Coraggio Consulting
Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Legislative Committee, Tuesday, September 19, 2023

Date: Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Place: Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, Virginia
Length: 2h 56m (video)
Official meeting video (Fairfax County): https://video.fairfaxcounty.gov/player/clip/3020
Official Board of Supervisors page (Fairfax County): https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/boardofsupervisors/

Machine transcript (speech-to-text) produced by Coraggio Consulting. Not an official county record. Names and numbers may be misspelled; check the video at the timestamp before quoting.
Speech-to-text: whisper.cpp, model large-v3-turbo. Produced 2026-11-03. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

[00:00:00] Yeah, right, right. First four years. Okay, good morning, everyone. Good morning. Good morning. Welcome to the September 19, 2023 meeting of the legislative committee.

[00:00:18] Board members should have at your place our agenda and a couple other documents that we're going to walk through today. I wanted to start on your agenda. You can see the list of upcoming meetings just to orient ourselves.

[00:00:35] We have two more meetings of the legislative committee before our draft legislative program will be made available to the public for comment. And then we have our public hearing scheduled on the draft legislative program for Tuesday, November 21st.

[00:00:51] So we don't have a lot of time, and that is all by way of reminding board members that if you have thoughts or ideas for changes or additions to the legislative program, try not to send them to us on Monday, November 20th.

[00:01:08] Try to send them to us as soon as possible so staff can work on them and we can discuss them at our upcoming meetings. And with that, we'll go ahead and jump right into our agenda. And the first item on the agenda will be an update on the recently signed biennium budget.

[00:01:31] And you should have in your packet this handout with some of the highlights. Even in the last week since the budget was signed, staff has been hard at work analyzing it and trying to identify the specific impacts on the county.

[00:01:47] That work will continue, but we have a first cut at it here, and I will ask Ms. Arco to lead us through it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, as you just said, the General Assembly passed this budget after a lengthy delay earlier this month, and then the governor signed it last week.

[00:02:07] So, it's a done deal, and our county staff, our budget staff, and the agency staff will go through it and go in more detail and provide the board more detail as we go along. But we've worked with FCPS and county staff to try to provide kind of a first look at a lot of this.

[00:02:22] And so we'll start with the K-12 funding section and then different staff will kind of work on different sections. We also have DMV staff and a lot of agency staff here that can answer more specific questions as we go along. I will also mention that the budget, this handout focuses mostly on funds coming to the county.

[00:02:41] The agreement did have tax cuts, which in some of the updates that I provided you all by email were included in some of those handouts and in some itemization. And so, but this handout really focuses on funds that are coming to the county and county programs.

[00:02:57] So in terms of the first section K-12 funding, I think as we talk through it, you'll see that a lot of the items that are included in here are a lot of county priorities and a lot of the things that we and you all have advocated for at the General Assembly. which is very nice.

[00:03:13] It really reflects a lot of local government priorities. So in particular, the GA has increased from the work that they've been doing the last couple of years, their work to continue to work to minimize the cap on support positions in K-12.

[00:03:33] So in this budget agreement, they decreased it from 21 to 24 per 1,000 students. So that funds about half of the remaining amount of the support cap. So that's been a priority for localities statewide, certainly including Fairfax County.

[00:03:52] And so that's a really helpful move in the right direction. They also take some of the federal ESSER funds to implement the Virginia Literacy Act. And so that's another step in the right direction. Probably the biggest pot of funding, if you will, that they included in this budget agreement is approximately $418 million in flexible funding that can be used for a variety of things that they outline.

[00:04:21] And so that's money that they really intended to be flexible for school divisions. There's no local match required, which is something that we certainly have talked about, and you all have certainly talked about and advocated for at the General Assembly, that no local match requirement. And so that's something that I think will be really helpful to FCPS going forward.

[00:04:42] And then the next category in particular that we certainly have talked about here a lot is that they did include funding for a 2% salary increase for K-12 employees. As we have discussed quite a lot, salary increases at the state level only pay for the state's share of the salary increase and only for SOQ-recognized positions.

[00:05:06] So in this case, the 2% would be on top of the 5% salary increase that was already included in the underlying budget, and in addition to the 5% that was included the previous year. So in the case of this 2%, the FCPS could receive $5.3 million in state funding, but it would cost them approximately $23.1 million in local funding.

[00:05:30] So obviously, that would put a lot of the funding burden on FCPS to draw down that $5.3 million. Just for comparison, what we've heard from FCPS in terms of the 5% that they already had included, that cost approximately $106.5 million in local funding, and they drew down approximately $29.5 million in state funding.

[00:05:52] So, obviously, we fund the lion's share of it in local funding. And so, that's kind of the general, those are the general items in K-12. I think the last thing that I would mention is we all talked a lot about the JLARC study that was approved by the General Assembly two years ago to study the true cost of public education.

[00:06:14] That report came out over the summer. To probably nobody's surprise, it showed that the state is dramatically underfunding K-12 in a lot of ways and in a lot of categories by approximately $1,900 per student. It made a lot of points that I think we have all been making.

[00:06:33] And so what the General Assembly did is they established a joint subcommittee in this budget to look at those recommendations and decide how to act on them. I think probably a lot of people would like them to take action immediately, but this is the way they chose to do it.

[00:06:51] And so obviously we'll need to be following that closely and working on that as that subcommittee goes forward. And so that's essentially the case for funding section. Why don't we stop there because obviously that's a big one and see if you have any questions from board members. Mr. Chairman.

[00:07:08] Less a question, just more a statement because this has been, you know, education funding has been in our package for as long as I can remember. And this study is important, not just for the $1,900 per pupil, but, you know, one of the key findings in here is that Virginia is way below the 50 state average.

[00:07:29] But what's shocking is we are way below our bordering states, too, including Kentucky and West Virginia. So when we talk about the need to increase funding and education, which lightens the load and the requirements on the county, we're not saying that just because it's a nice thing to do.

