What's next for social services in the City?

As many of you know, the City Council passed an ordinance this week requiring social service delivery establishments to get a special use permit. This ordinance puts us inline with other jurisdictions that have a process in place for their government and community to have some say in the operation and location of these facilities.

The ordinance, which can be found by clicking here and looking at agenda item 7a, was carefully worded and constructed to ensure that organizations would both feel welcome here in the City of Fairfax while also providing measured guidelines for them to operate under. Most importantly, it provided a process so that the community can have a say, just as we'd all expect we should when it comes to land use applications.

In fact, this special use permit follows essentially the same principles that we have when considering the land use matters dealing with fast food restaurants, housing developments, shopping centers, etc. and people expect there to be a process in place to air their views. For example, there were guidelines and a process in place for when a developer wanted to build the new Residence Inn on Chain Bridge Road; there were guidelines and a process in place for when Chick-Fil-A wanted to located in Fairfax Circle; and there were guidelines and a process in place for a proposed development (which coincidentally did not get Council approval) in Kamp Washington on what was once the site of American Medical Labs.

The point here is that no one questioned the need to have guidelines or a process in place where the community could be heard and the applicant would have to partner with the City and community in making its case. Hence, one of the requirements of the ordinance is that they have to present what is essentially a business plan to the community and Council to explain what they do. We require an explanation of this type for every applicant that I'm aware of. And to be honest, the social services ordinance that passed is actually giving more flexibility to the Council because of the nature of the organizations who may apply.

It's important to note that just about every request made to modify the ordinance was granted, including expanding the ability of a social services delivery establishment to locate in an industrial section of the City, which is where people felt like they could find more space for their operations. And, as the Mayor noted Tuesday night, these changes ensure that we have process in place should the courts rule against the City in pending litigation involving a ruling by the zoning administrator.

My remarks from the dais on Tuesday night cover most of what the ordinance is and what it is not. However, it seems there may still be confusion about the ordinance itself and how we even got to this point.

Unfortunately there has been a lot of misinformation thrown out into the community. The Lamb Center has become a focus of this misinformation, too, with myself and my colleagues getting calls and emails saying that the ordinance was going to close them down, that they wouldn't be allowed to operate and so on. That is not the case.

And my good friends in the press haven't helped. The headlines have pitted The Lamb Center against the City. This isn't a zero sum game where one person loses and the other gains. It's sad that some have framed it this way.

The reality is that The Lamb Center is just one of many social service organizations in the City of Fairfax. The City has spent a lot of time, energy and resources, too, in trying to help them in both their current location and trying to find a new home, which they admit they need and want because they are outgrowing their operations.

For the last couple of years I have attended The Lamb Center's annual dinner. Each year I hear and see the amazing work they do. Each time I talk with their leadership they say that they want to partner and find a new home. The fact is, the City has been a good partner in that we have tried for the last several years to find a new home both in the City and along the City-County line.

Unfortunately, we haven't been able to find a place that is workable for all. This is certainly disappointing since just a couple of years ago the City was going to offer a substantial sum of money to help relocate The Lamb Center to a facility, that while in the County, was along the City border, centrally located and met the needs of The Lamb Center.

So what's next for social services in the City? I don't think anything will change for the worse. I am hopeful that social services will continue to do their good works and flourish in the City. I actually think the new zoning requirements and process present a unique opportunity to build community support and showcase what organizations do. The City of Fairfax does care for the poor and we will continue to do so.

Another bit of information that has gotten lost in this discussion is that The Lamb Center - by its own admission - is growing because the needs of those it serves are growing.

This is where I personally feel we need to now sit down with County, City and social service organizations to help how we address these issues as one unit, recognizing that the poor and homeless don't differentiate between the County and City.

In other words, the issues surrounding the The Lamb Center and other social service organizations aren't just a City matter, they are a matter of concern to all who care for those less fortunate. So, I hope that this discussion, at the very least, will get us past this "us versus them" mentality with regard to our overall approach in helping those whom need the assistance of the City, the County and organizations located in central Fairfax.

Social services delivery establishment ordinance: What it is, What it is not

The City of Fairfax is not immune from homelessness or the poor being among us. We have probably all seen at some point men and women carrying their life in a shopping bag, walking along Fairfax Boulevard or maybe even trying to stay warm at the downtown library. Their situations remind us that for most of us, we are very blessed to have the comforts of a home, heat, food and a family.

