►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Okay,
we'll
convene
this
work
session
to
order.
Our
gang
is
all
here.
This
is
Christian
Dorsey,
chair
of
the
County
Board
presiding
and
we're
here
to
have
our
work
session
on
stormwater
utility
implementation.
So,
let's
get
right
to
it
and
I'll
turn
it
over
to
Mr
Schwartz
to
introduce
this
conversation.
B
Thank
you,
Mr,
chair
and
members
of
the
board,
thanks
for
another
opportunity
to
have
a
work
session
with
you
on
the
stormwater
utility
program.
It's
been
365
days
since
the
last
time
we
had
a
work
session
about
this,
so
we
last
met
February
1st
of
last
year
and
you're,
going
to
hear
from
the
Des
team
they've
been
very
busy
over
the
past
year,
working
through
rate
structure
options,
implementation
issues
and,
most
importantly,
the
kind
of
community
engagement
that
we've
had
and
that
we're
planning
on
having
going
forward.
B
So
we're
going
to
be
looking
for
some
direction
from
you
today
to
really
what
we're
doing
is
following
through
in
your
direction
to
have
in
place
for
fiscal
2025,
which
is
a
year
from
next
July,
we're
going
to
need
your
head
knot
on
certain
key
policy
areas
that
Focus
for
the
most
part
on
rate
structure,
credit
program
and
a
little
bit
of
the
confirmation
of
our
timeline.
So
without
further
Ado
I
have
next
to
me.
I
have
Tyler
Smith.
B
C
Thank
you
Mark,
and
thank
you
for
joining
us
today
for
an
update
on
the
status
of
our
implementation
and
the
progress
we've
made
to
date
as
well
as
next
steps.
The
next
slide
just
shows
a
brief
overview
of
the
agenda
and
the
items
we
plan
on
covering
today,
most
of
which
Mark
just
covered
next
slide.
C
We
last
touched
base
with
you,
as
Mark
mentioned
at
a
work
session
in
February
of
last
year
in
2022,
and
since
then
we
have
been
busy
on
engagement
and
implementation
of
the
stormwater
utility
feedback
from
the
public
has
informed
three
key
areas
that
we
are
seeking.
The
board's
feedback
on
our
rate
recommendation
proposed
credit
program
and
manual
and
recommended
implementation
timeline,
foreign,
the
next
few
slides
we
have
shared
before,
but
we
wanted
to
touch
on
them
very
briefly
as
a
refresher,
especially
for
those
learning
about
the
project.
C
For
the
first
time
today,
the
county
is
in
the
process
of
implementing
a
stormwater
utility
as
a
funding
mechanism
to
pay
for
the
storm
water
management
program.
Instead
of
funding
the
program
through
the
Sanitary
District
tax
add-on,
which
is
the
current
model
and
based
on
a
property's,
assessed
value,
the
program
will
be
funded
based
on
each
property's
measured
in
previous
area.
It
is
an
alternative
way
to
fund
the
program
next
slide.
C
C
This
slide
goes
through
some
of
the
benefits
of
funding
the
program
through
a
utility
model
fees
are
set
based
on
the
demand,
each
property
places
on
the
system
measured
by
impervious
area.
Ultimately,
this
would
create
a
fair
distribution
of
the
cost
of
the
program.
This
funding
model
is
in
alignment
with
industry
Trends
with
many
Virginia
jurisdictions,
billing
their
programs
under
a
utility,
including
Alexandria,
and
the
City
of
Falls
Church.
C
C
So
exactly
how
the
utility
work
to
measure
impervious
area
on
each
parcel
in
the
county.
We
are
relying
on
GIS
imagery
to
calculate
the
square
footage.
This
work
was
recently
completed
for
all
Parcels
in
the
county.
The
charge
will
be
based
on
a
unit
of
measurement
called
an
eru
or
equivalent
residential
unit
residential
unit.
It
is
estimated
for
Arlington
as
the
median
amount
of
impervious
square
footage
for
a
single-family,
home
or
2400
square
feet
to
calculate
the
annual
fee
on
each
property.
C
C
How
did
we
get
to
this
phase
of
the
project?
We
have
completed
a
feasibility
study
that
analyzed
this
transition.
Moving
from
this
from
the
current
funding
model
to
the
storm
water
utility
and
subsequently
did
additional
work
to
refine
this
analysis,
primarily
looking
at
additional
rate
options.
This
work
was
presented
at
a
work
session
on
February
1st
of
last
year
and
board
direction
to
move
forward
with
implementing
the
stormwater
utility,
followed,
we're
currently
in
the
public,
engagement
and
implementation
phase
of
this
project.
C
These
are
the
main
work
streams
on
this
slide
that
make
up
the
implementation
team.
Each
generally
has
a
small
team
of
Staff
assigned
to
it.
This
is
a
complex
project
which
includes
cross-departmental
business
decisions,
business
process,
development
and
Technology
integration,
and
so
our
stakeholders
reflect
that.
Our
project
team
includes
representation
from
Department
of
real
estate
assessments,
Treasurer
stormwater,
County
attorney
and
Department
of
Technology
services.
C
Each
one
of
these
work
streams
has
been
very
busy,
so
I'll
mention
a
few
high-level
accomplishments.
We
have
completed
this
phase
of
public
engagement
and
we
will
share
the
results
and
details
with
you.
In
a
few
slides,
we
have
completed
GIS
mapping
and
impervious
measurements
for
All
County
Parcels.
We
are
in
process
of
developing
our
stormwater
account
management
system
or
what
we
call
Sams
and
integrating
with
the
treasures
Billing
System
Ace,
as
the
utility
will
be
billed
on
the
real
estate
tax
bill,
financial
and
eru
modeling
is
completed.
C
We
finalize
our
rate
structure
recommendation
finalize
our
credit
program
recommendation
and
drafted
a
credit
program
manual
along
the
way
we
have
actively
engaged
with
the
county,
attorney's
office
and
finally
are
in
process
of
drafting
the
business
processes
necessary
for
go,
live
next
slide.
So
now
we'll
move
into
the
rate
structure
recommendation.
C
This
slide
shows
staff's
fee
structure
recommendation
for
the
utility.
We
are
recommending
three
customer
classes,
single
family,
multi-family
and
non-residential
first
for
single
family,
we're
proposing
a
tiered
rate
structure
in
this
structure,
single
family
attached.
Typically,
what
you
would
think
of
as
Town
Homes
will
be
charged
a
flat
.6
eru
the
same
as
our
smallest
tier
for
single-family
detached
homes.
There
are
approximately
6
400
Parcels
in
this
class
single-family
detached
properties
of
which
they're
approximately
28
000
would
be
placed
into
tears.
C
Based
on
their
measured
impervious
area
with
most
homes,
build
one
eru
homes
with
less
impervious
area
built
slightly
less
0.6
homes
between
3,
600
and
4
800
square
feet
of
impervious
area
would
be
well
billed.
1.7,
Euro
and
homes
with
a
very
large
amount
of
impervious
area
that
are
quite
dissimilar
from
other
homes
in
the
county
will
be
billed
per
eru
like
non-residential
properties.
C
The
middle
column
shows
the
rate
structure
we're
proposing
for
multi-family,
where
a
property
would
be
charged
a
flat
rate
of
0.18
eru
per
unit
on
their
parcel.
We
will
go
into
more
detail
on
why
we're
recommending
that
on
the
next
slide,
the
number
of
multi-family
properties
is
high,
approximately
27
500,
because
many
of
them
are
condo
units
that
are
billed
directly
to
the
condo
owner.
On
the
non-residential
side,
which
includes
commercial,
real
estate
and
other
non-residential
properties
such
as
places
of
worship,
we
would
build
each
property
based
on
the
measured
square
footage
of
impervious
area.
C
Since
each
property's
characteristics
are
so
unique
in
the
non-residential
space,
it
is
harder
to
create
tiers
with
fees
assigned.
Therefore,
we
would
charge
based
on
the
impervious
characteristics
unique
to
each
property.
The
stakeholder
Advisory
Group
was
generally
supportive
of
this
fee
structure.
Next
slide,
we
are
recommending
the
multi-family
customer
class
is
charged
a
flat
rate
per
unit.