[00:07:47] We're saying that because we're literally behind Kentucky and West Virginia. And so, you know, that puts it in real terms for people to understand what it is we're dealing with. And point of fact, we would have a shell of a public school system in Fairfax County if it weren't for the appropriations that came from this board.

[00:08:07] And so while we're all concerned about real estate assessments and car taxes and some of the other things that, you know, affect our homeowners, our public school system would look nothing like it looks like if we relied on state funding. It would be behind West Virginia and behind Kentucky.

[00:08:26] And so it's important that, you know, we stay on top of this issue because now there's an independent JLARC study out that has the metrics. As you said, we are not surprised to hear this, but when we talk about tax relief at the local level, it is impossible to talk about that unless the state gets serious about funding public education.

[00:08:47] And that's just the reality that, you know, that we're dealing with and that a lot of other local governments deal with. And so this has to be front and center in our package, especially now as the General Assembly is debating what to do about it. But this is why for many, many years we've been talking about this, and now the compounding effect of it puts us behind West Virginia and Kentucky, and to no parents or nobody in Fairfax County would that be acceptable.

[00:09:14] And so I think we just need to underscore this and stay on top of it. A lot of change is coming to the General Assembly. They had a you know quote-unquote enormous surplus this year. I'm glad some of the needle was moved on education But there is a long way to go in this category, and I think this is a moment for us to really reflect on this We supported the study We had an idea of what the study would show But to be frank with you it's far worse than even I thought We would be in terms of position compared to other states around us So I think this is you know, we need to stay on top of this. Yeah, definitely some some wins here

[00:09:51] But it's also worth noting some of it, especially the support cap, was a cut put in place after the Great Recession of 2009, 2010. So a student who was entering kindergarten at that time has lived every school year, maybe they're graduating now this year, with those cuts that are now only partially restored here.

[00:10:18] So clearly a lot of progress to be made. Supervisor Palchuk? Yes, thank you so much. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much to staff for your work on this. I have, I think in addition to what was shared, one particular question because I think knowing that we always need additional state funding, as was shared, one area that's been of great concern to us is the LCI and knowing that we as a county, if you take just our free and reduced meals, student population will be the second largest school system in all of Virginia.

[00:10:47] And so I was excited to see that some of those one-time funds were going to be used per pupil funding which I think I see as an important equity issue to help address specific needs of students and the highest needs students.

[00:11:04] But I know the details are an area that are, you know, the devil's in the details. And so I'm reading here and it says that could receive approximately $28 million and it may be carried into future fiscal years as long as the school division provides their local share of at-risk add-on.

[00:11:23] I don't know if you could share a little bit more on those statements, how much is hopefully certain that will come this year and what we need to think about because it does seem like hopefully this, my hope is that this is an effective way to keep addressing those longer term needs and not just the one-time funding that you can't hire a teacher just for one year.

[00:11:43] We need those staff to be able to be retained over time. So I don't know if you have a little bit more information about the likelihood and anything else we can do to help support and ask for that to be more longer term per pupil funding? - So my understanding about the flexible funding is that the amounts are more or less what they are.

[00:12:02] I think they were trying to provide flexibility, particularly because of how late in the year this budget was passed. This is an unusual time to be passing the budget and everybody's budgets are set more or less. And so I think there was some concern that if they passed it in a date-certain type of way, that some school divisions would say, well, we can't allocate all of this right now.

[00:12:25] And so, because even before the budget was passed, but when they were kind of putting final touches on it, I was sort of hearing a little quietly, like, we hope everybody kind of knows what they would do if they got money that they weren't expecting. And so I think it was really an effort to provide some flexibility, saying, well, you can carry it forward if you need to.

[00:12:42] So I don't think it's meant to be... I don't think that's meant, I think that's meant to provide flexibility, not a problem. So it's still just one time, but flexible as to when it can be used. Yes, I think it's meant to provide school divisions with the ability to say, well, if we can't allocate it right now because we've already set our staff, we've already hired, we've already made our decisions, well, we can use it next biennium if we need to.

[00:13:06] But I think probably our budget staff is going to need to be working with FCPS, and I know they've already been in touch with them, but to kind of figure out as they make those decisions how some of that works. So that's my understanding so far. Okay, so thank you. So I do agree there are a few good steps forward, but some of this really needs to be more baseline and recurring funding in order to really support the system.

[00:13:28] Thank you. I will also say, I'm sorry, when we get to the program, when we get to the K-12 funding position, we'll talk a little bit more about it's not been updated, But we'll talk a little bit more about why and it's a lot of what Chairman McKay said in terms of the JLARC study because they did talk about cost of living and those types of issues.

[00:13:46] And so we're going to be working closely with FCPS on that. I would also just mention in general, because you mentioned the LCI, this is a re-benchmarking year. And so we will get a new, everybody will get a new LCI this fall. And so obviously we'll be watching for that as well. Okay, why don't we move on to page two in human services.

[00:14:04] Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Ariel McAloon, Human Services Legislative Liaison. I'm going to walk through some of the human services items. The first one, starting on the top of page two, under early childhood, the budget included language that exempts community-based providers that are recipients of VPI grants from teacher licensure requirements, and this change will allow the county's community programs to use VPI funds to pay for teachers so that's a change that was supported in the

[00:14:39] legislative program in the past so that's helpful and also the third bullet under early childhood the budget also provided a 12.5% increase for early intervention services and that was the first rate increase for early intervention in over a decade so that's helpful again but also does not fully cover the costs and there is a need to continue looking at that to ensure that we have more consistent rate increases in the future to keep pace with the current

[00:15:13] costs and then aid to local public libraries the budget includes 3.6 million for additional CD to local public libraries we would anticipate expect the Fairfax County Public Library to get about 36,000 in additional funding based on that change um and um the uh in the state that was also part of the state has made more of a

