to remove it as it is unjustified and will be a continuing irritant until it’s gone.

This discussion led to the issue of the golf course.  The Community expressed its great thanks and appreciation for the strong position Supervisor Hudgins and the County took to help preserve Reston National Golf Course.  The CPR/RA rep noted the Comp Plan identifies two open spaces specifically identified as golf courses and asked if the community can count on the County to provide the same level of support in defending both full (18 hole) golf courses as we have seen in defending the first one.  The County rep stated it is very clear in the Comp Plan that there are two golf courses in Reston.   This affirmation was very well received by all parties.

In the course of the discussions, the County reps explained some of the bureaucratic challenges they face and the often lengthy time needed to ensure all proper authorizations and approvals are obtained for a given project.  They also explained there is a difference between commitments and actual physical possession of a resource or funds.  For example, the County reps speak of $10 million dollars in proffer money to obtain and support recreational facilities.  However, there actually is no “money in the bank” at the moment, as these commitments are only exercised when a project reaches a certain level of completion.

The CPR/RA reps expressed some frustration with the vagueness of the answers given by the County.  Although the complexity of the development process is understood and appreciated, Reston has been around for a long time and some examples of recent successful projects should be possible to cite.

In conclusion, the CPR/RA reps again thanked the County representatives for their candor and willingness to help educate the public.  This meeting was informative and productive.  Moving forward, the County agreed to provide:

• Information on the proposed turfing and lighting of existing playing fields in Reston, including how to mitigate safety concerns that have led Montgomery County to restrict new turfing, factors that led to a belief that significant increased playing time will result from these additions and a breakdown on the cost of upgrades and what designated funding source has been identified for each field;
• Information on the status of current development projects as they pertain to the delivery of open space, parks, “urban parks”, athletic facilities, pocket parks, etc. to the community.  This information should come in the What/Where/How/When format.  As part of this, please provide a map showing all current, proposed and aspirational open space, parks, urban parks, pocket parks, etc. including park dimensions, amenities, on site parking, etc.;
• Information on the status of the Hunter Mill indoor athletic facility, including proposed location, amenities, funding source, dedicated parking, etc.;
• Information on the status of the commission’s work assessing Reston’s playing fields;
• An explanation of the origin of the Road from Nowhere and why it keeps coming up in County documents such as the “Reston Traffic Analysis: Final Report” of March 28th, 2018.  Provide procedures to have road removed from all maps and any future consideration; and
• Information on how the development of Reston Town Center North will address open space and additional parkland.

Earlier, in a letter from the Planning Director, the County proposed having a joint meeting of representatives from FCPA, FCPS, the Northern Virginia Park Authority, the Reston Association and any other entity with an interest in or control over land that could become additional park or open space.  We believe this would be most helpful.

The community representatives agreed to provide:

• A template to list all the required information about park and open space, etc associated with upcoming development;
• A list of possible locations for pedestrian tunnels and overpasses associated with new construction;
• Public support for County efforts to obtain needed land in Reston from developers; and
• An open mind and appreciation for the difficulties County officials have in addressing all these issues.

The group will reconvene when both sides have had a chance to assess the additional information obtained from the other.

Sincerely, Dennis
Dennis K. Hays, CPR Discussion Leader

Letter from Dennis Hays to Sharon Bulova: Economics of the Friends

Dear Sharon: 

Sorry to keep bothering you but the issue of accountability keeps coming up and I think it important you have an accurate picture of what the various parties involved contribute.      

• The Friends receive no cash or funding from the County.           
• The County does provide space to the Friends, which certainly has value.  
• In return, the Friends give the County hundreds of  thousands of dollars in direct and indirect support..    
• The County gets back at least six or seven times the value of all support provided to the Friends.           

Over the years the County has received millions of dollars of "free money" from the Friends.  The margins we produce are not possible under any other arrangement.  