In
this
rate
structure,
the
impervious
area
for
all
multi-family
properties
is
totaled
and
divided
by
the
total
number
of
units
in
the
county
that
results
in
a
0.18
eru
assigned
to
every
unit.
C
We
are
recommending
this
primarily
because
structuring
the
rate
in
this
way
versus
charging
each
parcel
based
on
measured
impervious
area,
reduces
the
burden
for
properties
that
have
more
impervious
area
which,
in
this
customer
class,
tends
to
be
our
garden
style.
Apartments,
our
more
affordable
housing
types.
One
theme
we
heard
from
our
stakeholders
was
trying
to
mitigate
the
large
burden
shift
to
Garden
style
Apartments.
C
I
would
also
note
that
Alexandria
has
a
utility
billing
structure
that
builds
condos
and
Townhomes
as
separate
customer
classes.
Adding
the
multi-family
residential
class
does
create
some
small
amount
of
administrative
work
relating
to
maintaining
and
confirming
unit
counts
for
parcels
and
we'll
coordinate
that
with
the
Department
of
real
estate
assessments
next
slide.
C
This
slide
shows
burden
shifting
between
customer
classes
going
from
the
tax
to
the
stormwater
fee.
Overall,
single
family
detached
goes
from
36
percent
to
47
or
36
dollars
per
homeowner
the
unit,
the
entire
burden
shift
and
which,
for
this
example,
is
using
the
lower
end
of
our
fee
range
of
230
dollars
per
year.
U
is
due
to
the
new
rate
structure
calculation
based
on
impervious
area.
The
230
rate
assumes
today's
stormwater
program.
Cost
single-family
attach
Remains
the
Same
at
six
percent.
C
Multi-Family
goes
down
from
35
to
21,
and
non-residential
goes
up
from
23
to
26
percent
sign.
We
have
provided
the
public
with
a
stormwater
utility
fee,
estimator
tool
which
can
be
accessed
from
this
link.
The
public
can
look
up
their
property
and
see
their
estimated
erus
and
a
total
estimated
annual
fee.
Although
this
version
of
the
tool
is
based
on
preliminary
Data
before
we
finalized
our
impervious
layer
work,
our
hope
is
that
in
releasing
it
early,
it
gives
property
owners
in
the
county
a
chance
to
financially
plan
for
the
switch.
C
We
will
be
releasing
a
second
version
of
this
tool
in
the
future.
Now
that
all
impervious
area
has
been
measured
in
the
county
and
will
include
more
details
on
the
impervious
cover
for
each
property,
we'll
now
go
through
a
few
examples
in
the
next
handful
of
slides.
This
is
an
example
of
a
block
in
the
22202
neighborhood.
Here
we
see
the
most
expensive
home
home
C
does
not
have
the
biggest
utility
fee.
Home
B,
which
has
more
impervious
area,
is
bumped
up
to
the
third
tier
and
charged
more.
C
This
example
illustrates
impacts
to
Garden
style
apartments
by
showing
the
impact
the
Barcroft
apartments.
In
this
example,
we
show
that
calendar
year
2023
sanitary
tax
in
the
first
column
in
this
second
column
for
comparison
purposes,
only
we
show
what
the
utility
fee
would
have
been.
If
we
had
recommended
charging
multi-family
like
non-residential
based
on
impervious
area
of
each
property,
you
can
see
the
significant
impact
going
from
twenty
five
thousand
to
a
hundred
and
thirteen
thousand
under
the
utility
fee.
C
Our
recommended
rate
structure
would
Bill
the
Barcroft
Apartments
0.18
per
unit,
shown
in
the
third
column,
at
almost
sixty
thousand,
while
a
large
increase
from
the
Sanitary
District
tax,
the
burden
is
significantly
lessened.
The
reason
burden
shifts
to
this
class
of
properties
is
due
to
both
the
sprawling
nature
of
the
parcels
and
the
privately
owned
internal
streets
and
sidewalks
commercial
properties
will
see
varying
burden
shift
impacts
in
general.
C
This
example
shows
the
increased
burden
for
a
strip
retail
property
in
Arlington,
and
this
final
example
shows
a
place
of
worship
which
is
currently
exempt
and
their
estimated
fee
under
the
utility
I
would
I
want
to
also
point
out
in
this
example
that
this
church
is
made
up
of
four
separate
Parcels,
which
is
not
unique.
Many
of
the
larger
places
of
worship
are
made
up
of
multiple
parcels,
and
it's
shown
in
this
slide
in
the
blue
outline.
C
The
combined
utility
fee
is
shown
on
this
slide
for
all
parcels,
and
this
is
this
parcel
example
is
relevant
for
the
credit
discussion
in
a
few
slides.
It's
that
wraps
up
my
the
credit
recommendation.
I
can
either
continue
chair
Dorsey
or
we
can
pause
for
questions.
Colleagues.
D
I'm
trying
to
understand
the
the
townhomes
and
duplexes,
so
they
are
charged,
as
you
mentioned,
just
equal
to
to
tier
one
homes
or
0.6
eru
at
would
our
GIS
just
be
insufficiently
granular
to
assess
how
much
impervious
surface
is
associated
with
a
given
townhome
or
duplex,
or
is
it
an
administrative
burden
issue?
Why
not?
Actually
because
I
imagine
there
are
some
duplexes
with
very
little
imperfect
surface
and
some
with
very
large
driveways,
for
example,.
C
We
did
look
in
the
first
feasibility
study.
We
did.
We
had
moved
single
family
attached
were
actually
a
part
of
the
single
family
class
and
we
could
look
at
putting
them
into
tears,
so
they
would
be
either
in
the
smallest
tier
or
the
second
or
the
third,
but
we
found
that
most
will
fall
into
that
lowest
tier,
where
there's
some
larger
town
homes
that
could
fall
into
a
higher
tier.
But
it
does
create
some
administrative
burden
with
having
to
break
out
HOAs
and
common
areas
which.
D
D
C
Think
also
keeping
them
in
one
class,
and
you
know,
as
opposed
to
you
know,
putting
them
into
the
lowest
tier,
creates
an
ability
to
in
the
future.
You
know
as
part
of
any
maintenance
of
a
utility
in
four
or
five
years,
we'd,
probably
look
at
doing
another
rate
study
and
examining
it,
and
the
properties
would
already
be
in
their
own
class.
So
if
they
were
no
longer,
it
was
no
longer
appropriate
to
build
them.
0.6,
like
our
lowest
tier
we'd,
have
them
sort
of
separated
out
to
look
at
it.
E
And
microphone
so
two
questions
after
I.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation.
So
far,
number
one
Alexandria
is
is
differentiating
between
condos
and
rental
properties
in
the
multi-family.
What
why
exactly
so
condos
have
the
ability
to
you
know
to
distribute
the
fee
among
their
their?
You
know
condo
unit
owners
and
rentals,
who
have
a
a
one
owner
mostly
and
they
pay.
So
why
is
that
different.
C
I'm
not
sure
you
know,
I
think
the
characteristics
in
many
cases
from
previous
areas
similar.
We
can
certainly
get
back
to
you
and
see
if
we
can
find
out
we're
in
regular
communication
with
Alexandria
on
their
lessons
learned,
and
we
can
see
why
they
found
it
important
to
differentiate
between
those
two.
The.
E
Big
difference
is
that
they
have
a
completely
different
Financial
structure
at
the
end.
So
that's
that's.
That's
that's
interesting,
because
I
I
don't
know
whether,
under
the
current
system,
they
have
been
assessed
in
a
different
way.
That
would
be.
It
would
be
interesting
to
me
to
know
whether
you
know
a
condo
at
the
end
pays
a
different
fee
and
therefore-
and
the
second
thing
is-
we
decided
at
some
point
that
the
end
one
year
used
2500
square
feet
this.
This
is
just
a
starting
assumption
right.
There
is
no.
G
C
C
Think
another
thing
you
would
look
at
you
know
in
in
your.
If
you
know,
in
a
periodic
utility
fee
study
that
you
would
do
in
another
four
or
five
six
years
you
could
look
at,
does
that
2400
square
foot
assumptions
still
hold.
C
Okay,
moving
on
to
the
credit
program
under
state
code,
we
are
required
to
offer
a
credit
program.
