Peter’s Take is a biweekly opinion column. The views expressed are solely the author’s.
APS continues its record of flawed planning with the 2020 Elementary School Boundary Process. The latest recommendations typify years of ineffectual boundary planning.
In 2018, APS recognized it had a problem: a mis-match of the geographic locations in which its elementary students resided and the locations of schools. Further, APS identified the planning corridors (Rosslyn-Ballston, Columbia Pike, and Route 1) as the locus of the future enrollment growth, but the next new facility — Reed — was not being constructed where seats were needed. Therefore, APS began internal deliberations to adjust county-wide elementary school boundaries (for school year 2021-22).
The objectives included:
- create Reed and Science Focus (ASFS) attendance zones
- address overcapacity at schools
- maximize building capacity
- make efficient use of existing facilities and resources
- adhere to walk zones and balance demographics when possible
Last February the School Board voted to move Key Immersion to ATS, ATS to McKinley, and McKinley to Reed. Although this was and remains very controversial, the net result moved Option programs closer to areas with excess seats and freed up neighborhood seats at the Key site. However, because APS decided to limit additional stress during the pandemic, it hastily decided to abandon a first principle of any boundary process–to balance enrollment.
APS objectively has defined “preferred maximum” numbers of students at each school using Virginia guidelines. But APS has ignored its own analysis and excluded schools like Abingdon. Abingdon is projected to reach 930 students in 2022-23 with a preferred maximum of only 742. Other schools like ASFS, with a preferred maximum of 637 students, are included, yet ASFS is projected to enroll 662 in 2022-23 with the strong potential that up to an additional 80 will enroll if they elect not to move with Key Immersion. Others like Dr. Charles Drew–adjacent to Abingdon–has approximately 400 preferred maximum unfilled seats. And schools like Ashlawn and Tuckahoe (in this boundary process) have 200+ combined preferred maximum seats available through 2022-23.
The “minimal” boundary changes now proposed are unfair
Even for the small number of schools involved, APS’s latest proposal does not maximize flexibility nor does the proposal minimize impact on families as a foundation for the 2022 process. APS proposes moving several planning units from Ashlawn to ASFS even though future flexibility is needed there. At the same time APS proposes moving some students from McKinley to Ashlawn. These moves should be delayed until 2022 to preserve flexibility. Finally, APS leaves Tuckahoe well under-capacity. APS should use Tuckahoe’s excess seats to balance capacity from Ashlawn along the southwestern boundary of the County where future flexibility is less important.
Peter’s Take is a biweekly opinion column. The views expressed are solely the author’s.
Reopening APS schools safely no later than the first day of the spring semester, for our youngest students (K-5), should be a top priority for the Arlington County government.
APS must do more to make the air in classrooms safe so schools can open — and stay open. Arlington County needs to step up and provide APS with the necessary funding and technical assistance.
It’s particularly important to develop a detailed plan now to move our youngest learners (K-5) back into safe classrooms because there’s lots of evidence that they are the ones who suffer the most from an all-virtual environment.
During our health emergency, County government must exercise its existing local regulatory authority to impose Arlington-specific limits on indoor activities where the virus thrives, e.g., indoor gatherings, dining, bars, and gyms. If necessary, Arlington’s new ordinance should be more stringent and remain effective longer than Governor Northam’s November 16 statewide order.
Otherwise, it will not be safe for APS to provide in-person instruction.
Air is the Issue
For months, our County and school leaders have lacked sufficient urgency and focus to tackle the primary problem: the COVID-19 virus spreads through the air.
Experts in aerosol physics, chemistry, engineering, and public health have defined clear strategies to thwart airborne transmission. But in a recent 29-page APS report, air quality was mentioned but once. County officials are watching cases rise, but they must do more about it.
As the case count has risen, Arlington has risen into the “highest risk” schools’ category according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). If all elementary school students returned today, too many employees would soon be out sick or in quarantine. Safe, in-person operation is becoming impracticable.
APS should begin giving a biweekly “Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) report” to show a new focus on air quality. Classrooms need six air changes per hour of new, outside air coming in. APS has been working on HVAC improvements — including upgrading to MERV-13 filters to catch any virus floating in HVAC ducts. County funding is critical.
For additional ventilation, APS could place kids in rooms with windows. An open window can add more than 20 air changes! APS could use empty secondary schools (while older students are virtual), or even County recreation centers if needed. APS and the County should publish an inventory of spaces with windows.