[00:15:44] commitment to fund public libraries over the next um under adult aging and adults with disabilities i did want to flag that there is 250 000 provided for spark um that um the program that supports essential day programs for adults with disabilities and then moving on to page three the children's CSA the budget eliminated language that had directed

[00:16:21] the implementation of rate setting for private special education day placements that implementation would have led to the state circumventing CSA some sufficiency requirement which was something the county strongly opposes so that removal of language was good and then under behavioral health the budget did include a number of items under behavioral health the first being that the budget provides 58 million or to expand and modernize the crisis services

[00:16:55] system and so we will be looking at that in more detail because more analysis is needed to see exactly how that will be allocated in terms of how that will be helpful but and it is critical that that allocation be based on population size so that it's most helpful there there are a few items also in children's mental health that was something that the county has included in the legislative program there's 4.2 million provided for child psychiatry and

[00:17:31] children's crisis response services 7.5 billion for DBHDS to partner up and partners to provide technical assistance to school divisions looking to integrate mental health services, and then also $4 million for DBHDS to contract with the Virginia Mental Health Access Program to develop integrated mental health services for children.

[00:18:00] And also then under behavioral health, but moving on to page four, there was some money provided to increase funding for the first three steps of STEP VA, $4.4 million, although that um funding is helpful that the mandates of step ba have been underfunded from the beginning um and that has been a significant problem for localities so this adjustment is a step but it does not address the overall shortfall of funding for the step ba services and then there was also

[00:18:35] 1.4 million in opioid settlement funding included for the purchase and distribution of naloxone and under medicaid also on page four the budget funds 500 additional developmental disabilities waiver slots um the county supports increasing the medicaid waiver slots um which is i'm sorry to address the priority one waiting list which is now over 3500 in virginia and particularly where the waiver assignments to localities are not keeping up with that priority

[00:19:12] waiting list. And I think Daryl may be here if you have questions on that. And I think that that was all under human services. Okay, any questions from board members on human services, Supervisor Gross and then Supervisor Lesk? Age of public libraries, very small amount. We need to say thank you. But My question is, does it come without strings attached?

[00:19:46] I was going to ask if that can be dedicated to purchasing more Paw Patrol books. I learned there's a short, long waiting list for Paw Patrol. I don't know if $36,000 will do it, actually. I need to have more than that.

[00:20:03] Well, my concern is not the amount of money as much as what somebody in Richmond may decide to put on to, maybe not this year, but in future years, some sort of, you can use it for this, but you can't use it for that.

[00:20:21] And we're going to check on what you've got in your collection, et cetera, thinking about what's going on just a little bit north of us. So does this, at least this year, come without strings? I'm almost afraid to bring it up. I don't want to give anybody any ideas. Right. But it is a serious, serious matter across the country.

[00:20:40] And this was one of the ways they could chip away at it. We might have to look into that further. It may have to get us more information. We'll double check. I don't recall seeing anything in the budget language that tied it to anything in particular.

[00:20:57] But we will double check. And when we get to the program, we'll talk a little bit more about it because the state has made a commitment to try to fully fund that library formula. But I think we have some concerns about whether fully funding the formula really funds it to the degree that it should be. But we will double check to make sure that there's no particular strings on that.

[00:21:15] Okay. The formula is one thing. Trying to remove the independence of our library board of trustees and deciding what's going to be there is the overarching. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[00:21:31] I'm really excited to see the additional funding for foster care and adoption cost of living adjustments. My wife was a foster care and adoption specialist for many years, so I pretty clearly understand the importance of the work that those families do.

[00:21:48] Do we have any sense of how much that might mean to the average family here in Fairfax County as it relates to cost of living adjustment? I think, well, we may have DFS.

[00:22:05] I think Michael Beckett may be here. I don't know if he could speak to that. I think if not, we could probably get the information later. I'm just curious to know kind of what that impact is because I think, obviously, any additional funding is great, but just trying to get a magnitude of what it means.

[00:22:22] It's $2.3 million statewide. Correct. Correct. So probably not a big number. But just curious to see. We can get that for you. Yep, and then secondly, on the behavioral health, I just wanted to acknowledge a few things here.

[00:22:39] I do appreciate the point about the first bullet, the $58 million to expand and modernize the crisis services system, and then the $10 million for establishing additional mobile crisis services in underserved communities and areas.

[00:22:57] I would say, just thinking about my own community, we have some pretty significant needs and we'll be very interested in seeing how this plays out relative to its future allocation. So I just want to express, appreciate this, but looking forward to hearing what the specifics are.

[00:23:16] And then the other point is the $5.1 million to help with law enforcement agencies providing transportation services. I know this was a big issue that came up when we were discussing kind of some of the adverse impacts that police officers face in waiting for these placements to be made.

[00:23:41] I'm excited that there's a method here that might be able to give some relief, but I guess we won't know, I guess we won't know how much would be allocated to Fairfax yet and what type of impact that would have to our police department as a result of it.

[00:24:01] But I guess that's something that's going to come later. Okay, well, I'll look forward to it. And I just want to acknowledge that's a very good point in the budget. So thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Okay, Supervisor Palchuk, and then we'll move on. Thank you. I'll try to be brief. One quick comment, just want to thank you.

[00:24:16] I want to thank VACO. The Children's Services Act, as you know, CSA is unique to Virginia. I had the opportunity to sit on the state board, and I think this is something I appreciate our CSA staff and VACO continue continuing to follow this. It would have been quite hurtful to have that rate change for a private day.

[00:24:34] And so, unfortunately, we probably need to keep monitoring that, but I think this is a good step forward. On the early childhood, I think some good news, and I wish there were more. And my question for VPI, do we have a sense, and I see some of our early childhood staff here, do we have a sense of what this could actually mean on the additional VPI funding, or is that still to be looked at for our community providers?

[00:25:00] I think that if the staff who are here might be able to speak to it, but if not, I think that we can get that information. Okay. I know we're probably short on time. So if we could get some more information, you know, as you know, we need quite a bit of additional support and funding. And we know that it's an excellent investment in early childhood. And so any little bit we can get from the state is helpful. So curious to see what that is. And clearly we need to continue to advocate for more support there.