This
slide
gives
an
overview
of
what
the
design
of
a
good
credit
program
would
aim
to
do.
We
would
want
the
program
to
help
support
water
quality,
meet
regulatory
mandates,
create
private
opportunities
that
support
the
County's
goals
and
promote
private
sector
awareness
and
voluntary
Behavior.
C
This
slide
shows
the
recommended
credit
program
structure.
We
have
structured
our
credit
so
that
higher
credits
are
given
for
bigger
impacts
to
the
system
and
for
things
that
take
more
time
and
investment.
Our
credit
program
is
broken
into
single-family,
residential
and
multi-family
non-residential
for
both
groups.
The
max
credit
you
can
have
applied
to
your
bill
is
35
annually
under
state
code.
We're
required
to
provide
credits
for
structural
stormwater
facilities
installed
as
a
condition
of
development
through
land,
disturbing
activity
permits
or
LDA
we're
proposing
up
to
a
15
credit
for
compliant
properties.
C
Mandatory
structural
credits
will
be
tiered
five
percent
for
pre-2014
LDA
approvals,
10
for
LDA,
under
an
acre
15
for
ldas
over
an
acre
and
15
for
LDA
2.0,
which
is
one
of
the
most
expansive
LDA
programs.
In
the
state
moving
it
onto
voluntary
credits,
we've
broken
these
into
actions
that
earn
five
percent
credit
and
actions
that
earn
10.
five
percent.
Credit
amounts
for
single
family
includes
conservation,
Landscaping
tree
planting
and
rainwater
collection
for
multi-family
non-residential.
It
includes
conservation,
Landscaping
tree
planting,
stormwater
education
and
storm
drain
marking
and
the
10
category
for
single
family.
C
This
slide
goes
through
some
of
the
considerations
for
developing
the
credit
program.
Typically
organizations
Target
their
programs
to
equal
between
one
to
two
percent
of
Revenue.
To
put
this
in
perspective
for
Arlington,
this
is
about
150
to
300
000
annually.
Remember
this
program
is
cost
recovery
so
that
any
Revenue
decreases
result
in
a
higher
rate,
so
the
same
level
of
Revenue
is
still
generated
to
cover
the
cost
of
the
program
for
Arlington.
We've
set
our
credit
cap
at
35
percent.
While
you
may
notice
this
is
lower
than
some
other
jurisdictions.
C
This
is
in
part
in
large
part,
based
on
the
mandatory
credits
by
state
code
that
we're
required
to
give
for
LDA
properties.
Our
starting
point
is
almost
one
percent
in
credits
before
adding
in
voluntary
actions
over
two
thousand
one
hundred
properties
will
be
eligible
for
mandatory
credits,
and
this
will
likely
grow
each
year.
We
also
don't
know
what
the
uptake
will
actually
be
on
the
credit
program,
it's
hard
to
anticipate
applications,
so
we
wanted
to
start
more
conservatively
knowing
that
in
the
future
we
can
always
increase
the
percentage.
C
While
it
may
be
more
difficult
to
lower
it.
A
big
consideration
as
we
developed
the
program,
was
that
we
stay
within
the
state
code
parameters.
We
can
only
give
credits
by
customer
class
and
not
by
land
usage.
For
example,
we
couldn't
create
specific
credits
for
places
of
worship
or
non-profits.
The
credits
would
need
to
be
available
to
all
property
owners
in
the
non-residential
customer
class,
so
we
made
sure
to
include
credits
that
appeal
to
places
of
worship
like
volunteer
events.
C
We
did
Regional
and
Nationwide
benchmarking
of
credit
programs
to
determine
the
best
mix
of
voluntary
actions
to
include
in
our
program
some
items
that
were
considered
But.
Ultimately,
we
are
not
recommending
are
the
no
fertilizer
project
because
we
don't
believe
it's
verifiable
certified
nutrient
plans,
because
typically
these
apply
to
more
agricultural
properties
and
in
Arlington
these
tend
to
be
golf
courses
and
permeable
walkways
and
patios.
We
wanted
to
focus
on
the
most
common
paved
surfaces
that
are
the
most
impactful
one
final
consideration,
and
this
is
in
response
to
feedback.
C
We
heard
primarily
from
places
of
worship
is
that
voluntary
action
should
be
applied
to
all
properties
on
an
account
so,
for
example,
the
church
example
we
looked
at
when
we
were
looking
at
in
at
their
multiple
Parcels.
If
they
did
one
volunteer
event,
they
wanted
that
credit
to
apply
to
all
four
of
their
Parcels,
not
just
one
next
slide.
C
The
primary
purpose
of
the
utility
we
are
setting
up
is
to
recover
costs
for
the
stormwater
Management
program.
We
are
also
required
by
code
to
have
a
credit
program.
Our
recommendation
attempts
to
balance
the
desire
of
our
customers
for
opportunities
to
reduce
their
bills
and
reward
meaningful
actions
with
the
administrative
workload
and
Equity
considerations,
as
I
mentioned
previously,
a
good
program
targets
one
to
two
percent
of
Revenue
or
approximately
150
to
300
000.
C
We've
strived
to
keep
program,
Administration
and
requirements
for
property
owners
simple,
so
they
don't
have
to
add
overhead
so
that
we
don't
have
to
add
overhead
and
access
of
the
credits
we
are
providing.
This
credit
program
is
envisioned
to
be
managed
by
the
stormwater
billing
manager
and
the
only
staff
dedicated
to
processing
credit
applications.
C
As
we
think
about
administrative
burden,
it
was
important
for
both
ease
of
administration
and
ease
for
our
customers
that
the
documentation
we
require
for
credits
be
streamlined
and
simple.
In
most
cases,
photo
documentation
and
receipts
is
sufficient.
With
some
practices
requiring
a
simple
diagram
staff
has
drafted
a
credit
program
manual
that
will
be
made
available
to
the
public
that
outlines
detailed
instructions
for
applying
the
credit
manual
includes
minimum
documentation
required
frequency
of
recertification
and
whether
a
credit
is
ongoing
or
one
time.
C
We
also
wanted
to
make
it
easy
for
our
LDA
properties
to
receive
credit
without
additional
red
tape,
as
they
already
spend
time
submitting
annual
compliance
documentation
to
the
county.
As
such,
they
will
not
need
to
apply
to
receive
a
credit
as
long
as
they
are
in
compliance,
we
will
automatically
give
it
to
them.
This
is
different
from
other
jurisdictions
that
require
them
to
apply
separately.
C
Another
way
we're
trying
to
reduce
overhead
is
by
giving
credits
on
a
bi-annual
basis
for
the
ongoing
actions
they've
implemented,
such
as
rainwater
collection,
landscaping
and
Rain
Gardens
and
permeable
driveways
and
parking
lots.
We
are
also
grandfathering
in
many
voluntary
actions
that
people
have
already
taken
and
those
would
be
bi-annual
credits
as
well.
C
If
our
credit
program
is
too
rich
in
terms
of
total
credits,
we
provide
customers.
Inevitably,
that
will
mean
that
we
will
need
to
increase
the
utility
rate
to
make
up
the
Lost
revenues
we
did
discuss
with
the
stakeholder
Advisory
Group
that
less
wealthy
Property
Owners
may
not
have
the
means
to
implement
some
of
the
voluntary
credit
actions,
but
would
still
be
subject
to
any
rate
increase
that
would
be
required
to
make
up
for
the
credit
program.
D
D
Can
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
how
that
might
happen
if
a
property
owner
is
to
convert
some
of
their
property
into
previous
service,
for
example,
if
one
of
our
large
churches
wanted
to
turn
a
parking
lot
into
a
reforested
area,
how
would
they
go
about
requesting
a
new
GIS
study
or
a
look
at
their
bill?.
C
I
think
there's
a
number
of
ways.
We
would
hope
to
catch
that
and
keeping
in
mind
that
we're
still
finalizing
those
business
processes
now,
but
with
many
of
those
use
cases
in
mind,
as
we
try
to
figure
out
how
we'll
accommodate
those
those
situations,
one
we're
looking
at
using
or
we're
under
contract.