BACKGROUND:  You may remember all of this started four years ago when the Friends asked for an audit of the Library Director's Gift Fund due to reported irregularities.   We have never received a response to this request.  Instead, the County turned around and initiated an attempt to audit the Friends!  This was dropped only when an attorney for the Friends hammered home that the County had no right to demand an audit of independent, 501 (c) 3 organizations.  

A year later came the initial attempt to unilaterally modify the MOU.  This fizzled when the Trustees were unable to say why the existing MOU wasn't serving all parties well and what the purpose of the new MOU would be.  

Now comes yet another attempt to intrude negatively on the Friends operations.   

The Economics of the Friends:  

The following pertains specifically to the operations of the Friends of the Reston Library.  Each Friends Group is different, of course, and there may be unique situations here and there, but in general all Friends Groups operate under similar circumstances.      

What the County Gives to the Friends:   In general, books discarded by the County are of zero value.  They tend to be soiled, torn, dog eared, outdated, missing pages, etc.   As a rule, we don't accept books from the County.  There are, however, a few excepts - occasionally we will accept a book, generally non-fiction in the categories of hard science (physics, math, biology) or history as these books (sadly) are rarely checked out and thus are in much better shape.  I wish to correct my statement in an earlier message that Reston sells no books from the County.  My apologies.   A more accurate statement would be we sell extremely few books originally purchased by the County.  The books received from the County contribute an amount of less than one third of one percent of our sales.

      

What the Friends Give to the County: It is important to note the public donates their books to the Friends, not the County.  Many of our books are collected directly from patrons' homes.  I know some dispute this, but this is at best a difference without a distinction as the books all go to supporting our common goal of helping the Library.  This is only an issue if someone wants it to be.  There is more to story, however - the County provides us with a list of desired titles (mostly popular current fiction) and we hunt down these titles, tidy them up, and give them to the County.   In fact, library staff are welcome to take desired volumes at any time, including in the middle of a sale.   Whatever the source, a donated book has an initial value of three to five cents (wholesalers pay two dollars for a large box of random books)   ALL of the subsequent increase in value is due to the work of the Friends.  

Space allocation:  Here the County does provide a vital service:  The Reston Friends occupy roughly 450 square feet of space in the Reston Library on a continuing basis.  Comparable space in Reston goes for between $2.00 and $2.50 a sq ft per month.  Taking a mid-point value of $2.25, the value of the space we occupy would be about $12,000 a year.

Return on Investment:  Last month we authorized over $70,000 in contributions to the Reston and Herndon libraries.   We sponsor speakers, put on children's programs, buy books, support English language training, purchase makerspace equipment, buy garden supplies, purchase furniture, pay for periodicals, put on SAT workshops, support the page program, provide budget supplements,  fund volunteer recognition, pay for library outreach materials, replace easels and carts, fund pre-school programs for children with sensory needs, provide educational opportunities to school aged children during holidays, supply bottled water service for the staff, etc. etc.  

Putting on a Sale:   Each year we hold two large general sales, two childrens' and young adults sales, a holiday sale, a puzzles and games sale and a mystery books sale.  Plus, of course, the ongoing sales.  We have a year round operation with hundreds of volunteers.  A very conservative estimate of the volunteer hours needed to accomplish all of this is between 5,000 and 6,000 hours.  The State of Virginia values volunteer service at $26.71 an hour. 

BOTTOM LINE:  ALL the flow of money goes FROM the Friends TO the County.  And we ask nothing in return other than some space to do our job.  

For over a year all we have asked to be treated as an equal partner - is that too much?  

 

 

Sincerely, Dennis Hays 

RA on upcoming Reston PRC Zoning Ordinance Amendment Work Sessions

Re-post: Fairfax County Public Library and Friends of the Library clash over finances, Fairfax Times, June 22, 2018

The following is a partial re-post of a recent Fairfax Times article by Angela Woolsey on the dispute between FCPA and the Friends of the Library:

Visitors to the Tysons-Pimmit Regional Library used book sale on June 1 through 3 received a slip of paper with their purchase warning that the quarterly sales could come to an end.