The County should also help with extra safety equipment, which might cost as little as $500-$1,500 per classroom, for the limited number of K-5 students returning in early 2021 (if we act now).
All APS classrooms should be equipped with carbon dioxide (CO2) monitors, to give staff real-time information about air quality. Even with masks on, risks increase with time indoors. CO2 meters can alert when exhaled breath is building up.
Portable HEPA air cleaning units could filter virus particles from the air, two to five times hourly. Investments in such equipment would pay off beyond the pandemic — by improving indoor air quality, reducing other illnesses, and boosting student achievement.
Peter’s Take is a biweekly opinion column. The views expressed are solely the author’s.
The 2020 School Bond is worth $52.65 million. These bond funds will be used for the following projects:
Major infrastructure such as HVAC replacement which impacts air quality for schools: $15.4 million;
Building refreshes and kitchen renovations at ATS, Key and McKinley: $7.65 million;
Security entrances at Taylor, Gunston, Jefferson, Williamsburg, Wakefield: $5.30 million;
Planning and design to meet 10-year projected capacity needs at all school levels: $24.3 million*.
Arlington voters should vote YES, with the understanding that comprehensive long-term capital planning must be an urgent priority. More information on this bond is here.
Background
APS facilities are used more than 58,000 hours annually by the entire Arlington community, including: community membership in APS aquatics facilities; evening and weekend programs run by Arlington County Parks and Recreation; holiday and summer camps when schools are not in session; and a wide range of community fairs, arts events and other special meetings. All these uses are in addition to serving approximately 28,000 students in the pre-K through grade 12 programs.
When major work needs to be done ranging from replacing internal school systems or roofs, or if buildings require significant renovation, or additions or new buildings are to be built, these projects are referred to as Capital Improvement and Major Infrastructure Projects.
Why you should vote YES
This year, APS departed from the traditional 10-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) in order to align with the Arlington County FY 2021 CIP which is focused on the short-term due to the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
This 2020 school bond sticks to sustainable decisions which address immediate needs without creating conflicts with imminent policy decisions under development in other departments. This school bond is focused on ensuring good financial stewardship by taking care of the facilities we have and carefully setting the stage for expected growth in the next 10 years.
I support a YES-vote. Read More
Peter’s Take is a biweekly opinion column. The views expressed are solely the author’s.
On September 15, The Arlington County Board approved a $3.8 million contract to design an ART operations and maintenance facility. Initially part of the Board’s non-public-comment consent agenda, this contract and its accompanying staff report had a lot to hide.
Background
The County purchased 2631 and 2635 Shirlington Road in 2018 for $24M with plans to use the space for a public facility. The 2018 Four Mile Run Valley (4MRV) Area Plan recommended the space optimize density (up to 120′) due to its strategic location adjacent to I-395.
Also, in 2018, the Board adopted a new community engagement strategy to integrate better public insights into community projects thus achieving better outcomes and controlling costs associated with late-in-plan changes.
The Green Valley Civic Association (GVCA) has repeatedly taken the County to task for its lack of community engagement, communication and resource allocation. During the 4MRV planning process, residents of this area offered comments like these to ARLnow.com: “[T]he county’s “engagement process was lousy from the beginning.” “[T]he county has indeed held plenty of meetings, it’s the quality of those meetings that [are a] concern.” In a June 2020 letter to the editor of the Sun-Gazette, GVCA leaders concluded: “It is no longer acceptable for the County to say “we’ll try to do better” or we’re “for equity.” [I]t’s past time to prove it.”
Community engagement
This new ART facility proposal designates public engagement at the county’s “involve” level, yet the county’s transportation department actions to date have fallen short on public engagement for this project. At the September 15 Board meeting, Chair Libby Garvey disparaged resident engagement thereby underscoring the county’s disdain for what the community brings to the planning process. Garvey apparently forgot that only two years ago she had proclaimed: “We need always to work to build trust that we are listening to our residents.”
Arlington County has been lauded in many surveys as having one of the most highly educated group of residents. Yet, this ART facility project demotes public input to just the “aesthetic elements.” Sadly, the county isn’t taking into consideration that community members may have better, and perhaps more strategic and innovative, ideas than the county about the use of scarce space.
The Board’s vote to hire an architect for $3.8M to prepare a concept plan with insufficient public consultation is likely to increase the costs of an already expensive project. The county now can reject any suggestions for improvements to the design due to the timing and cost to make changes.
Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com
A new community group has formed to support restorative justice policies in Arlington.
