Reston Spring

Reston Spring
Reston Spring
Showing posts with label Hunter Mill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hunter Mill. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 28, 2023

Supervisor Alcorn remains silent on using a Boston Properties proffer for a performing arts center.

 

Since the publication of a half-baked "feasibility" study last summer, Supervisor Alcorn and Leila Gordon, executive director of RCC, have said nothing about the proposal they are advocating for a Reston Visual and Performing Arts Center (VPAC) in Reston Town Center.  Their advocacy is based on a proffer from Boston Properties for a small land plat, Block J, across the street from the Metro station. The proffer states, “Block J may only be used for the Arts Center or as a park open to the public (emphasis added).”  The reason Alcorn and Gordon are silent on the matter is that there is an election coming in November and they do not want to upset the public with this hugely expensive and unnecessary project.

In contrast, a park, indeed any meaningful open space, is sorely lacking in Reston’s transit station areas (TSAs). In fact, here is the standards in the county’s framework for urban parks: “New developments generate (park) need at a rate of 1.5 acres per 1,000 residents and 1.0 acre per 10,000 employees. Within urban, mixed-use development areas, a full complement of urban park types is desirable to create robust park networks.” Reston’s draft plan calls for over 40,000-67,000 new residents in the TSAs and 56,000-86,000 jobs in the TSAs depending on the growth scenario. That increase should lead to the creation of 72-106 acres of added public parks in the TSAs, not counting what is already owed for the existing population and jobs in these areas.

Indeed, on the few occasions that the county has mentioned the park alternative, it has always referred to it as “a ballfield.” It is clear that the site is not large enough to accommodate a full-size baseball or soccer field. A softball field alone requires 1.5 acres, not counting seating, etc. A full-size soccer field needs 1.8 acres and a baseball field needs 4.5 acres. With Block J only about 60,000 SF or about 1.4 acres, fitting a real ballfield here appears impossible, especially with its irregular shape.

A real park, one for people to come and enjoy the outdoors and some smaller recreational facilities, such as a playground and maybe some pickleball courts, is not only feasible, but it would serve a far larger cross-section of the TSA’s population than mini-ballfields placed there. And it wouldn't hurt to add some trees for shade and to help the environment.  This is a far more useful use of this small area in serving the 60,000-87,000 people planned to live in the TSAs, about half in the Reston Town Center area.

In fact, it could be argued that using Block J for a ballfield of whatever size would not meet the terms of Boston Properties’ generous offer—to be used “as a park open to public.” No one would ever confuse FedEx Field for a park. Why would one do so with Block J?

On the other side of the ledger, building and operating an arts center would be extremely expensive and is unneeded. Hunter Mill District—the area Supervisor Alcorn is supposed to represent—holds nearly one-fifth of the arts centers in the county according to county data. And our neighboring districts—Dranesville and Providence are equally well endowed. That’s over half of the county’s arts centers within ten miles, and many are accessible by the Silver Line—including the new 1,500 seat Capital One Center in Tysons. Why should Restonians or even all county residents pay nearly $240 million to build and operate another small theatre and art center in Reston over the next 30 years--$8,000,000 per year?

Residents need to continue to question Supervisor Alcorn on the choice between an expensive and unnecessary VPAC or a much needed and much less expensive park.

Wednesday, June 5, 2019

April-May Contributions and Expenditures of Hunter Mill District Supervisor Candidates

Below for your information is a summary table of the contributions to and expenditures by each of the five candidates running for Hunter Mill District Supervisor.  The data is compiled by the Virginia Public Access Project (VPAP).  More detailed information on each candidate's campaign funding may be found by clicking on the candidate's name.  

We would note that Maggie Parker, who works for Comstock Holdings, raised nearly eight times as much money and spent nearly five times as much money as her closest funding competitor, Walter Alcorn.  RestonNow has an article on Ms. Parker's funding sources here.