Now
with
a
new
company,
that's
helping
us
with
our
impervious
area,
measurements
for
GIS
called
near
map.
They
have
some
new
technology
where
we're
able
to
identify
changes
in
in
an
impervious
area,
so
change
detection,
that's
one
two
we'll
also
be
looking.
H
C
C
A
process
now
where
people
will
be
able
to
go
in
through
our
existing
tools.
We
have
now
that
people,
some
people
are
already
familiar
with
Q
alert.
How
people
log
on
and
notify
the
county
of
other
issues
will
be
the
same
tool
that
they
can
go
on
and
and
ask
for
someone
to
my
impervious
area
measurement.
Does
not
look
correct.
Can
you
take
you
know
another
look
we'll
be
updating
our
impervious
flyover.
D
So,
are
you
anticipating
that
the
the
category
or
the
tiering
would
happen
on
an
annual
basis
anyway,
that,
because
our
Maps
can
be
updated
so
frequently
that
we
generate
a
new
number
for
folks
every
year?
Well,.
C
C
D
D
Let
me
if
I
could
ask
just
one
follow-up
question
then
I'll
yield
so
I
know
you.
You
framed
very
well
that
this
is
about
cost
recovery
rather
than
incentive.
If
there
were
a
large-scale
investment
in
conversion
to
pervious
surface
such
that
we
actually
lowered
our
community's
overall
magnitude
of
storm
water
to
manage.
I
think
this
is
probably
a
question
for
our
Des
team.
Are
our
investments
or
our
plans
for
the
the
flood
Brazilian
Arlington
downscalable
such
that
we
could?
D
D
E
Thank
you,
Mr,
chair,
relevant
to
the
line
of
questioning
here.
So
one
way
to
mitigate
storm
water
is
to
have
previous
surfaces
right.
The
second
way
is
to
discharge
and
drain
the
the
impervous
surface
into
a
public
system,
and
the
Third
Way
is
to
mitigate
on
site
like,
for
example,
having
a
cistern,
or
you
know,
saying:
that's
that's
the
amount
of
water
I
can
I
can
take
and
mitigate
on
site
that
doesn't
really
count.
In
this
case,
we
are
not
going
to
reward
or.
I
E
A
E
Yes,
okay,
so
that
means
that
if
somebody
wants
to
Big
to
build
a
bigger
one
special,
this
is
again
you
know
if
somebody
has
really
very
big
parking
lot
Etc
and
they
want
to
pick
a
bigger
one.
They
wouldn't
get
from
I,
wouldn't
get
a
quote-unquote
and
incentive
from
this
program
here
they
would
have
to
find
a
different
way
to
be
rewarded
for.
C
That
yeah
I
think
one
of
the
reasons
you
know:
we've
Limited
image
action
I
think
it's
also
important
to
note
that
you
know
an
individual
property
owner's
impact
to
the
system
is
just
one
aspect
of
you
know
that
we're
trying
to
maintain
the
overall
system
that
I
think
the
the
public
all
gets
a
benefit
from,
and
so
you
know
we're
trying
to
allocate
the
costs
in
the
best
way
we
can
between
properties,
and
so
we
are
trying
to
give
a
credit
for
when
people
do
make
meaningful
contributions
like
putting
rainwater
collection
or
a
cistern
on
their
property.
F
Yeah,
thank
you
on
the
rainwater
collection
so
where
I
live,
when
it
rains,
there's
a
lot
of
grass,
but
it
puddles
very
quickly
because
underneath
it
the
soil
is
like
cement,
I
mean
it
doesn't
soak
up
anything.
F
C
F
Do
it?
Yes?
Okay,
that's
great,
that's
good
to
hear
and
then
I
assume
there'll
be
somebody
that
I
could
see
someone
thinking
they
protect
them.
Perhaps
that
church
parking
lot,
that
it's
changed
into
a
forest
that
they'd
want
to
know
what
the
cost
benefit
is,
and
they
might
want
to
talk
to
someone
to
figure
out
okay.
So
if
I
do
this,
how
much
credit
am
I
going
to
get?
C
You
know
people
you
can
reach
out
County
for
help
and
I
would
also
add
a
lot
of
the
things
we're
giving
credit
for
are
in
line
with
other
programs.
We
have
at
the
county,
so
those
resources
also
exist.
You
know,
for
example,
adopt
a
streets
program
we
already
have,
or
you
know,
new
tree
planting
or
education
outreach
are,
you
know,
resources
we
already
have
available
at
the
county,
so
we've
been
trying
to
coordinate
with
those
departments
to
make
sure
people
are
aware.
F
A
Thank
you.
I've
got
a
couple
of
questions,
so
one
of
the
benefits
of
the
old
ad
valorem
system
and
I'm
not
advocating
that
don't
don't
get
alarmed
Mr
Schwartz.
I
A
One
of
one
of
the
easy
things
about
it
was:
it
really
didn't,
require
anybody
to
calculate,
and,
as
we
talk
about
this,
you
know,
you've
mentioned
the
staff
that
were
going
to
be
ongoing
to
administer
the
credit
program,
cost
the
credit
manual,
the
mapping,
the
other
technological
ongoing
Investments
that
we'll
need
to
make
here
the
business
processes
to
deal
with
disputes.
Everything
else
you
know
not
even
including
the
consultant
fees
that
it's
taken
to
get
us
to
this
point.
A
What's
the
ongoing
sort
of
you
know,
burden
on
the
general
fund
that
we're
absorbing
not
to
the
general
fund
to
the
utility
that
we're
absorbing
going
this
route
versus
where
we
were
before.
C
I
think
the
near
map
subscriptions
25
000
on
an
ongoing
basis,
and
then
so
we
can
provide
you,
the
updating,
accounting
but
roughly
those
are
the
ongoing
costs
and
we're
really
focused
on
trying
to
minimize
those.
Knowing
you
know
to
the
point,
you
just
said
that
it
is
an
added
overhead
that
didn't
exist
before
and.
A
That
does
not
diminish
my
enthusiasm
for
actually
charging
people
in
the
right
way.
I
just
want
to
be
very
clear
about
what
it
means
and
secondarily
I,
don't
know
if
you
mentioned
this
and
if
you
did
I
apologize,
but
where
do
our
eru
fees
stand
relative
to
other
jurisdictions
that
have
gone
this
this
route,
you
know,
do
we
have
any
sense
of
what
the
per
eru
fees
look
like
broadly.
C
Well,
I
would
I
would
say
that,
and
maybe
you
have
something
to
add
Chris
to
this,
but
other
jurisdictions
have
different
measurements
for
eru,
so
we're
2400,
others,
maybe
sure
you
know
a
thousand,
so
I
think
it
we'd
probably
need
to
look
at
the
average
single
family
burden
and
we
can
and
as
part
of
our
annual
budget
process.
We
always
pull
that,
and
so
we
can
update
that
now
now
that
jurisdictions
are
putting
out
their
proposed
budgets
and
provide
that
as
follow-up
great.
D
You
I
wanted
to
ask
a
little
bit
about
with
regard
to
the
credit
program.
I
I
I
really
appreciated
the
point
about
you
know
really
wanting
to
find
activities
that
are
meaningful
and
have
an
impact.
D
The
ones
that
you
know
sort
of
raise
questions
for
me
are
the
ones
that
are
perhaps
more
kind
of
one-offs
right
and,
and
are
we
really
confident
that
those
are
actually
likely
to
reduce
the
overall
amount
of
storm
water
or
improve
the
quality
of
with
regard
to
our
runoff
and
so
I
wondered
I
know
our
DS
team
has
been
thinking
a
lot
about
this,
but
is
there
more
that
we
could
say
about
the
the
research
that
substantiates,
for
example,
the
idea
that
a
a
street
cleanup
or
invasive
plant
cleanup
can
help
reduce
the
overall
storm
water
burden
on
the
community.
I
I'll
simply
say
that
you
know
those
water
quality
types
of
things
are
part
of
the
program.
So.
To
that
extent,
yes,
that's
helpful.
Yes,
you
do
you
do
a
cleanup
or
whatever
that's
going
to
help
the
water
quality
aspect,
because
we
have,
we
went
very
focused
lately
in
the
program
on
the
water
quantity
or
the
capacity
challenges
we
Face.