[00:25:29] And then my last one excited to see about spark I believe Janet howell has been quite the proponent of that and I know we're looking to support them Do you know if that's one time or recurring funding that they'll be providing leave the thought would just be one time just one time?

[00:25:45] Okay, okay. That's good to know go ahead Jennifer Vanny, I was just going to say a lot of the funding that has been provided is one time throughout the budget in general there are exceptions but Overall, it's a lot of one-time funding with the surplus dollars.

[00:26:05] Okay, that's good to know. So some good temporary news, but continued investments. Thank you so much. Okay, quick question. Yeah, just a quick question. And Daryl, I'm looking at Daryl. If he doesn't know right off the top of his head, we can get it later. But the 70 additional DD waiver slots that are in here, you know, we have the state priority one waiting list at 3,500.

[00:26:26] I'm just wondering what our county waiting list number is because 70 sounds like a lot of slots until you hear what the waiting list number is. So Daryl and I had this conversation yesterday. Oh, go ahead and come up, Daryl. I'm not taking your place. Daryl and I had this conversation yesterday. I think he told me ours is about 1,000 right now. And so it's part of why we added some language, I think, to that section where we talked a little bit about how the amount of slots that the state is allocating at the moment are not even keeping up with the new additions to our

[00:27:02] list. And so I think when we talk, as we go through the program and as we're working through it, we're trying to think about ways to talk about, particularly the localities where we have growing waiting lists and the allocations from the state are being distributed in a way that isn't keeping up with those lists. And so, yeah, Gerald, go ahead and talk about our list because you know a lot more than I do. Yeah, our priority one wait list is just north of 1100.

[00:27:30] And yeah, the issuance of waivers is not keeping up with the growth. So it's getting larger rather than smaller each year. And so we have one third of Virginia's waiting list, but it says we typically receive 12 to 14 percent of total state allocations. So that formula is not, has no correlation to the size of your waiting list then or how are we I mean it seems like we're falling way further behind if we have one third roughly one third of the waiting list but we're only getting 12 to 14

[00:28:03] percent of the slots in years where there are more slots yes you're correct um it's a problem and it's been an ongoing problem for quite some time so maybe you could explain I mean you kind of explained to me how they're doing the distribution now and it made a lot of sense to me so in terms of each locality and then the region well yeah one of the things they have two different types of waivers, and each locality right now gets at least one.

[00:28:33] So that means right off the bat, you've got 80 waivers that have been assigned out to some localities. And keep in mind, there's a handful of localities where their priority one wait list is 10 people or less. And they're still getting at least two waivers to their individual jurisdiction. And that's what's compounding the issue that's going on, is some of their based policies on how they're going to make sure that every locality gets at least one type of waiver. So this is a problem. I mean, this is something we need to drill down a little bit better because it's like an exciting point here that you feel like, wow, we're getting 70 new

[00:29:11] slots, but we're losing ground. And so I think this is continue to have this conversation, but I think it's important to point that out. Thank you, Darrell. Okay, let's move on to compensation and workforce? All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Florida Survivors. I want to highlight a couple things in the compensation workforce section. First of all, the first bullet says 2% increase for constitutional officers and state-supported local employees. This will likely be an estimated $400,000 over the next six months back towards us. The rest of the increases, which

[00:29:48] for a number of different positions. We weren't able to know how much is coming yet, but we did try to provide at least like how many positions we have or some kind of information on scope since we don't have exact numbers, but that would include, there was money to address the compression adjustment for deputy sheriffs in regional jails, as well as Office of the Public Defender as circuit court clerks and the district court clerks and juvenile domestic relation clerks. So each of those had money towards increasing compensation, but we don't know the local

[00:30:22] effect necessarily on that yet. The next, then there are three bullets at the very bottom of page five, all having to do with incentivizing nurses and getting more nurses into the workforce. So none of that money will necessarily come directly to the county, but it is increasing workforce has been a big priority for us. So I wanted to highlight that. And then on page six at the very top. There are two behavioral health items. One is for the loan repayment,

[00:30:58] so $1.5 million to that, and then $18 million to compensate CSB staff. It's unclear, again, how much will come to Fairfax County, but there is that money in the budget for compensation for CSB staff. Okay, anything, any questions on compensation and workforce? All right, we've made it to the other category. Who's going to lead us? I'll go ahead and do the other category as well. So the first one under other category is public safety. The first bullet I want to highlight

[00:31:33] is has been something in our program for a while. So it's increasing the jail per diem for the locally responsible inmates by $1. Our position has been for two, but we did get one. It's worth note, I mean, it's almost to the point of absurdity here because the cost to house a state-supported and made in Fairfax County is $419 per day.

[00:31:56] And we're talking about going from $4 to $5. So we asked for two and got one. So, okay. Definitely keep pushing on that one. The next one is an additional one-time funding of $2.1 million to the HB 599 funds for local police departments.

[00:32:20] So we'll get approximately $300,000 from that. And this one, I'm sorry to interrupt, but just board members will recall this was one of our budget priorities in our program this year. So happy to see that. Definitely. And then the third bullet is a combination of different violence prevention, safety, community programs for a total of $35 million in investments.

[00:32:46] The next one is the Stormwater Local Assistance Fund. So there's $30 million provided in the budget statewide for that. $10 million is set aside for two different projects, but that does leave the $20 million, which we know is a priority.

[00:33:02] Elections, we're providing $7.3 million coming back to localities to help with reimbursing presidential primaries. $7.1 million may be used to reimburse localities and specifically is in there.

[00:33:18] And then the last thing is an affordable housing. There was a bill that passed this last year that requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to do five-year annual needs assessments and plans and updating them every five years. And so $200,000 was allocated to support that new function in their department.