Contributions to and Expenditures by Hunter Mill District Supervisor Candidates, April 1-May 30, 2019
Source:  Virginia Public Access Project (VPAP)








Walter Alcorn Laurie Dodd Shyamali Hauth Parker Messick Maggie Parker
Starting Balance $44,942 $6,430 $5,459 $1,732 $0
Type of Receipt

Cash Contributions More than $100 $28,930 $5,150 $6,172 $0 $155,375
Cash Contributions of $100 or Less $2,396 $2,135 $3,599 $155 $5,449
In-Kind Contributions More than $100 $448 $0 $0 $0 $93,452
In-Kind Contributions of $100 or Less $0 $0 $95 $0 $0
Loans Received $0 $2,000 $2,500 $0 $0
Miscellaneous Receipts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Receipts 4/1/2019-5/30/2019 $31,774 $9,285 $12,366 $155 $254,276


Type of Expense

Itemized Expenses $49,446 $11,246 $10,399 $848 $148,967
In-Kind Expenses $448 $0 $95 $0 $93,452
Loans Repaid $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Surplus Funds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Expenses 4/1/2019-5/30/2019 $49,894 $11,246 $10,494 $848 $242,420


Ending Balance on May 30, 2019 $26,821 $4,468 $7,331 $1,039 $11,856






























































































































Monday, June 3, 2019

Hunter Mill District Supervisor candidates respond to CPR questionnaire

Enclosed below are the verbatim responses of the five Hunter Mill District Supervisor candidates to the questionnaire circulated by the Coalition for a Planned Reston (CPR).   They are arranged in alphabetical order.  Here is the table of contents:
p.1     Walter Alcorn
p.4     Laurie Dodd
p.7     Shyamali Hauth
p.9     Parker Messick
p.12   Maggie Parker

Saturday, April 13, 2019

Meet the Hunter Mill District Supervisor Candidates

The critical June 11th Democratic primary for County Supervisors is rapidly approaching. This primary likely will determine the successor for Catherine Hudgins as our elected representative in Fairfax County.

There are five candidates running in the Democratic primary: Walter
Alcorn, Laurie Dodd, Shyamili Hauth, Parker Messick and Maggie Parker.

In order to be an informed voter, please attend a candidate forum. There will be three public events prior to Primary Election Day.  CPR and members of the public will be asking the candidates about their position on growth and infrastructure:


Tuesday, April 16th at 6:30pm
Sponsored by Herndon-Reston Indivisible

Sunset Hills Montessori School
11180 Ridge Heights Rd, Reston, VA 20191 
 
Tuesday, April 23, 2019, from 7 PM – 9 PM
Sponsored by Reston Citizens Association
Lake Anne Community Center
Jo Ann Rose Gallery
1609-A Washington Plaza N, Reston, VA 20190


Monday, April 29, 7 to 9 pm
Sponsored by Hunter Mill District Democrats*
Reston Community Center Hunters Woods

CenterStage
2310 Colts Neck Road, Reston 20191

*Registration required:
http://huntermill.fairfaxdemocrats.org/bosforum/
NOTE: Must register by April 15th, but questions may be submitted through later date.

Our new Hunter Mill Supervisor will have significant influence on the future of Reston, including our golf courses.

Join with your neighbors in learning about the candidates’ positions, and REMEMBER TO VOTE ON JUNE 11!

Wednesday, March 27, 2019

RCA hosts Hunter Mill Supervisor Candidates' Forum, April 23, 2019


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Reston Citizens Association Announces Candidate Forum to be held April 23 at Lake Anne Community Center

March 26, 2019 - Reston, VA - Reston Citizens Association (RCA) will be hosting the candidates for the Hunters Mill Supervisor’s seat on the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors in a Community Forum.

When: Tuesday, April 23, 2019, from 7 PM – 9 PM
Where: Lake Anne Community Center, 1609-A Washington Plaza N, Reston, VA 20190

For the first time in many years, RCA is proud to resume its tradition of hosting a Candidate Forum. This Forum will allow Restonians to learn their potential supervisor’s positions and plans first-hand.
The Candidate Forum will be free to the public and take place in the Jo Ann Rose Gallery at the Lake Anne Community Center. 

“RCA is very excited to resume our long tradition of connecting the citizens of Reston and the Hunter Mill district with their local leaders and with the information they need to make informed decisions,” says Dennis Hays, President of the Reston Citizens’ Association. “We expect this to be the first of many such forums.”