We are also fortunate that so many wonderful organizations such as The Lamb Center, FACETS, Our Daily Bread and others have decided to call the City home to help address our community's needs. It's something we should be proud of - extending compassion to those who are less fortunate and need a helping hand, hope and in some cases, a home.

At the same time, we must realize that at 6.3 square miles, the City of Fairfax is a very small jurisdiction smack-dab in the middle of Fairfax County and its million-plus residents. We are home to many organizations delivering social services - both non-profit and government. As some will say, it's not the organizations or their mission that are issues unto themselves; rather, it's the intensity of so many of them being within such a compact area of the City of Fairfax.

We have these organizations within our borders - and provide City taxpayer-funded services to them - while at the same time not having a proper land use process for which organizations can partner with the City and the community when they choose to locate in the City of Fairfax.

This is why I'm supporting a proposed ordinance to provide for a new process that social service delivery establishments would have to adhere to when they want to either locate or expand in the City. I believe that the community - as with any other industry or individual applicant - has a right to provide its input during public hearings and in public discourse.

But the ordinance I'm supporting isn't identical to the one originally drafted. Rather, it's one that contains the suggested changes that the Council - through consensus at our December 14 work session - agreed to put forth to the planning commission when it meets on January 10.

So there's no confusion, let me take a moment to explain what this revised ordinance is - and what it's not.

The revised version, which can be found on the Council's agenda under 7a by clicking here, is the result of conversations with representatives of The Lamb Center, Our Daily Bread, FACETS, concerned citizens, staff, my Council colleagues and from listening to the concerns expressed by members of the planning commission and public testimony.

What I heard in all of these conversations was that the ordinance as originally drafted was too harsh. For instance, the original ordinance maintained that social services organizations couldn't locate within 1,000 feet of one another and that an establishment had to be 500 feet from public transportation. Some people were concerned that we were getting too nit-picky and that, quite frankly, the ordinance seemed to do everything but tell the poor they weren't welcome in the City of Fairfax.

The amended ordinance still provides a fair and equitable process for the Council, community and organizations the opportunity to have a discussion about where a facility is located and how it will fit in with the community. But what it does not do is tie a Council's hands with overly rigid guidelines that it must follow in either approving or rejecting an applicant. Instead, it gives the Council flexibility to make a decision based upon the needs of the organization - and the community - while at the same time ensuring that basic zoning principles are still present.

Changes include: the distance requirements are gone; the specific parking restrictions are gone; the Council now "may" consider certain aspects of an organization's operation; and it clarifies certain terms so that organizations only provided minimal "client-facing" activities will not be impacted (this reflects the fact that some social service non-profits may want to have an administrative office in the City).

The revised ordinance was also crafted with great care and consideration to ensure that existing organizations' current locations or operations would not be impacted. I have received numerous calls and emails asking why we're trying to force organizations to move. Let me be clear: existing organizations do not have to move, they don't have to change based on this ordinance. No person is being asked to leave and no building is being razed.

Some comments I've heard, too, have been that we haven't conducted a great deal of outreach. The fact is, we've had a planning commission meeting, Council work session and I have personally met with affected groups, listened to their concerns and made changes to the ordinance that will hopefully soon come before us. I know, too, that my colleagues and staff have met with community members and representatives of non-profit organizations. The public will have an additional opportunity to comment on the ordinance during the planning commission meeting January 10 and during the City Council meeting on January 11. Both are a 7 p.m. at City Hall.

To clarify another point, the ordinance would also update our outdated zoning code with regard to social service delivery establishment organizations. The revised ordinance puts us more inline with other jurisdictions, which have a more updated and detailed process.

The new version of the ordinance responds to the concerns of the community and I feel confident that it provides a process that is not punitive, but rather one that ensures all parties can be heard, which is what we want when it comes to land use decisions.

When I think about my life - blessed with a wonderful family, a home, a job and the opportunity to serve - I realize how very fortunate I am. But I know there are many who are not. This is why we should continue to help and provide that lending hand. My hope is that this ordinance - and the discussions around it - will highlight the serious needs we have, raising awareness so that all of us together - the City, County and concerned organizations and citizens can provide the resources and compassion needed to help our fellow citizens.

The needs are great, the dollars are few

This is the time of year when Virginia's General Assembly starts their work on the state budget by convening regional meetings to hear from citizens and organizations. Often times - as was the case with a hearing in Fairfax County - individuals and groups come to ask for funding of their causes. As the Washington Post reported this morning , the are clearly great needs for funding of services that, even during better economic times, didn't get the funding they deserved.