The paper explained that the book sales are at risk of ending due to an ongoing disagreement between Fairfax County and the various Friends of the Library groups that fund and sponsor many library activities.

The Friends of Tysons-Pimmit Regional Library then suggested that concerned citizens contact their local supervisor and the Fairfax County Public Library administration.

The rift between the library administration and the Friends stems from a new memorandum of understanding that outlines the responsibilities that each party has as participants in a public-nonprofit partnership.

Library administrators say the MOU is necessary to clarify the county’s relationship with the Friends groups, which are independent, nonprofit community organizations run by volunteers and dedicated to supporting library activities.

However, members of several Friends groups argue that the terms in the memorandum are intrusive and restrictive, especially when it comes to their financial reporting obligations, and that the library is using the threat of eviction to pressure them into signing a document despite their objections.

Click here for the rest of this article.  

Re-post: Library Friends Groups are fighting county eviction threat, Annandale Blog, June 15, 2017

Friday, June 15, 2018 

Library Friends groups are fighting county eviction threat

A library book sale organized by the Friends of George Mason Library.

Library Friends groups are engaged in a bitter dispute with the administrators of the Fairfax County Public Libraries (FCPL), who they say are trying to control their finances and are threatening to kick them out of the library if they don’t sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU).

The biggest point of contention in the MOU, adopted by the Library Board of Trustees in January, is a provision requiring Friends groups to turn over all their financial records to the FCPL.

Friends groups believe the MOU is one-sided and say they would sign if they have a chance to make some modifications – but they’ve told they either have to sign it as is or be evicted. “We’re being told it’s our way or the highway,” says Charles Keener of the Friends of the Tysons-Pimmit Regional Library.

The Tysons Friends group, which has not signed the MOU, passed out flyers at its book sale earlier this month stating, “this may be our final book sale.”

The Friends of the George Mason, Reston, Centreville, Thomas Jefferson, and Kingstowne libraries also have not signed the MOU.
 
According to FCPL Director Jessica Hudson, the Kings Park, Dolly Madison, Martha Washington, Lorton, and City of Fairfax libraries have signed.

The Friends of Woodrow Wilson Library have also signed the MOU, reports Pat Jack of the Friends group. “We’re very small potatoes; this MOU really is aimed at the larger libraries that make a lot of money. We felt we could live with it. We thought about disbanding but felt we couldn’t do it to the staff.”

“It was not handled well by the trustees,” Jack says. “They tend to dictate and not collaborate.”

Keener believes some Friends are waiting to see if they are actually going to be evicted before signing.

Hudson says she hopes all of the Friends will eventually sign the MOU by July 31 but “we haven’t set a firm deadline.” If any Friends groups refuse to sign “we would work toward dissolution of our partnership,” she says, which means the Friends group would be “removed from the library space” and could no longer use the library name.


Lack of compromise


“If they treated us as equals, all of the issues could be resolved,” says Dennis Hays, chair of Fairfax Library Advocates. “We could probably hash it out in an hour or two. It is baffling why the county is antagonizing a group that has been so helpful to the library system.”

“If the friends were to go away, the ability of the library to serve the public would be severely impacted,” Hayes says.

Library Friends are volunteers, and many of them seniors. They put in countless hours supporting their local library branch and collectively raise hundreds of thousands of dollars a year – mostly from book sales – for library programs, landscaping, furniture, and much more. George Mason Friends pays for the countywide summer reading program.

Keener accuses Hudson of “dictating, threatening, and bullying, instead of being willing to compromise.” There has been a “great deal of mistrust, anger and sense of disrespect throughout the process,” he wrote in an email to County Executive Bryan Hill. “How is it going to look when they send marshals to throw out little old ladies who sell books?”