About Reston Citizens Association
Reston Citizens Association (RCA) is a non-profit, tax-exempt 501(c)3 corporation serving over 60,000 people who live in Reston. Founded in 1967, RCA is the only community-wide, non-partisan, and action-oriented organization in which everyone that lives, works and plays in Reston has a voice.

###
Media Inquiries: Lynne Mulston, Vice President, Reston Citizens Association (703) 662-1687

Monday, January 21, 2019

Gross Misstatements by Supervisor Hudgins on Reston Planning

In her January 2019 Hunter Mill Highlights newsletter, our supervisor makes a number of gross misstatements regarding the Reston Master Plan Special Study Task Force (RTF) she created.  Here are some of the lowlights:

  • The letter says, "Counties, cities,and town must provide a comprehensive plan detailing transportation plans; a system of community service facilities: parks, sports playing fields, forests, schools, playgrounds, public buildings and institutions, hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, community centers, waterworks, sewage disposal or waste disposal areas; areas for urban renewal; measures managing sustainability of groundwater and surface water; affordable housing, power corridors, and broadband infrastructure. In short, it is a guide for decision-making about virtually every aspect of the natural and built environment."

This is simply not true.   The Reston plan does NOT detail any infrastructure plans except, in a few cases, county goals for various types of infrastructures.  For example, the discussion of parks and playing fields is limited three green blobs on a map and a call for twelve ballfields, three minimum.  Yet the county standard for urban parks calls for more than 80 acres of parkland and the facilities standards call for more than 60 ballfields of all types to meet the planned population of 92,000 in Reston's urban areas. Similarly, the county identified a need to provide schools for 2,900 new students in its 2014 version of the Reston plan, but did not increase that number at all when it increased the potential residential development from 28,000 DUs (59,000 people) to 44,000 DUs (92,000 people) in 2015, increasing student yield by another 2,900 students in 2015.  And so it goes.  The attention to infrastructure is dismal.

  • The very next sentence says, "And for six years the Reston Master Plan Special Study Task Force considered those requirements and offered recommendations."  Like Pinocchio’s nose, this duration just keeps growing in county publications!  The task force held its first meeting on December 1, 2009; it submitted its final report in January 2014.  It did not meet thereafter.  That's four years and two months the task force took to study and report on the Dulles Corridor station areas (“Phase 1” of the re-planning effort).  “Phase 2” of the Reston planning effort, looking at Reston beyond the Dulles Corridor, comprised only four county-directed community meetings and an open house; there was no task force.  
  • The newsletter goes on, "Much of what we see in the Transit Station Areas (TSA) and in Reston today is a direct result of the 2006-2008 Reston Metrorail Access Group (RMAG) management plan and recommended strategies to manage future traffic conditions, feeder bus systems, pedestrians, and bicycles."  The RMAG report was excellent.  It was even approved by the Board of Supervisors.  Unfortunately, while there has been a lot of "planning" paperwork, there has been virtually no funding to build the transportation capabilities it recommended.  For example, a decade after the RMAG's report, the recommendation to build a bridge across the Dulles Corridor extending Soapstone has received only preliminary study-level funding.  In fact, the county doesn't plan for it to be completed for another decade, a probably optimistic scenario--and no funding has been committed to its construction or even acquiring the land to allow its construction.
  • Supervisor Hudgins adds, "Density close to transit, careful planning, and compromise are all elements of a healthy community, and that's exactly what's happening in Reston. Suburban sprawl is simply not part of this plan."  Grossly inaccurate!  There has been no "careful planning" of development in the urban areas, just pro forma county reviews of development applications and approvals of numerous exceptions and waivers inconsistent with the Reston plan.  And the county claims the suburban areas of Reston, all zoned PRC, and nominally planned to remain "stable" could see a quadrupling and more of density in its village centers and a doubling of density in several other county-designated Reston "hot spots" under current county planning. 

To read such inaccurate summaries coming out of our supervisor’s office is indeed disheartening.   As we enter a supervisor election year, it is even more important than ever to educate ourselves and PROTECT Reston’s planned community status.  