[00:33:39] Okay. Any questions from board members on other, any of those items? Zarko? So, Mr. Chairman, before we totally leave this, it's not really a budget issue, but it's a state funding issue that was announced last week.

[00:33:54] So Noelle just wanted to share, or I asked Noelle to share something about this. Mr. Chairman, Noelle Dominguez with the Department of Transportation. While not in the budget, we did want to say that Senator Barker let us know last week that he worked with the administration to provide $4 million for the Lee Chapel Road project.

[00:34:13] So we did want to share that. We're checking in with VDOT on how that will work along with the $5 million the board provided in July. Great. I just wanted to say very good news from Senator Barker.

[00:34:29] Okay, anything else on budget issues before we move on to the program? Nothing? Okay, board members have the 2024 draft legislative program at your seat.

[00:34:46] And Ms. Arco is going to walk us through some areas that are work in progress and a couple of changes that we've already incorporated. I wanted to just start, though, on page one, which kind of is the introduction, and remind board members and the public about the organization of the program, which we did change and streamline a little bit last year.

[00:35:13] And you'll see at the bottom of the page there, the four categories. We have our overarching priorities, which are kind of the key perennial challenges, underfunding of core services, education, and others that we discuss, and general lack of local authority.

[00:35:29] So that's always the first section in the program. Next is our initiatives and budget priorities, which we do not yet have. We'll be developing over the course of the fall. And those are specific and targeted legislative and budget priorities.

[00:35:46] that we'll focus on in the upcoming session and work very closely with our delegation to get across the finish line. And we had some successes in that category in the most recent session. And then the bulk of the program are the position statements, which outline the 15-ish pages of positions that we take each year, which we'll be updating.

[00:36:09] And then finally, fact sheets that we produce over the course of the fall and throughout the session to give our delegation specific information and facts that they need. So with that, I'll turn it over to Ms. Arco to walk us through the program.

[00:36:28] And I'll just note, we were successful last year in reducing the length. What I don't want to do is add a page or two to the program every year and wake up 10 years from now and see that it's 30 pages. so we're going to try to have a one in and one out policy on on words and in positions miss arco thank you mr chairman and we've taken that instruction seriously so we've tried to keep it around the same length as we start off this year so the first position that's in here and the board may recall this from other years we if we have a position that we haven't yet updated at

[00:37:05] the beginning and this often happens in particular with the k-12 funding position because we're working with the school board. We leave it in red, we italicize it, and we mark it as it just hasn't been updated. So this is the position from last year. Because we're working with the school board, sometimes it takes us a little bit of time to, you know, coordinate that first update.

[00:37:24] This year, in particular, because the budget passed so late, and because of the JLARC study that we already talked about, it's just going to take us a little bit of time to kind of think about what we'd like to say in this position. But I think, going back to what Chairman McKay mentioned, I think we really want to think about reworking this position, and that's the conversation we've had with our legislative counterparts at schools, to really focus on that report, because that's the General Assembly's own report that really talks about the shortcomings in state funding and the things that we really need to focus on.

[00:37:55] And it particularly highlights issues like cost of living and things like that, which the LCI doesn't do a good job of capturing. and so we want to try to rework this to focus on some of those issues and really kind of point back to their own study and so hopefully at the next legislative committee meeting which is only in two weeks but we'll have a draft for you all to to start to consider and obviously we'll update it through the process but that's why this position is in red for now and there's a few like this for various reasons and i'll explain why but that's the case with this one any questions on

[00:38:31] that process folks understand the direction that we're heading okay okay so then turning to page 3 Noel will talk about the transportation position mr. chairman on the top of page 3 we had a regional transportation funding position essentially asking the general assembly to make the region whole from the 2018 diversion of funds we have added to that to also request the Commonwealth provide dedicated and sustainable funding for WMATA based on the recent discussions that have happened there and we provide some information on the current shortfall that has been noted of 750 million that that could be updated as discussions continue

[00:39:12] as well as information from the northern virginia transportation commission on what wamada does for the commonwealth's economy and that the the wamada language there at the end of the first paragraph is is what i hope and anticipate will also be the language in vaco's position. So I've been working to get that. Chairman McKay and I have been working to get that adopted at BACO. So it will be consistent. Questions on WMATA, Supervisor Gross?

[00:39:42] I would simply suggest that because the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments also has a full court press on this, that we share all of this with COG and that whatever legislative program COG may come forward with, and sometimes they do and sometimes they don't, With Congress that this be included, I think it's important that all the partners have the same approach, the same language, the same push.

[00:40:13] Yeah, you know, one difference historically, regionally, is that when there has been a need for dedicated funding for Metro, Maryland gets it from Annapolis. Yes, exactly. And Metro gets it for us. And trying to change that narrative a little bit here rather than begging for the ability to take money out of our own pockets to fund it, that Richmond should look at doing what Maryland has historically done.

[00:40:41] Absolutely, absolutely. My concern is that we don't want to be just doing this independently. We need to make sure that all of our, especially the folks in the WMATA Compact, we all have the same language, and we support one another's approach to getting the funding.

[00:41:02] COG is trying to do a deep, deep, deep dive into WMATA's books, along with a number of other folks. It's not working quite as well as they had hoped, but we need to be united in our efforts.

[00:41:19] Thank you. Thank you. Supervisor Patrick. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And just adding on to that, and I appreciate the work that you and so many councils are doing on this. I do agree it's very important to include the state needs on this, but also when you're sharing the economic and workforce issues and concerns, I think the more we can do to really tie that in, that it's not just transportation, But it really is an impact to our land use, to our tax base locally and in Virginia.

[00:41:50] But also keep in mind, I think that it does say the currently projected shortfall. I do believe we are awaiting the next WMATA budget later this month that may have some changes to that. And so focused on both the short term as well as the long term needs and how they've, as you know, been there.