The group, Arlington Advocates for Restorative Justice (“AARJ”), will sponsor a virtual public panel discussion on September 9 at 6:00 PM. Two academics renowned for their work studying restorative justice will participate: Thalia González from Occidental College and Carl Stauffer from Eastern Mennonite University.
These panelists will discuss the efficacy of restorative justice in its various applications and imagine, in conjunction with the audience, what a fairer and more just Arlington might look like. You can register here.
What is restorative justice?
Restorative justice (“RJ”) is an approach to wrongdoing that seeks, to the greatest extent possible, to repair or ameliorate harms caused by an offense, through communication and affirmative measures collaboratively agreed upon between those the offense harmed or affected and the offender or offenders.
Since the latter part of the twentieth century, many communities worldwide have incorporated RJ into criminal justice and public education disciplinary systems. Studies show that RJ generally increases victims’ and offenders’ perceptions of fairness, and suggest that its adoption may reduce recidivism.
The criminal justice system in the United States is broken. It is a system that exacts punishment as an end in itself rather than bringing about positive change to address underlying causes of crime and the need for victims, offenders, families, and communities to heal.
The U.S. represents 5% of the world’s population yet incarcerates 25% of its prison inmates; and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Our schools often fail effectively to help students in their moments of greatest need, instead following disciplinary policies that lead students to drop out rather than helping them change or avoid negative behaviors. And it is often our most oppressed and disadvantaged communities that bear the brunt of the failings of our predominantly “retributive” approach to violations of law and community norms.
We need a paradigm shift in how we deal with wrongdoing.
County’s “Restorative Arlington” initiative
In December 2019, the County Board took an initial step toward creating a “Restorative Arlington” by approving a one-year employee loan from the Annie E. Casey Foundation to the Arlington County Manager’s Office. Liane Rozzell, a Senior Associate at the Foundation and an Arlington resident for 21 years, became the Restorative Justice Project Coordinator. This agreement took effect on January 2 and will expire on December 31, 2020.
Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com
Recent collaborations between local governments and school systems in other localities, including Alexandria, San Francisco, and New York City, offer promising new instructional and childcare examples for Arlington to follow.
As I discussed in my last column, COVID-19 has exposed again why certain categories of vulnerable and disadvantaged APS students need the special attention and support that new programs like these will provide.
Making hard decisions regarding which APS students would be eligible, where these new activities would take place, who would staff and supervise them, and other details certainly present challenges. But Arlington can and should rise to the occasion.
Alexandria
Alexandria has a plan that “promises to offer child-care options for ‘those families who need it.” Further information released so far is available here.
San Francisco
San Francisco is planning “an unprecedented educational assistance program for the fall meant to help up to 6,000 children with their distance-learning needs.”
Starting in September, dozens of recreation facilities, libraries and community centers across the city will be transformed into “learning hubs,” spaces where young students who may struggle with remote instruction can go each day to access their digital classwork and the social interactions that virtual schooling cannot provide.
Officials are prioritizing low-income families, children in public housing or the foster care system, homeless youth, and others in living situations that make remote learning particularly challenging. At first, the hubs will serve students in kindergarten through sixth grade, a group that has lower rates of infection, but officials will consider making the hubs available to older students. They will operate five days a week during ordinary school hours and will be staffed by experienced nonprofits and other organizations…”
The barriers for distance learning are not just access to Wi-Fi, it’s making sure that children have a quiet place to even connect in to their Zoom calls, and have the support they need to … submit homework and participate virtually…
Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com
On July 14th, APS chose the best of a bad series of options by deciding to reopen schools 100% virtually.
All the options were bad because of a public health failure:
Outrage over schools’ inability to fully reopen should not, of course, be directed at schools themselves, but at the public health failure that makes it impossible for most of them to do so.
COVID-19 presents APS with a unique opportunity to take stock of what is working, abandon what is not, and creatively and equitably implement an effective 21st-century education for all.
Instructional and student achievement
Learning to read, spell, and write is a fundamental basis for all school learning, but APS’ reading achievement gap is widening. APS’ 2018/19 reading SOL pass rates by subgroups further prove that our minority communities (Black, Hispanic, Students with Disabilities, Economically Disadvantaged, and English Language Learners) will be the most impacted by APS’ virtual reopening. Their literacy skills lag behind their White, Asian, and Multiple Race peers (Black – 72%, Hispanic – 66%, White – 94%, Asian – 86%, Multiple Races – 92%, Students with Disabilities – 54%, Economically Disadvantaged – 63%, and English Language Learners – 38%.)