Hudson brushes aside the criticism, insisting “many Friends groups had an opportunity to have their feedback taken into account.”

There have been many meetings on the MOU, representatives of Friends groups acknowledge, but they say they aren’t being listened to.

“Every effort by Friends to offer an alternative MOU was completely rebuffed,” Keener says, and Friends’ request to have FCPL adopt a model MOU from the American Library Association was ignored.


Friends have also pointed to the county’s plan to use separate MOUs for friends groups that support Fairfax County parks and suggested FCPL do the same for library Friends.


According to Hudson, the library Friends groups generally have the same missions and do the same activities, so “having the same overarching document makes a lot of sense,” while the park friends groups are more varied.

Money grab?

The single biggest point of contention is the provision in the MOU calling for Friends to turn over detailed financial records to Fairfax County, despite the lack of evidence of any wrongdoing.

“We are fine with providing the same basic financial summaries we file with the Feds and which are presented in our treasurer reports at our board meetings and given to the branch manager,” Keener says. “But the director has told groups that they must provide copies of every receipt and copies of their actual bank records.”

Keener finds it especially insulting that “they are asking us to turn in every Costco receipt.”

“The concern is that some of the friends have reserves, and it appears the county would like to make use of them,” Hays says. “We literally give millions of dollars to the county.”

A lawyer specializing in nonprofit law hired by several Friends groups told them “the county has no legal right to demand such detailed internal records from a legally recognized independent nonprofit entity,” Keener notes.

“Throughout this process, we have not been treated as an equal party to a mutual agreement,” he says. “And now we are being outright bullied and threatened if we dare to uphold our legal rights and follow our conscience.”

“As a county taxpayer I am beyond angry to see this disrespect and abuse directed toward citizens who have given selflessly of their time for decades,” Keener says. “This is truly Big Brother run amok.”

Hudson defends the need for more financial information. “The library board feels strongly that it’s part of their fiduciary responsibility to provide transparency around monetary issues,” she says. “Friends want more transparency, too. We will provide them more information on how libraries use their money.”

Hays and Keener would like to see the Board of Supervisors step in and resolve the issue. “The optics of having the friends goose-stepped out of the library is something the supervisors don’t want to visualize,” Hayes says.

Community center

Kathy Kaplan, a longtime advocate of the libraries, believes the current conflict with the Friends is an extension of previous attacks on the library system. That includes attempts to slash the FCPL budget, the “beta plan” in 2013 to restructure how the branches operate, and the systematic effort to throw out thousands of books to make more space.

The number of library books has been cut to 2.15 million, down from 3 million in 2004, Kaplan says, and FCPL is purchasing very few nonfiction books for adults, and almost no science, history, or philosophy books. Kaplan suspects the FCPL’s ultimate goal is to turn libraries into human services centers or community centers.

Hays notes the libraries already do a lot of community projects, such as bringing in guest speakers, hosting community groups in meeting rooms, and organizing children’ programs. But “turning the buildings into community centers with books along one wall is not what a library is.”

When asked about her vision for the library system, Hudson said libraries are not going to become community centers. “We are more of a community hub, with computer access and programming for children and adults,” she says. “We are continuing to meet baseline services – checking out books and reading programs for children, for example – and will build on that.”

Library advocates aren’t buying it. “This is part of a radical rightwing effort to destroy educational institutions in our state,” Kaplan says. “We need to have a functioning library that provides information for the public.”

Ellie Ashford at 12:35 PM

Re-post from the Coalition for a Planned Reston website: You Spoke. We're Listening.

This is re-posted from the CPR website:

Thanks to the many CPR volunteers who responded to our survey of how we can best help you learn more about density and development issues in Reston and become even more engaged in the overall development process. Here are key highlights of what you told us:

In terms of what CPR volunteers would like to do,

• 45% were interested in direct engagement by attending public meetings of Reston and Fairfax boards;
• 38% want to help with communications to ensure neighbors are informed;
• 31% are willing to help boost our message on social media;
• 25% want to assist in researching specific development proposals or how other communities handle development; and
• 10% have offered to help shape strategic communications and expand media contacts.