[00:42:11] it's not a new thing for a long time now. Thank you. Great. I think we're good on Metro. Mr. Chairman, on regular statewide transportation funding, we don't have any new language. Still references that Northern Virginia should receive its fair share of statewide revenues, that various programs such as maintenance and revenue sharing should be funded, and that they should simplify processes for administering some of the programs they have the statewide level okay move on to governance so mr. chairman moving on to

[00:42:49] page for governance there are only just a few updates at the bottom of page four and then the top of page five you'll see them in yellow they're just some clarifications and small changes not very significant and then as you turn to page five you'll see that the budget priority section is another one that's in red that we haven't updated yet that's basically for the same reason we just discussed in k-12 which is that the budget just passed and so we need a little bit of time to kind of go through it and see what the impacts are before we know what the priorities will be for the next budget as well and so we'll

[00:43:26] hopefully have a draft for you all at the next legislative committee meeting I would also mention that normally at this time of year not normally I'm sure it's true the governor is working with his administration on his budget submission which he will make in December and this will be the one because of our unusual budget system in Virginia this will be the one biennial budget that this governor gets to submit and work with the General Assembly and then implement it's the one it's the one he gets from start to finish and so usually we work on something a letter from the board to reach out to him with budget priorities and so we'll be working on that with you all to try to submit something as we

[00:44:05] also are working on these priorities and so but because of this budget that just was completed we had to kind of see what it was before we turn to the next one which I think is how the legislators are feeling too they haven't they hadn't finished the 2023 session before they could turn to 2024 and so then on the bottom of page six early childhood again those are just really small changes to that section I will note that in a couple of places in those positions you'll see small notes in red italics when some of the BACs have asked us or or ask the board to keep particular positions in the program.

[00:44:44] We try to include little notes in red to you all, just to show that the BACs have requested that that position stay and their support for it. We'll remove those when it comes to the adoption of the program, but it's really just to show you all that the BACs have said that they support that position as they're your advisors.

[00:45:03] And so this is the first time we're seeing it in the program here, and so that's just a reminder for you all, and you can see there's another note the top of page seven also from the Commission for women and then in the global climate change section there's also a note from the Commission for women other than that there's just a small change in that section Supervisor Paltrey thank you mr. chairman just a question I'm sorry I'm looking through I don't know if it's in here but have we looked at the and I was listening to the

[00:45:40] FOIA Council conversations have we looked at electronic participation and electronic meetings is that in here ensuring that both Commission's we and the public can have greater access to the meeting so in the local authority section we did our language last year about greater participation in electronic meetings did I miss it or is it in there I just have to find which section it is oh yeah so at the top of page 5 oh it's the first bullet at the

[00:46:17] top of page 5 but it's there's a partial bullet at the beginning and it says locality should be granted additional authority to allow for increased opportunities for members of public bodies to participate and attend public meetings remotely while ensuring that public service is available to individuals with a wide array of backgrounds and maintaining the transparency required for the conduct of public business but certainly as we go through the process if there are additional things that you all want to talk about and consider we can but we did add that last year because there was certainly a push particularly by a member of our delegation who sadly will not be in our delegation anymore because of redistricting she'll be in the General Assembly but not in our Fairfax delegation but there has been a lot of

[00:46:55] push on on legislation like that and we had supported the bills but we hadn't put it in the legislative program we try to keep this language relatively broad not knowing exactly what bills will come up or what the particulars of the debate will be in each session. But we did support a number of bills last year that were specific. Right and I appreciate and I guess partly and maybe in our advocacy I do think that specific member had some pushback some of those members will no longer be there but there will be new ones and so if we do need to strengthen it or do anything to this language I think it would be

[00:47:32] beneficial to do that. Thank you. I think we were on page 6? 8? 7? 6? I mean, 7 or 8?

[00:47:50] Yeah, 7. 7? So on page 7, just a very small change, and then a note there, again, from the Commission for Women asking to retain the global climate change position. And then on page 8, just a very small change on CSA, and then again, a note from the Commission for Women. They supported that position and courts just some very small changes there at the bottom of page 8 economic development and diversification that position is in red we have not updated it yet and I will mention that the reason is because when we first started putting

[00:48:26] that position in the legislative program a lot of the position and the edits to the position really did come from out of EDI and were really economic development specific as this position has been in here for a little bit longer the edits have become and the position has become a little bit broader and touched more County agencies and more things that the County does that aren't just economic development and so we've wanted to make sure that other County agencies review those sections that really kind of affects some of their work and so it just has taken a little bit longer to to get that kind of review so at the next meeting we'll have an updated position and I'll just say I

[00:49:03] think this is one where especially as we're looking at other things we really got to prioritize because there's an infinite number of things that we could say there's already a lot and the risk is if we say everything we're saying nothing and no one reads it so as we're working on it let's just try to keep that in mind because there's a lot here already so then at the bottom of page nine under jails there are small updates but I will point out that one of the updates is one that you all already talked about a little bit so the cost of

[00:49:41] housing an inmate is now approximately four hundred and nineteen dollars last year's program the cost was three hundred and something dollars I don't remember the exact amount but it was significantly lower obviously costs only go up and so it has changed significantly and so obviously that's not reflected in the small increase in the jail premium from the state and then under libraries we did talk about this a little bit in the questions about libraries in the budget but the GA did make a funding commitment I think last

[00:50:15] year where they basically agreed to a funding plan to fully fund the current library formula and it's sort of a several year plan until last year they put some more money into it and this in this budget agreement they put additional funding and I think there may be a couple more years in the plan and so that's obviously helpful and we're supportive of that and so we tried to reflect that in the language but I think the question is in addition to Supervisor Gross's question about you know the strings potentially with any funding it's just is that formula adequate to fund really what the libraries need and should be doing and so that's why we tried to reflect that a

[00:50:54] little bit in the language because even when they fully fund it I think potentially that's not what the libraries really would need and so that's what those updates reflect okay I think we can move to page 10 Okay. On page 10, Medicaid waivers, we did try to update some of this language to reflect some of what we were talking about with Daryl.