We
can't
forget
our
ms4
permit
in
the
water
quality
things
we're
also
trying
to
be
at
the
same.
D
Time:
okay,
that's
a
that's
a
helpful
reminder:
I
think
that,
because
we
probably
talk
less
as
a
community
about
the
ms4
permits
than
we
do
about
responding
to
the
magnitude
of
water,
that
seems
to
be
striking
us
with
these
major
flooding.
Events.
D
I
think
the
only
other
question
I
have
is
and
again
I
am
sort
of
focused
on
this
idea
of
you
know.
To
to
what
extent
can
we
really
support
property
owners
in
reducing
impervious
surface,
because
that
serves
the
broader
goal
and
serves
their
own
interests
in
reducing
their
bill?
D
Do
we
see
a
role
for
you
know?
Perhaps
our
own
urban
forestry
staff
or
an
entity
like
the
northern
Virginia
conservation,
trust
in
helping
Property
Owners?
Think
about
converting
and
conserving
right
impervious
surface
to
pervious
surface,
whether
that's
you
know,
planting
more
trees,
putting
a
conservation
easement
over
property,
you
know
or
how
have
we
thought
about
using
Partners
to
help
proper
owners
think
through
those
things,
the
credits
I,
think
that
was
a
great
question
that
was
Garvey
had
about.
D
You
know
what
what
is
the
pathway
through,
which
somebody
can
explore
a
cost
benefit
of
the
credit.
But
if
someone
is
I'm,
especially
thinking
about
these
institutional
Property,
Owners
ready
to
make
a
big
change
on
their
property,
who
are
the
partners
that
we
can
refer
them
to?
Do,
we
think
that's
something
we
can
do
internally?
What
is
the
pathway.
C
I
would
I
would
start
by
saying
we
would
definitely
be
open
to
partnership.
We're
looking.
You
know
for
some
of
the
credit
program
like
the
stormwater
education
events,
we'd
be
looking
to
partner
with
Eco
action.
You
know
so
I
think
you
know.
Definitely
that's
something
we'd
be
open
to
it's,
not
something
I
think
we've
explored
at
this
point.
You
know
during
implementation,
but
we
could
look
into
that.
Okay,.
E
Thank
you,
I
I,
always
understood
on
the
on
the
financial.
You
know
the
cost
of
an
area
so
I
understand
this
too.
We
have
to
cover
the
cost
of
the
program,
so
the
authority
will
have,
to
you
know,
have
a
balance
sheet
and
show
what
the
cost
of
the
program
is
and
it
has
and
then
it
will
have
to
be
divided
by
the
ER
use,
the
total
of
erus
right,
that's
the
cost
of
an
area
correct,
and
then
we
will
see
what
what
happens
with
credits
Etc.
E
So
by
by
that
amount
we
will
never
be
exactly
comparable
to
somebody
else,
because
you
know
geography,
topography,
precipitation
makes
a
difference
whether
a
jurisdiction
is
as
more
of
a
problem
of
capturing
water,
as
in
a
problem
of
you
know,
being
a
narrative
place
where
you
need
impervious
services
for
for
other
reasons.
So
the
My
question
is
here:
we're
still
copying.
E
You
know
I've
seen
jurisdictions
doing
other
things
like,
for
example,
certifying
excellent
performing
properties
because
they
invested
and
say
you
are
a
you
know:
storm
courser,
stormwater
conservation,
client,
a
you
know
very
high:
they
they
have
to
renew
their
certification
every
X
years,
like
five
or
so,
and
these
then
participate
in
higher
and
have
an
active
incentive
to
to
be
in
a
higher
credit
class.
This
is
especially
interesting
for
commercial
clients.
You
know
with
colossal,
you
know
impervious
Services
Etc.
E
Is
that
something
we
we
thought
about,
or
is
this
something
that
I
mean
I
understand
how
difficult
it
is
to
administer
that?
But
this
is
this
is
where
you
know
jurisdictions
come
in
and
say:
well,
we
are
not
going
to
do
it
piecemeal.
We
we
will
establish
one
program
where
somebody
will
be
able
to
classify
and
you
know,
and
they
will
bring
the
engineering
and
they
will
have
the
the
paperwork
to
show
that
they
did
actually
mitigate
and
then
they
will
be
classified
as
a
you
know.
Preferred
customer
for
this.
C
Out
of
here
Crystal
but
I
would
say
we
didn't
look
at
that
example.
Per
se
I
mean
we
incorporated
the
LDA
structural
credits,
I
think
the
15
you
know
the
highest
you
can
get
for
mandatory
structural
and
then
I
would
I
would
say
commercial
as
a
whole
for
some
of
those
bigger
commercial
properties.
Their
burden
is
going
down
under
this
this
model,
but
I
don't
know
if
there's
anything
to
add
or
we
have
our
Consultants.
Here
too,
they
may
be
able
to
add
something
to
that
conversation.
C
If,
if
there's
anything,
we
can
get
back
to
you
on
follow-up
on
that
yeah
I've.
E
Seen
that
you
know
there
are
three
levels
and
let's
say
if
you
are
tier
one
that
normally
the
program
distributes
the
fixed
cost,
so
the
hard
infrastructure
cost
to
everybody.
There
is
no
exception
to
that.
It's
the
variable
cost
that
that
that
finds
is
is
credited
to
those
who
have
a
significantly
better
behavior
and
invest
rather
than
those
who
cannot
do
that.
And
then
there
are
classification
about
those
who
are
willingly
not
doing
that,
and
thus
who
cannot
do
that
because
they
cannot
afford.
C
Not
only-
and
we
can
certainly
look
into
that
and
get
back
to
you
I-
think
the
only
comment
I
would
make
is
you
know
if
you're
significantly
reducing
the
burden,
especially
for
some
of
our
larger
paying
commercial
customers?
It
will
inevitably
increase
the
the
eru
rate,
and
so
you
know
we'll
increase
the
burden,
then
for
the
others
that
aren't
taking
those
measures.
So
it's
just
a
you
know,
be
a
balancing
act,
yeah.
E
F
Thank
you
so
thinking
about
our
tree
canopy
and
you
know
we're
always
trying
to
keep
track
of
our
tree
canopy
and
the
people
that
are
upset
that
we
don't
keep
track
of
it
as
much
as
we
should
and
I'm
thinking.
We
have
this
bi-annual
flyover.
That
knows
exactly
what's
going
on,
so
can
this
GIS
be
used
to
keep
track
of
how
our
tree
canopy
is
doing,
and
in
other
words,
can
is
that
a
byproduct
that
we
could
get
from
this?
At
the
same.
C
Time,
certainly,
we
can
see
tree
and
canopy
from
our
GIS
information,
and
you
know
we
did.
We
have
heard
recommendations
that
we
should
be
looking
at
our
tree
canopy
as
part
of
the
credit
program.
We
can
certainly
go
back
and
and
review
that
we're
certainly
very
supportive
of
meeting
the
stormwater.
You
know
the
stormwater
programs
very
supportive
of
meeting
our
tree
canopy
goals
when
we
formulated
our
recommendation
for
our
credit
program
we
wanted
to.
C
You
know
we
included
the
new
tree
planting
credit
to
be
supportive
of
that
and
because
it's
a
it,
helps
towards
our
ms4
permit
and
is
one
of
the
more
common
credits
we
saw
when
we
looked
at
you
know
other
jurisdictions,
a
credit
for
sort
of
tree
canopy
or
mature
trees
is
definitely
not
as
common.
We
found
one
example
in
the
country
of
that,
but
we
can
certainly
go
back
and
review
that
and
and
kind
of
weigh
that
with
the.
F
Administrative,
thank
you
and
I
think
it's
wonderful.
The
way
we
also
provide
trees
to
people,
which
is
great.
What
I
was
thinking
actually
was.
It
was
a
separate
like
a
I,
think
it's
DPR
that
handles
this
separate
concern,
keeping
track
for
different
reasons.
Not
for
this.
It's
just
a
byproduct
that
we
we
could,
instead
of
paying
to
have
a
survey
done
every
so
many
years.
Maybe
we're
just
going
to
be
doing
it
ourselves
and
not
have
to
do
that.
That
was
my
thought.