In terms of the specific information our volunteers most want to know more about (either through in-person workshops or video meetings), getting a deeper understanding of the development process, key decision makers, and key decision points topped the list.

• A significant number also want to dive more deeply into the Reston Master Plan and specific development proposals, with several wanting to learn more about how to increase the community’s influence over development issues and more history about how Reston is handled by the county in terms of development decisions.

When asked what material would be most helpful for CPR to provide online, our volunteers asked for:

• information about zoning in Reston;
• the development process and how it works;
• key development meetings at the local or county level;
• a list of development projects that have already been approved;
• the legal issues that may be at play:
• how to preserve Hidden Creek Golf Course from development, and
• how to get the county and developers to listen more closely to the community.

We asked what volunteers value most about Reston (multiple responses were allowed).

• Topping the list was Reston’s commitment to sustainable ecology and preserving green spaces and natural resources (84%).
• Tied for second (all at 75%) were its variety of neighborhood types; its unique balance of commercial, residential, and open spaces as a planned residential community (high density limited to Town Center and the Toll Road corridor); and its recreational amenities (trails, sports fields, pools, tennis courts, and park system).
• Reston’s inclusive social structure for all economic, racial, ethnic, and religious backgrounds was flagged by 61%, with easy access to Metro and the Silver Line coming in at 43%.

So, what comes next?

We’ll start posting materials online as soon as we can pull them together. First up will be a list of key zoning terms (PRC, TSA, PRM, etc.) and a flow chart of the development process, both of which are already in train. While some information is available online through various Fairfax and Reston websites, it can be dense and hard to parse, so many of you asked for shorter and simpler explanations of processes and core issues.

In addition, we’re planning to start holding video meetings in June to begin direct conversations with you all on how to become more engaged, to answer questions you may have and dive more deeply into the specific issues you’ve raised in this survey. More details on how to sign up for these will be posted on this website, on Facebook, and on The CPR Update (our newsletter).

Again, thank you all for the time you invested in completing this survey. All of us, as Reston residents, are committed to ensuring that Reston remains a great place to live, work, and play. Together we will achieve that goal.

CPR thanks Supervisor Hudgins for delaying zoning amendment, continuing dialogue with Reston

Coalition for a Planned Reston

A voluntary group of residents from the Reston Citizens Association,

Reclaim Reston, and Reston 20/20

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

April 27, 2018

CPR Thanks Supervisor Hudgins for Keeping Proposed Zoning Amendment off County Calendars as Dialogue With Reston Residents Continues

Following an energetic meeting of over 150 Reston residents on Monday evening, April 23, Coalition for a Planned Reston (CPR) sent a letter to Supervisor Hudgins expressing appreciation for supporting small group discussions and a continued hold on any action by County staff to move their proposed amendments forward. CPR held the meeting to review the results of a community-wide survey on the County’s proposed zoning density increase. CPR’s letter stated:

As you are aware, we believe strongly the County's proposals will make Reston less livable, less vibrant, less welcoming, less diverse and less united.  In short, the County’s proposed density amendments would seriously undermine everything that makes Reston, Reston.  

Nevertheless, we are committed to work together to find common ground and a path forward.  We believe that mutual trust is a key component for this to work and thus we are encouraged by your suspension of any further action on lifting the cap while we work together, including efforts by County Staff or others to schedule the proposed zoning amendment for consideration by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors.     

In addition to planning to attend working sessions with the Supervisor and County staff, in May CPR will be conducting community action meetings for 300 volunteers among the nearly 500 Restonians who completed CPR’s survey.

Media Contact-
Lynne Mulston, Coalition for a Planned Reston
703-662-1687

 ##