For students struggling to read and/or write, learning new content and demonstrating mastery in any subject area already was challenging in a 100% in-person learning environment. Students with poor literacy skills, who are required to work more independently in the virtual learning environment, will face even bigger challenges for APS to overcome. Read More
Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com
Among the County government’s recent blunders are its disrespectful behavior as described by residents of the historically African American Green Valley neighborhood and its erasure of Black Lives Matter supportive chalk art on Juneteenth.
The Juneteenth erasure generated justified outrage and inspiring community-wide responses.
These latest inequitable actions come on the heels of other poor County government decisions I’ve discussed recently.
Would changes in the form of our government help?
Elect 7 County Board members
Arlington’s current “County Manager Plan” form of government was adopted in 1930:
[T]he County Board elected at large meant a governing body more responsive to the needs of the county as a whole… [T]he ‘continuous, contiguous, and homogeneous’ nature of Arlington had now found expression in its form of government.
Arlington has had five County Board members elected at large ever since. But in 1930, those five members represented 26,615 residents (5,323 per Board member). Now they represent 236,842 (47,368 per member).
Alexandria — a city not a county — has seven elected representatives (including the Mayor) representing a current population of 159,428 residents (22,775 per representative).
If Arlington had seven County Board members elected at large, that would be 33,835 residents per member. Having seven members elected at large would be a significant improvement. It would provide many more opportunities for our elected leaders to hear directly what many more residents think of actual or proposed government policies and practices.
Don’t elect County Board members by district
Some residents believe Arlington should elect at least some County Board members from geographically defined districts. But, where to draw the lines? Electing members by districts would not be a net plus. There are many very important communities and issues in Arlington that have a confined neighborhood focus, but these tend to be so localized that we’d need too large an increase in the total number of County Board members. Instead, we should study the benefits/costs of adopting something like D.C.’s elected Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners.
Alter election times & terms
Our current five Board members are elected in a 1, 1, 1, 2 annual sequence, and serve four-year terms. The costs/benefits of alternatives should be carefully studied. The most substantial changes include simultaneous elections of all at once and/or two-year terms. I support simultaneous elections of all at once, four-year terms, and a two-term limit.
Adopt ranked-choice voting
Arlington County should exercise its recently obtained authority to adopt an ordinance providing for ranked-choice voting (“RCV”) in both County Board primary and general elections.
Peter’s Take is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ARLnow.com
Arlington County and APS face extraordinary challenges because of COVID-19.
With many questions left unanswered, on June 9 Governor Northam approved general guidance for a phased reopening of Virginia public schools.
COVID-19 must become the catalyst for County government and APS completely to reorganize and integrate their operating and capital planning now.
County Board July 7 special election
Independent candidate Susan Cunningham appropriately devotes an entire press release to many helpful suggestions for accelerating County/APS collaboration, including:
“The County Board, School Board, County Manager, and new Superintendent should sit down together immediately to prioritize what’s essential for our school community and the entire Arlington community.”
Democratic nominee Takis Karantonis astutely concludes:
“I am a strong supporter of the work done by the 2015 Community Facilities Study group [“CFSG”]. I have been frustrated by a seeming lack of support among School and County Board members for the thoughtful recommendations in that study.”
Republican nominee Bob Cambridge correctly confirms that “effective management requires initiatives such as cost-benefit analyses.”
School Board November 3 general election
In responses to a questionnaire sponsored by my colleagues at Arlingtonians for our Sustainable Future (ASF), the three School Board candidates also advocate major reforms now:
Symone Walker, the Independent candidate:
“[I]t is time … to better manage and direct Arlington’s growth in a more paced and modulated manner. I favor the approach to retrofit and repurpose existing APS and county facilities as has been done in Fairfax County and the City of Alexandria. I favor this approach as practical, more efficient and environmentally friendly, and the most cost-effective.”
The two ACDC-endorsed candidates:
Cristina Diaz-Torres has “long supported APS and the County engaging in more robust cost-benefit analysis procedures for construction. This is particularly important given the current economic crisis and the likely drop in both tax revenue and (potentially) bond capacity.”
David Priddy states “for years we have had conversations around facilities owned by the county and facilities owned by APS. The two were not in agreement. That meant we did not have the full picture when properly planning for future growth.” Read More
Peter’s Take is a biweekly opinion column. The views expressed are solely the autho
A new report by the Civic Federation (CivFed report) analyzes Arlington’s recent historical spending on park and recreation investments funded with Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) bond dollars.