I
don't
know.
Krista
yeah
you've
got
something
to
say
well,.
H
I
was
just
going
to
add
that
our
GIS
department
is
working
with
all
the
departments
in
the
county
to
see
how
this
new
tool
can
meet
their.
C
Yeah
I
think
rgis
teams
are
excited
about
this
New
Year
map
tool.
C
A
A
See
I'll
think
I
had
another
one,
as
it
relates
to
one
of
the
credit
options.
Let
me
just
go
back
to
that
slide
to
refresh.
A
Here
there
is
the
one,
the
last
voluntary
action
and
the
10
bucket
the
parking
parking
lot
private
street
sweeping.
Can
you
just
tell
me
a
little
bit
more
about
what
that
is?
It
seems,
at
least
on
its
face
to
be
a
little
bit
different
from
the
others,
as
the
others
are
affirmative
actions
that
someone
would
take
to
do
something
different,
then
they're
already
doing
it,
and
that
seems
to
be
like
ongoing
maintenance.
So
tell
me
more.
F
H
Good,
so
this
would
be,
if
a
you
know,
a
apartment,
building
or
non-residential
facility
chooses
to
do.
The
street
sweeping
to
remove
debris,
leaves
among
their
privately
owned
facilities,
the
streets,
the
parking
lots
and
just
recognizing
that
that
helps
toward
the
water
quality.
You
know
we're
removing
those
pollutants
from
you
know
potentially
getting
into
our
waterways.
So
that's
a
helpful
helpful
action
there
and
we.
We
also
saw
this
in
some
of
the
other
regions
in
neighboring
jurisdictions.
Have
this
available
as
well.
C
A
C
H
The
action
the
credit
manual
does
go
through
which
type
of
sweeper
is
required
to
perform
the
sweeping
and
then
all
the
documentation,
the
square
footage,
and
things
like
that,
so
that
we.
C
Okay,
we're
moving
into
the
public
engagement
phase.
We've
done
a
lot
of
engagement
on
the
storm
water
utility.
Since
we
last
spoke
with
you.
This
timeline
summarizes
some
of
that
work.
We
created
a
project
website
with
information
about
the
proposed
utility
and
links
to
meetings,
presentations
and
other
materials,
the
county
established
the
stormwater
utility
Advisory
Group,
or
what
we
call
the
sugag
in
March,
which
included
representatives
from
residential,
commercial,
non-profit,
environmental,
fiscal
and
Faith
organizations
to
provide
a
range
of
perspectives
and
input.
C
The
sugag
Met
five
times
during
the
year
to
advise
staff
and
provide
input
on
the
utilities,
draft
rate
structure
and
credit
program.
The
county
also
gathered
input
from
the
broader
Community
via
a
feedback
forum
and
a
public
open
house.
In
July,
general
information
on
the
proposed
utility
was
shared
in
the
inside
Arlington
email
newsletter
through
an
informational
video
in
the
annual
water
quality
report
that
was
mailed
to
all
households
and
with
a
fact
sheet
and
infographic.
C
County
staff
shared
information
on
the
utility
at
several
public
events
throughout
the
year
and
gave
presentations
to
groups
such
as
the
Civic
Federation
Chamber
of
Commerce
Arlington,
neighborhood
Village,
the
Faith
Alliance
and
the
forestry
and
Natural
Resource
Commission.
As
shown
on
an
earlier
slide.
We
also
developed
an
online
mapping
tool
that
allows
Property
Owners
to
view
their
estimated
stormwater
utility
fee
and
includes
a
comment
form
from
this
engagement
staff
received
a
lot
of
very
useful
feedback
in
general.
The
community
thinks
that
charging
for
stormwater
Services
based
on
impervious
area,
makes
sense.
C
Stakeholders
overall
were
very
interested
and
supportive
of
the
credit
program
and
during
our
engagement
with
faith
in
nonprofit
organizations,
they
emphasize
that
additional
time
before
implementation
would
be
very
helpful
to
them
for
Budget
planning.
They
also
noted
that
the
credit
program
would
be
very
important
for
their
organizations
for
affordability.
Some
stakeholders
Express
concern
about
how
this
change
to
a
utility
might
affect
lower
income
members
of
the
community
and
suggested
that
the
county
try
to
mitigate
that
impact,
because
shifting
from
the
tax
to
the
fee
would
have
a
greater
impact
on
nonprofit
and
Faith
organizations.
C
Staff
hosted
two
engagement
sessions
for
these
stakeholders
to
share
information
and
receive
back
in
addition
to
hearing
about
concerns
about
being
charged
for
storm
water.
For
the
first
time,
these
organizations
emphasize
that
additional
time
for
implementation
would
be
helpful
for
their
budget
planning,
and
the
credit
program
will
be
very
important
again.
Credits
for
group
volunteer
activities
were
emphasized
as
an
important
element
of
the
credit
program
that
Faith
organizations
would
be
well
positioned
to
take
advantage
of,
and
they
are
interested
in
a
higher
cap
on
the
credit
program.
C
C
This
slide
more
directly
shows
how
what
we
heard
during
engagement
informed.
Some
of
our
recommendations
we
heard
from
the
faith-based
community
more
time
would
be
helpful
again
for
financial
planning,
and
so
we
are
recommending
a
deferred
timeline
for
implementation.
With
the
first
bill
and
calendar
year
2024.,
we
heard
concern
for
low-income
residents.
We
are
recommending
the
multi-family
fat
flat
rate
for
multi-family
housing
in
order
to
lower
the
burden
increase
for
the
garden
style.
C
Apartments
we
heard
from
our
faith-based
community
that
volunteer
events
would
be
valuable
to
the
credit
program,
and
so
we
incorporated
these
types
of
events
with
higher
credit
amounts.
We
are
also
applying
volunteer
credit
actions
on
the
entire
property,
not
just
the
individual,
Parts
Parcels
for
the
faith-based
institutions
and
other
non-residential
properties.
And,
lastly,
we
receive
feedback
that
credit
should
be
given
not
just
for
new
practices,
but
for
some
existing
practices
properties
have
already
undertaken.
We
included
some
grandfathering,
based
on
the
feedback
specifically
for
rainwater
collection,
rain,
Gardens
and
permeable
driveways,
and
parking
lots.
C
So
our
current
timeline
recommends
the
new
utility
rate
and
ordinance
become
effective
for
calendar
year
2024..
This
addresses
a
number
of
issues
and
concerns
from
a
project
perspective.
First,
we
heard
again
from
our
faith-based
community
that
they
would
like
more
time
to
financially
plan
second
going
into
calendar
year.
2024
or
going
live
in
2024
allows
enough
time
for
people
to
implement
the
practices
necessary
to
receive
credits.
C
An
earlier
go
live
date
would
not
have
given
ample
time
to
Property
Owners
to
implement
credit
actions
to
be
able
to
apply
for
credits.
This
would
have
potentially
been
an
affordability
issue,
particularly
for
our
faith-based
community,
who
is
very
interested
in
the
voluntary
credit
program
to
reduce
their
burden.
C
Third,
this
provides
a
reasonable
timeline
that
will
allow
thorough
testing
of
our
new
billing
processes.
We
are
well
underway
with
implementation,
and
the
complexities
of
the
project
have
become
much
more
clear.
It
includes
new
business
processes
and
Technology
development
and
collaborating
across
many
county
departments.
It
is
imperative
that
we
get
this
right
as
we
are
filling
every
parcel
in
the
county
and
we're
billing
them
on
their
real
estate
tax
bill.
And
lastly,
it
has
the
added
benefit
of
allowing
more
time
to
communicate
the
change
to
the
public.
C
The
slide
lays
out
our
recommended
timeline
in
detail.
We
will
advertise
and
adopt
the
calendar
year,
2023
Sanitary
District
tax
for
stormwater
as
part
of
the
normal
fy24
budget
process,
as
shown
on
number
nine
and
ten
on
this
chart.
At
the
same
time,
we
will
also
we
are
also
recommending
the
board
advertise
and
adopt
a
resolution
that
will
demonstrate
the
County's
board's
intent
to
adopt
that
stormwater
utility
to
go
into
a
fact
for
calendar
year
2024..