The supervisor’s push for an increase in Reston’s (suburban) PRC population cap up from 13 to 15 people per acre is a terrible idea, given that much work remains to be done to bring accurate information and robust public input into the equation.  Soon the Board of Supervisors may vote on this proposed zoning change.  All citizens should let Supervisor Hudgins and every other supervisor know what you think in every way possible.  Write, email, and attend the Planning Commission hearing on this vital matter on January 23, 2019, at the Fairfax County Government Center, 7PM sharp.  

IF we don’t stand up for Reston now as a planned community, it will be lost forever.

Tuesday, November 20, 2018

Fairfax Board to Reston: Screw you and your Master Plan!

In an announcement yesterday, Fairfax County stated that the Board of Supervisors plans to move forward with actions that will implement changes in Reston's Planned Residential Community (PRC) zoning ordinance that will allow the tripling of Reston's population.  The specific changes are:
  • Increase overall density in the PRC area from 13 to 15 people per acre.
  • Allow the number of dwelling units on individual high-density parcels to increase from 50 to 70 per acre.
None of this counts the planned increase in Reston transit station area (TSA) population from zero in 2010 to more than 90,000 resulting from a change in the zoning ordinance applicable there and a change in the "target" dwelling units from 29,000 to 44,000 without any interaction with the community in a 2015 amendment.

Democracy dies in darkness--and the arrogant, insensitive, disgusting Fairfax County Board of Supervisors is well on the way to making that happen.  It does not care what most Restonians think about preserving the values and goals established by its founder, Bob Simon, and encouraging organic growth, including the transit station areas, within that context.

It's just allowing more buildings, more residents, more commercial space in more places.  At the same time, it is not creating better roads, schools, parks, environment, and other necessities to accommodate those people.  Plans, yes; action, no.  Its only goal is more tax revenue without the necessary accompanying infrastructure investments.

Contrary to what the county says, there need be no fear that Reston will lose its broad PRC zoning because developers will choose alternative zoning categories.  That's a lie.

First, the only place that this could occur is where alternative zoning ordinances overlap with the PRC in the TSAs--basically Reston Town Center (including RTC North) and a portion of Reston Heights.

The two alternative ordinances are Planned Development Commercial (PDC) for commercial-centric high-density development and Planned Residential Mixed-Use (PRM) for residential focused high-density development supported by retail.  These ordinances, in revisions a couple of years ago, increased the allowable density from FAR 3.0 to FAR 5.0 with Board approval.  That means a 20-acre plot could have as many as 3,620 dwelling units (DUs)--some 7,500 people excluding affordable and bonus housing which don't count in the PRC zoning ordinance--using the county's planning factor for DU size.

Second, a change in zoning requires the approval of the Board of Supervisors; it is not a unilateral action by the developers.  The Board can say "no," but the current Board would almost certainly say "yes" as it continues bend over for the development community at the expense of Restonians, current and future.

In fact, the county's worry isn't a "patchwork" of zoning ordinances in Reston as its announcement states.  That too is a lie.  Its concern is the loss acreage covered by the PRC if developers shift to another zoning category in the TSAs, thus lowering the level of allowable development in the smaller PRC areas of Reston.  In short, it's trying to insure maximum development, not avoid some imagined bureaucratic complexity.

The county's announcement highlights that the master plan process "ended in 2015" and included a community task force that worked on the station areas (Phase 1 of the planning process).  That task force worked five years to create a reasonable Reston transit oriented development plan.  It culminated in a "Scenario G" in 2012 that constituted the task force's perspective on more residentially-focused station areas at a reasonable density.  The total number of households targeted was 27,538 dwelling units.  In 2014, the Board approved the plan with a target of 27,900 dwelling units in line with the task force's recommendation.  Then, in mid-2015, the Board suddenly changed this dwelling unit target from 27,900 to 44,000 without any discussion with the community That was the "end" of the planning process: A big screw you to Reston!

And who was behind this move?  Our supervisor, Cathy Hudgins, of course.  Her treacherous action, completely ignoring the will of Reston and her own specific commitment to have county staff answer a series of mutually agreed upon questions before proceeding, is unforgivable.  Her letter to RA and CPR (below) about her perfidious action tries to justify the unjustifiable.  We, as a community, need to step forward--and do so quickly--to show her that her dishonesty and treachery will not stand.





Tuesday, July 24, 2018

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