The CivFed report’s results are summarized in a table on page 1. Roughly 86% of all bond funds were dedicated to recreational uses. By contrast, less than 5% was spent on land acquisition and less than 2% was invested in open space and natural habitat.
Resource allocation mismatch
This funding allocation history is inconsistent with the public’s stated priorities for outdoor park and recreation investments, as determined by the County’s 2016 “statistically valid” survey, which ranked investments in trails, natural areas, and wildlife habitat as top priorities to satisfy unmet or partially unmet needs in our community.
In three of the last four park and recreation bond referenda appearing on November ballots, land acquisition was offered as a rationale for borrowing the funds. Yet, CivFed’s report notes a consistent shortfall in the County’s acquisition of new public land — just 1.82 total acres acquired since 2015, well below the annual 3-acre per year target in the 2019 Public Spaces Master Plan (PSMP).
Although the County has made significant investments in trail modernization and expansion through various funding mechanisms (including transportation funding), the same cannot be said for land acquisition or for investment in natural areas and wildlife habitat.
Beyond the 2016 community survey priorities, the County has set aggressive goals in its plans for stormwater management and flood resilience, as well as energy-use reduction coupled with urban heat island mitigation. See the 2014 Stormwater Master Plan and the 2019 Community Energy Plan.
Acquiring land to preserve and harness natural County infrastructure is essential for meeting these goals while simultaneously allowing the County to satisfy previously identified unmet or partially met needs for natural open space supporting human health as well as wildlife.
CivFed’s recommendations
On May 19, the CivFed voted overwhelmingly (63-5-1) to approve an important resolution making three recommendations to guide future park and recreation investments:
- The County should balance its capital investments to “fund passive park features (including wildlife habitat and open space), trails, and parkland acquisition on a more equitable basis with respect to its recreational investments.”
- The County should “demonstrate more forward-thinking and commitment to land acquisition for passive park use,” especially through the purchase of land identified as a “Generational and Unique Opportunity” in the PSMP.
- The County should “consider as a high priority dual-purpose sites that can be used for flood mitigation and Open Space-Natural Habitat,” as described in the 2014 Stormwater Master Plan.
Planning for Arlington’s future during a pandemic
On May 19, in response to uncertainty prompted by the pandemic, the County Manager proposed a scaled-back, one-year CIP just for 2021, rather than the traditional 10-year plan.
Stormwater management/flood resilience continues to be included as a funding priority in this one-year CIP. This priority is consistent with CivFed’s third recommendation to acquire land that serves a dual purpose.
Peter’s Take is a biweekly opinion column. The views expressed are solely the author’s.
The Northern Virginia Regional Parks Authority (NOVAParks) owns and operates Arlington’s primarily natural Potomac Overlook, Upton Hill and W&OD Trail regional parks.
But NOVAParks seems to have lost the trail outlined in its own Mission Statement which emphasizes (at p.7) enriching our lives “through the conservation of regional natural and cultural resources.”
Arlington’s statistically valid resident park survey (at p. 4) found that our community’s three most desired park features are multi-use trails, hiking trails, and natural areas & wildlife habitats. Yet NOVAParks is now single-mindedly pursuing funding for a project to dramatically widen the W&OD trail to create an environmentally damaging commuter thoroughfare.
NOVAParks’ W&OD trail widening project
NOVAParks proposes replacing the two-mile-long, 10-12 foot-wide segment of the trail paralleling Four Mile Run between N. Roosevelt St. and North Carlin Springs Road. In many areas the new trail will be two parallel paved trails — a 12-foot-wide bike trail, an 8-foot-wide pedestrian trail, a 2-foot median and outside buffers — for a total width of at least 26 feet, equal to some residential streets! Elsewhere, the trail will be widened to 16 feet with outside buffers for a total width of at least 20 feet.
This project should be withdrawn
This project will destroy almost two acres of green space while adding almost two acres of impermeable paved surface, including within Chesapeake Bay Resource Protection Areas (RPA’s) and flood plain along Four Mile Run, threatening increased flooding in Arlington’s BonAir and Bluemont parks. NOVAParks has failed to conduct an “alternatives assessment” of less expensive and environmentally destructive solutions. Finally, NOVAParks has failed to conduct any safety assessment of whether its proposed wider trail, with potentially higher bicycle speeds and volume, will actually increase bicycle speeds, and therefore the frequency and severity of accidents.