C
C
This
slide
lays
out
what
lays
ahead
in
order
to
adopt
the
new
utility
and
calendar
year
2024.
the
county.
If
the
County
Board
accepts
the
recommendations
in
this
presentation,
we
would
advertise
a
resolution
on
the
stormwater
utility,
this
February
or
March,
which
would
include
the
board's
intent
to
adopt
the
new
utility
rate,
ordinance,
recommended
rate
structure
and
fee
prior
to
the
start
of
calendar
year
2024..
The
resolution
would
also
include
adoption
of
the
credit
program,
practices
and
credit
amounts.
So
Property
Owners
can
begin
to
implement
credit
actions.
C
The
credit
program
manual
would
remain
in
administrative
document
that
would
be
updated
periodically.
The
resolutions
would
be
adopted
in
April,
and
this
is
all
shown
in
red
on
this
slide.
Adoption
of
this
resolution
would
enable
Property
Owners
to
begin
submitting
credit
applications
on
November
1st
2023
for
the
calendar
year
2024
billing
period
Then
would
we
we
would
be
coming
back
to
the
board
in
late
fall
to
advertise
the
utility
ordinance
new
rate
structure
and
new
rate
and
adopting
prior
to
the
beginning
of
the
calendar
year
2024.
C
the
first
first
bill
for
calendar
year
24
would
go
out
to
property
owners
in
May,
as
shown
in
Blue
on
this
line,
adopting
the
new
fee
and
rate
ordinance
prior
to
the
calendar
year.
2024,
beginning
and
off
budget
cycle
will
need
to
be
done
for
the
first
year
of
implementation.
Only
after
that
and
after
the
utility
has
been
established,
we'll
be
able
to
advertise
and
adopt
as
part
of
the
normal
budget
process,
and
with
that
that
wraps
up
the
presentation.
G
You
Mr
chair.
The
question
concerns
experiences
that
other
localities
have
had
in
working
with
their
non-profit
and
faith-based
organizations.
Have
you
done?
Have
we
done
a
scant
on
on
other
localities
to
get
a
sense?
I
was
I.
I
also
know
that
there's
some
Coalition
Interfaith
groups
that
have
worked
with
Fairfax
I
was
just
on
the
phone
with
one
of
them
today
and
just
didn't
know
if
you
guys
had
seen
how
they've
gotten
to
compliance
and
how
they've
been
able
to
work
together
in
other
localities.
C
Certainly,
we've
been
in
a
lot
of
contact
with
our
surrounding
jurisdictions,
especially
as
part
of
the
feasibility
stage,
and
that
was
why,
based
on
that
feedback
and
some
of
pitfalls
that
maybe
some
other
jurisdictions
ran
into
during
implementation,
which
is
why
a
large
part
of
our
engagement
really
focused
on
Outreach
to
our
faith-based
organizations
and
we'll
continue
to
do
that.
Outreach.
C
You
know,
we've
I
think
we
have
had
robust
Outreach
to
this
point,
but
I
think
it's
a
big
change,
and
so
we
need
to
continue
to
reach
out
and
communicate
and
we
were
very
open
to
hearing
from
feedback
from
them,
which
is
why
I
think
our
initials
some
of
our
original
recommendations.
With
our
credit
program,
you
know
from
the
feedback
we
heard
from
that
Community
informed
some
changes
we
made,
including
adding
more
volunteer
based
options.
You
know
at
higher
ounce.
C
You
know
you
heard
the
Deferred
timeline
was
a
big
one
and
just
how
important
the
credit
program
would
be
to
them,
which
ultimately
also
we
realized.
We
needed
sort
of
more
time
for
people
to
implement
the
practices.
So
they
could
get
that
those
credits.
G
I
did
just
one
follow-up:
I
want
to
make
sure
I
got
this
clear,
there's
not
a
35
cap
overall
by
law.
It's
a
effectively
if
you
continue
to
work
that
cap
on
the
credit
up
and
it
means
means
that
the
efficacy,
the
whole
system
doesn't
work
as
well.
So
it's
not
a
legal
reason.
It's
a
solid!
You
know
everybody
else
pays.
C
E
You
Mr
chair
so
again
about
the
faith-based
organizations.
There
have
been
more
vocal
about
this
and
more
concern
because
they
are
the
only
ones
that
who
don't
pay
anything
under
the
current
system.
So
for
them
is
the
adaptation
a
big
deal,
and
there
are
some
I
mean
the
the
issue
with
Outreach
there
is.
There
are
some
who
definitely
can
afford
that.
It's
a
matter
of
you
know
providing
for
this
and
preparing
for
that,
but
there
are
also
some
who
don't
and
you
know
for
them.
The
adaptation
will
be
even
more
difficult.
E
So
do
we
track
that?
Do
we
have
an
idea
of
you
know
how
many
out
of
this
class,
which
is
not
a
homogeneous
class?
How
many
of
these
are
you
know
kind
of
just
the
mechanics
of
transition
and
others
who
really
will
face
a
a
financial
burden
here
to
understand
to
have
an
initial
understanding
of
where
we
are.
C
I
would
say
we
don't
have
access
to
the
specific
financial
data
for
all
our
faith-based
organizations,
but
the
average
impact
per
parcel
is
about
eighteen
hundred
dollars
per
unit.
I
think
a
lot
of
per
Parcels
or
excuse
me
not
per
unit,
but
you
know
certainly
for
some
of
our
very
large
faith-based
organizations.
It
is
a
significant
burden
shift
for
them,
an
increase
in
burden
when
you
think
of
you
know
Bishop
O'connell
and
some
of
these
large
campuses.
C
But
there
are,
you
know,
I,
think
that
average
faith-based
organization
is
a
lot
smaller
footprint
and
so
we're
not
talking
to
scale
like
the
of
the
example
we
showed
today.
But
that
is
a
certainly
a
concern.
C
I
think
we
have
limited
tools
in
the
stormwater
toolbox
to
help
with,
let's
say
a
credit
program
specifically
targeted
or
a
grant
program
funded
out
of
stormwater
to
Target
those
organizations.
So,
in
terms
of
you
know,
looking
at
anything
else,
we
wanted
to
put
in
our
toolbox
for
helping
organizations
that
may
have
an
issue
with
being
able
to
afford
it.
You
know
could
potentially
come
through
a
grant
through
the
general
fund
or
something
like
that.
At
this
point
we
haven't
recommended
that,
but
that's
something
that
could
be
I.
E
I
I
believe
that
I've
heard
of
many
from
many
faith-based
constituents
that
it's
just
a
matter
of
adaptation.
They
will
find
a
way
they
just
need
the
time
we
are
already
giving
some
time.
That's
that's!
That's
fine!
It's
just
a
matter
of
working
well
together,
but
others
who
are
really.
You
know
flagging
that
and
I
wanted
to
know.
You
know
what
what
is
there.
C
Certainly,
try
to
see
if
we
can
get
more
feedback
and
data
I
think
we'd
have
to
get
that
feedback
from
the
faith-based
community.
I
think
we
definitely
heard
some
of
the
things
we
heard
in
engagement
echoed
some
of
the
things
you
said
more
time
would
be
helpful.
Others
were
concerned
that
maybe
it
would
impact
the
services
they're
providing
the
community,
so
it
costs
the
money
to
provide
services
that
they're
providing
to
those
in
our
community,
and
maybe
that
would
have
to
be
offset
with
now
this
fee
that
they
have
to
pay
to
the
county.
C
I
think
it's
a
big
change,
so
obviously
I
think
it
creates
a
little.
It
does
create
stress
for
these
organizations
to
Think
Through
sort
of
a
new
Financial
reality
that
they're
they're
going
to
have
to
plan
for
and
I
think.
Yes,
every
every
faith-based
organization
probably
has
a
different
situation
they're
dealing
with,
but
we
can
continue
to
sort
of
reach
out
and
see
if
we
can
get
more
information
from
those
churches
that
maybe
feeling
like
they
don't
have.
The
tools
to
you
know
plan
for
this.
F
Thank
you,
I,
don't
have
any
more
questions,
I,
don't
think
I
just
want
to
say:
I'm
pressed
I
am
at
this
approach.
I
mean
it's
been
I,
think
really
thoughtful,
very
deliberate
and
very
customer-centric.