[00:51:21] We reflected just the change in the waiver rates and the growth in the overall waiver list, I think, based on the discussion that we just had with Daryl. We might want to... Yeah, I think we need to... chairman's point we need to have our number yeah and probably we should because it's constantly changing we should say as of whatever date that number is accurate and the points that daryl made about the growth in the waiting list being faster than the additional slot with the 70 that we're

[00:51:56] looking to get so yeah we can and and as we talk about what we want to focus on in our legislative reception with a delegation this may be you know we focused on behavioral health one year and we focused on support cap and education funding last year maybe we have a ways to go but this might need to be a focus this year because it's pretty eye-opening when you get into the numbers so we'll work on that in between um and then this again has a note this time from the long-term care

[00:52:33] coordinating council asking that you all retain this position so you can see that note at the bottom at the bottom of page 10 water quality funding just a small update there the state has been funding stormwater local assistance fund obviously we would like them to continue to increase funding that's an important fund for us turning to page 11 Jennifer do you want to talk about elections there are a couple updates for the election section the first one is some added language about access for non-physical disabilities, having access

[00:53:11] to curbside voting. You supported some legislation on that last year, and so just wanted to make sure we had gotten that language in there. The law was changed I think two years ago, but the disability was still defined as a physical disability, so that information is in there. And then the second change is just from purchase to implementation the state did go into contract last year with a provider to update the state system for elections and so we just to keep the

[00:53:44] language current said design and implementation okay following on that page paid family and medical leave there's just some clarifying updates that we've received from staff and then that position also has a note that the Commission for Women and the long-term care coordinating council requested that the board retain this position in the legislative program and then behavioral health oil do you want to talk about those updates yes so on behavioral health we had included some new language noting that the state is working to

[00:54:21] transition to the certified community behavioral health clinics model that's really building on step VA and that's a national model it's designed to ensure access to comprehensive mental health and substance use services so just to keep the language there relevant and current we wanted to include that so that we yes sorry to that a little further down if I could ask I was just having a sidebar with Tom Fleetwood we had a roundtable yesterday with the

[00:54:57] Congressman Connolly on permanent supportive housing and I know we have in here increasing funding for units for individuals am i are we on housing so we're on behavioral health but oh sorry I heard that we do have that in affordable housing both yeah I'm sorry but I was trying to figure out it's kind of linked to both so maybe going linked to this but the housing bullet one two three four five you're now you're talking about page 13 13 The fifth bullet, increase funding.

[00:55:34] Yeah, sorry, page 13. On permanent supportive housing. I am sorry. I misheard what you were saying. I thought we were on the same bullet. I can come back to it over there if now is OK. Why don't you do it now? OK, thank you.

[00:55:50] We're all on the page. My apologies. And so we just had a very robust conversation yesterday about both kind of the one-time funds that are going toward building the units, but the need overall for additional support, as you know, the wraparound services and the operating expenses, the recurring operating expenses are quite large to support the units because they're not just building, but we're really supporting to be successful.

[00:56:18] And so I know the need for, there's quite a bit of local, but for that state and that federal funding, and here at the state level, if we could add units, not just units, but also for wraparound services or operating expenses to that as well.

[00:56:37] And happy, you know, we can work with the housing office on the specific language on that if my colleagues are comfortable. Yeah, I think that makes sense. So it would be like units and something. Because the one-time fundings are a little bit easier to do, and then those operating expenses are the bigger lift that we need more support, I think, at the state level.

[00:56:57] Okay, we'll come up with something on that and bring it back. All right, so let's go back to page 11, right? Or 12, where were we on? Yeah, so the other change in behavioral health on 12 is just a clarifying change in that bullet near the top of page 12.

[00:57:13] And then we also had a note that the Commission for Women recommended retaining that decision. Okay, any other questions on that section? No. So, Mr. Chairman, on long-term care workforce needs, We got some edits from staff and I think maybe one or two of the BACs that we still need to review because they expanded the position in a way that I think led us to some questions.

[00:57:39] So we'll provide some updates at the next meeting. Substance use disorder. Those are just a couple of small clarifying changes. And then now on to housing.

[00:57:56] So on affordable housing, we added some language to note the need to strengthen tenant protections against evictions. We also included a reference to the surging rental prices based on market conditions.

[00:58:12] And then in the second bullet, we added some languages to clarify that resources are included in plain language just to ease that accessibility.

[00:58:27] And then moving on to human services, in adult protective services, we just had an update to that stat there about the county APS reports of adult abuse, neglect, and exploitation.

[00:58:44] And we did have a note that the Long-Term Care Coordinating Council recommended retaining that position. I also should have mentioned that for affordable housing. And they also made that note for the independence and self-sufficiency position. The second, under human services, that position is otherwise the same as what it was last year.

[00:59:07] And then on TANF, we added some language to note that there's a need for continued TANF funding of programs which meet the needs of low-income families. TANF funding, some of the discretionary funds have been used to fund a variety of programs.

[00:59:26] And there was, there's been some information recently that the current obligations for that funding are actually going to lead to a deficit in TANF. So we included that language to kind of address that issue. And that's something that we'll be looking at.

[00:59:42] It's something that VACO had raised as well. So that's something we'll keep an eye on. Okay. Anything there? All right. Page 14, land use. Oh, Supervisor Gross.

[00:59:59] We could go back to page 12. In the middle of the page in red, the long-term care workforce needs. I have a lot of personal experience with this right now. It says it's updates and reaffirms the position, but it will be updated in a future draft.

[01:00:15] What do you anticipate the updates would be? And I'm wondering, I'm not sure how we define long-term care. I've always thought about it as you're going into a facility and you're not coming home.

[01:00:32] You know, it's going to be for months and months and months rather than, you know, something that's rehab for a shorter period of time. So we definitely need more qualified people. But could you tell me what you're planning to do in updating it?