The new reality of government at all levels though is that the pie is getting smaller and smaller for "non core" services. Even then, education, transportation and yes, law enforcement have been victims of new austerity measures. The City of Fairfax will soon begin its own budget process and as I've said before, I think we are going to fare better than most. But times aren't as flush as they once were and if the state cuts more funding from local government or puts additional burdens on local government, it will be harder to keep up the level of service people expect and deserve without either tax increases or cuts in other parts of our budget. I'm hopeful that isn't the case as we have been able to provide funds for our regionally and nationally acclaimed services while still keeping the tax burden the lowest in Northern Virginia, which I believe as helped our local economy as well as our taxpayers.

With all of this said, I do find it troubling that many causes and organizations in Northern Virginia are finding it harder and harder to get additional resources from either government or private donations. In talking with a friend who is a fundraiser (non political) yesterday, she noted that the economy is still taking a toll on her ability to raise money. That's not too surprising. But what did surprise me was her comment that the pool of potential donors is either getting smaller or is stagnant. In other words, unlike in other economic times when new money meant new donors and hence, donations, this economy finds people, corporations and governments tucking in their horns. It's almost like we are hoarding our foodstuffs for a long cold winter - a winter we don't know when will end.

The City of Fairfax - all 6.3 square miles of it - does what it can to help by providing tax breaks to non-profit organizations, services and even direct funding. We're trying not to close the wallet. But Virginia could do much more. Our Commonwealth ranks seventh in the nation in wealth (Northern Virginia is in he top three of regions) and 48th in the country when it comes to social services spending. Clearly there is room for some compassionate spending by our state legislators that won't break the bank or increase taxes. And should they help - even just a little more - people will then be able to help themselves more ably and contribute to our economy, which reduces the need for government support and helps unfreeze this frozen economy.

A New Year - Reasons to be optimistic

We are now three days into a new year and the clouds hovering over our economy seem to be clearing. In fact, in the City of Fairfax there are reasons to be quite optimistic about the year ahead.

To start, we are seeing housing prices stabilize - if not increase. According to George Mason's Center for Regional Analysis, Case-Shiller and a Washington Post analysis, from 2009 to 2010 the price for homes has gone up by about 2 percent and the time on the market has gone from 71 days to 48. Ancedotally, I have heard from many people who - when refinancing - have even seen a 3 to 4 percent increase in their home's value.

At the same time, we are seeing the vacancy rates of commercial properties within the City stabilize as well. On the flip side, assessments of commercial property - which make up more than half of our property tax base - are going down. And that could have a seriously negative effect on our City budget.

While not scientific, my own observation of foot traffic at Best Buy and other City retail outlets as well as people eating at restaurants over the holidays leads me to believe that we'll see an uptick in consumer spending, which means more tax revenue. Our unemployment rate is also still around 5 percent - about half of the national rate.

Moreover, we are continuing to see renewed interest in the City as a place to invest as we still have a healthy pipeline of projects awaiting administrative or Council decisions. We are also the beneficiaries of federal stimulus spending with many government contractors finding the City a great place to set up shop given its proximity to Mason. For instance, a Fairfax Times article by Michael Pope reported that"according to a database compiled by ProPublica ... Fairfax City and Arlington received the most stimulus money per capita in Northern Virginia, almost twice as much as Fairfax County or Alexandria."

Grant it, our federal government could soon institute a variety of austerity measures that may put the crimp in spending on contractors, which could impact us. For the time being though, it's fair to say that because of where we are situtated and importance to the region, we may not receive the blunt end of any cuts. Only time will tell.

All of this good news could lead one to believe that our City budget will be peaches and cream. It won't. We still face significant challenges such as increased personnel costs related to a change in our pension system, increases in operational costs(gas, supplies, etc), regulatory requirements, a potential increase in school population and the potential for decreases in tax revenue.

With all of this said, I feel a lot better about the City's prospects in 2011 then when I first came into office in 2008 and we faced a multi-million budget deficit. Even during my first budget during the spring of 2009 the Council was able to hold the line on discretionary spending, give employees a small pay raise (the only locality in Virginia or the region to do so) and still have the lowest tax burden in all of Northern Virginia. We also earned a AAA bond rating for our prudent and wise fiscal management.

Clearly there are challenges, but the City of Fairfax has much to be thankful for - and much to look forward to in the coming year. Happy New Year to all!