[01:00:47] So some of the suggestions that we received from staff and perhaps from some of the BICs, too, I don't remember off the top of my head, talked about expanding some of this to additional types of positions like assisted living and things like that.

[01:01:04] And while I understand that concept, I think there wasn't there hadn't yet been a lot of discussion about is there a potential fiscal impact to the county or how does the county use those types of facilities and how does some of that work? And so usually when we have those kinds of things come to us as legislative staff, we try to make sure that we pull everyone together so that we understand the benefits of, you know, to the people and to the programs on the human services side, for example, in this case.

[01:01:35] But also, is there a fiscal impact? And if there is, that could, you know, it could be that the board chooses to go in that direction, but we need to sort of understand the totality of it. And so the updates and reaffirms the position is the language from last year. We sort of reprinted exactly as it was last year.

[01:01:51] We haven't changed that. And then we just need to sit down with staff and understand what that expansion to additional positions would look like and what would the impacts be before we come back and present it to you all. Thank you, because I think we have to be careful not to throw everything but the kitchen sink, including the kitchen sink, into something like this.

[01:02:09] Right. Because there are very specific pieces. Right. Quite frankly, we have some supposedly skilled nursing facilities in this county that I wouldn't send a dog to. No, really, really. I mean, there are some that are just so awful.

[01:02:27] And many times we get, I don't know about you all, but I get calls from constituents about the care for their loved ones in some of our skilled nursing facilities. So we need to look at the ones that are really doing well and figure out how they're doing it, because they're the ones who are really providing the services, quality services for the clients.

[01:02:52] But there are some that are just not, and probably, well, I won't go any further. But I do think that this needs to have some serious consideration. Our population is not getting younger.

[01:03:10] these facilities, and I can tell you that when somebody is going from the hospital discharged to a skilled nursing facility, there might be a long list of facilities. Many of them have no beds available, and others you just would not even consider. So it's pretty narrow. So this, you know, needs a little bit of extra work, I think. Thank you. So we'll come back at the next meeting.

[01:03:36] some language there for the board to review okay we didn't have any changes to that wireless telecommunication facilities we did have a couple of small updates from staff I don't think oh okay sure we can yeah if the board has questions about those specific updates Jennifer can speak to them but okay no keep going okay and accessibility there's a very small update and then

[01:04:14] again I know the long-term care coordinating council asked that we retain that position in the legislative program and then either Jennifer or Chris can talk about dangerous weapons you can go ahead and take that and the it's really a technical change to how this specific pneumatic gun works so we had explosive instead of pneumatic pressure so it's it's a very technical changed about how the weapons work my understanding of it it's new Matt we you're saying we previously used the word explosive which is not really

[01:04:51] accurate when you're talking pneumatic gun yeah exactly the way it fires so that was a police department this just matches more closely to the definition in the Virginia code okay no questions on that domestic and sexual violence so So turning to page 15, we did not have changes in that section, but the Commission for Women asked that the board retain that position.

[01:05:25] And then the next one that's also in red, so we'll update it for next time, is the safety sensitive positions. The board will recall that we had quite a lot of discussion about this last year, and it was a new position last year. The General Assembly did pass legislation last year, and it probably wasn't everything THAT WE WOULD HAVE LIKED, BUT IT DID MOVE THE ISSUE FORWARD FOR THE INTERIM PERIOD UNTIL THE STATE DOES IMPLEMENT THE WRAP BACK PROGRAM. THEY ARE STILL ON THE SAME SCHEDULE THAT THEY WERE, WHICH IS IMPLEMENTATION IN 2025. I THINK FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, CERTAINLY WE CAN STILL RETAIN

[01:06:02] THE LANGUAGE ABOUT TRYING TO ACCELERATE THAT IMPLEMENTATION OF WRAP BACK IN AN ACCELERATED fashion if the state can and so i think probably we could retain that i think we're sort of going around right now with in the interim period you know i don't know if the general assembly is going to do much more if any for that interim period since the interim period is now shorter and so we've been trying to talk to fcps and and police and some of our other agencies to kind of get their feedback on you know their comfort level with where things stand and um and also just a general

[01:06:40] sense of whether the general assembly is likely to really take this up again given that they just passed some legislation and again the interim window has has gotten smaller and so that's why we haven't updated it yet but we were going to try to come with an updated draft next time for you all to discuss okay um and then um next local property tax exemptions no changes there um and and then transportation no Mr. Chairman the change in the transportation section essentially returns last year as the board may remember you had three initiatives stop for pedestrians the

[01:07:19] picking up signs and the reducing the speed limits this puts the speed limit item back in the transportation section of the program but it's essentially the same language as previously The other two did pass, this one did not.

[01:07:37] Am I correct that we have the 25 to 15 mile per hour language, both in the bolded opening paragraph, but also in the first bullet? Exactly. Yes, so the bolded mentions clarifying the language, the counties have the authority, and then the bullet says that as well, yes.

[01:07:58] Okay, I feel like we could maybe streamline that to just say it in one or the other. You know, it continues to be an important issue for us, but a little bit redundant to have it back-to-back there. We can condense. And secondary road devolution, no changes from previous years.

[01:08:14] We just assert that we should not be required to implement a secondary road devolution. Okay. And the final, we have the loud exhaust. And just having talked to several GA members, I think there's going to be another push on that this year, maybe with a slightly different approach, so we'll continue to engage on that issue.

[01:08:43] Okay, that is the end. Are there any questions from board members on the draft program? Again, if you have additional thoughts, especially between now and our October 3rd meeting, get them to us so staff can take a look, but we plan to have an updated draft with some of these areas that are in progress with draft language on October 3rd.

[01:09:11] Ms. Arco, is there anything else? Nothing else, Mr. Chairman. Just the faster anyone can send us things, the better, because it's only two weeks away. All right. And thank you, everyone, for your work, Ms. Arco, and the entire team. And we're adjourned. Thanks, everyone.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coraggio Consulting · aguyonx.com