So
I
was
really
pleased
to
hear
that
we've
got
this
Simplicity
of
credit
verification
that
that
does
that
one
and
saying
that
a
lot
of
other
places,
don't
they
make
them,
do
it
twice,
which
is
just
drives
people
crazy.
F
Thank
you
for
that
really
appreciate
it,
and
all
of
the
work
I
mean
we're
all
aware
that
our
you
know,
faith-based
organizations
may
have
trouble
with
this,
and
just
it
feels
like
a
lot
of
effort
has
been
taken
and
will
continue
to
be
taken
to
help
them
get
through
this
I.
Think.
F
If
you
look
around,
it's
really
clear
why
this
it
really
makes
sense,
I
think
this
new
new
approach
that
we're
taking
and
then
using
the
gis
and
having
it
going
across
the
you
know,
we've
got
got
it
got
a
nice
tool
here
that
could
be
used
by
a
lot
of
different,
so
the
silos
are
getting
broken
down.
So
I'm
just
impressed
with
the
you
know.
Customer
centered
thoughtful
approach
and
really
appreciate
it.
Thank
you.
B
Mr,
chair
I,
wanted
to
give
Tyler
and
Krista
a
chance
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
something
that
has
driven
me
to
distraction
for
years,
driving
down
Washington
Boulevard
and
seeing
the
Pentagon
parking
lots.
So
we
talk
a
little
bit
about
how
we'll
be
capturing
that.
C
So
under
the
utility
the
federal
government
will
be
required
to
pay,
whereas
now
that's
not
some
properties
will
not
so
actually,
unfortunately,
the.
C
C
Properties
that
have
their
own
ms4
permit
by
state
code
are
exempt,
so
they
will
not
pay,
but
certainly
other
Federal
Government
properties
in
the
county
will,
and
so
that
is
a
change
for
those
organization.
You
know
for
those
entities,
so
it's.
B
A
good
thing
actually
I
had
forgotten.
The
Pentagon
does
have
its
own
ms4
permit
and
that's
a
good
thing,
and
we
will
of
course
be
following
to
see
how
they
comply
with
their
own
ms4.
Permit.
A
A
G
C
I
A
A
C
Part
of
the
reason
I
think
it
was
beneficial
to
bill
on
the
real
estate
tax
bill.
A
Yeah
I
mean
just
you
know,
for
our
broader
Community.
You
know
again,
the
the
treasurer
has
programs
that
allow
people
to
spread
that
payment
out
over
time.
I
can't
remember,
however,
many
months,
but
the
she
continues
to
drive
the
costs
of
doing
that,
payover
time
even
lower.
It
seems
each
and
every
year,
and
so,
if
that's
available
for
large
institutions,
they
should
Avail
themselves
of
it
and
there
are
a
number
of
other
things.
So
that's
that's
good
news.
G
G
14
has
that
pie
chart
with
a
shift
from
single
family
to
to
essentially
single
family,
detached
to
in
terms
of
Burden,
taking
a
little
more
of
the
burden,
because
that's
where
the
impervious
surface
is
to
and
multi-family
decreasing
somewhat
you
mentioned
earlier,
that's
68
percent
of
households
will
see
a
night
about
a
95
dollar
increase
and
it
we
have
to
address
storm
water
and
flood
resiliency.
It
was
a
huge
issue.
G
We
haven't
had
something
like
July,
8th
2019
in
a
long
time,
but
every
time
it
rains
we
all
think
of
it,
and
so
we
have
to
address
that
infrastructure,
but
I
wonder
net.
If
there's
an
increase,
I
want
to
be
able
to
Simply
explain
when
not
now,
when
people
you
know,
are
not
paying
focused
attention
to
this,
even
though
we
are
doing
the
work,
but
also
going
forward
and
six
months
in
the
fall,
and
as
we
get
closer
to
the
time
that
people
will
feel
these
bills.
G
I
want
to
be
able
to
say
is
this
a
net
increase
in
the
total
amount,
we're
investing
and,
and
that's
because
of
the
storm
water
facilities
which
are
funded
partly
By
Us
by
this
and
partly
by
the
bond,
is
it
a
net
increase?
Do
I
have
that
piece
of
it
correct
and
is
there
a
way
we
might
be
able
to
sort
of
show
simply
what
we're
doing
to
to
you
know
why
we're
doing,
in
addition
to
a
more
fair
way
of
Distributing
the
cost
so.
C
D
C
Think
you
know
we
certainly
I
think
can
demonstrate
that
this.
The
slide
we
were
showing
was
trying
to
show
at
the
lower
end
of
our
feast
structure
that
the
230
estimated
rate
that
assumes
like
for
like
costs
right
now
so
Apples
to
Apples,
so
that
whole
96
dollar
shift
to
single
family
detached
would
be
due
to
the
burden
shift
so
next
year,
when
we
come
forward
with
our
new
rate,
anything
above
230
dollars.
C
B
B
And
the
reason
to
do
that
in
the
beside
the
burden,
sharing
was
the
bond
issues
that
we
put
out
and
to
meet
The
Debt
Service
obligations
for
that.
So,
while
there
is
shifting
from
one
source
to
the
other,
there
is
just
a
huge
increase
in
the
level
of
effort.
That's
occurred
in
the
last
two
years
and
where
that's
going
to
also
be
you
know,
picked
up
by
the
right
payers.
G
So
the
base
of
what
we're
providing
is
a
little
bit
changing
over
time
and
I'll
submit
that
I
might
not
be
the
only
person
who
doesn't
quite
get
that
immediately.
So
you
know
it
may
might
be
worth
teasing
that
out
some
way
we've
had
these
Bond
issues
and
therefore
there's
this
slight
increase
in
our
base
facilities,
but
thanks
Mr,
chair
and
thanks
staff
for
leadership.
G
E
Last
question
so:
transparency,
the
the
erus
that
correspond
to
a
property
that
are
you
know
charged,
will
be
charged
in
fiscal
year
2024.
They
will
show
up
in
the
in
the
public
listing
of
their
property
data
assessments
Etc.
This
will
be
distinctly
visible
right,
correct.
C
You
know
more
kept
more
up
to
date
more
frequently
and
then
also
through
property
search
lookup
when
we've
been
coordinating
with
treasures
and
DTS
Andrea
very
recently
had
a
number
of
meetings
on
how
we're
going
to
change
that
website,
so
that
the
stormwater
information
will
be
very
clear,
and
it
will
also
be
very
clear
that
it's
not
part
of
your
real
estate
tax,
that
it
is
a
separate
fee.
G
Steve
Franti
I'm
glad
you
asked.
We
received
a
lot
of
information
but
didn't
have
that
clear
relief.
So
all
three
pieces
I've
not
had
conversations
with
at
least
I'm
persuaded
that
shifting
so
that
we
shouldn't
just
be
assessing
property
values
and
we
should
be
assessing
and
focusing
on
impervious
cover.
So
that's
on
the
rate
structure.
The
credit
program
I
asked
that
earlier
question
about
the
35
percent,
just
to
make
sure
I
was
aligned
and
then
the
community
engagement
I
do
agree
that
we
want
to
be
thorough
in
the
process.
G
So
you
have
a
head
knot
on
all
three
for
me.
D
Certainly
I
to
begin
at
the
end,
I
think
the
recommended
timeline
is
thoughtful
and
responsive
to
the
feedback
that
we've
gotten
and
I
think
that
I
am
not
overly
optimistic
that
we
can
obviate
the
concern
that
will
come
eventually
when
a
bill
lands
and
focuses
doorstep
for
the
first
time,
but
I
think
it
does
give
time
for
that.
Continued
engagement,
I
am
pleased
with
the
the
shifting
of
the
rate
structure.
D
I
think
this
is
the
the
right
way
to
do
this
and
I
hope
that
it
will
encourage
people
to
to
change
their
the
distribution
of
their
property
and
how
it's
contributing
to
a
royal
storm
water
and
water
quality
issues,
and
that
does
lead
me
to
to
part
two
I
think
the
credit
program
is
designed
is
very
thoughtful.
D
D
It
would
have
to
be
reducing
an
awful
lot
of
impervious
surface
to
actually
have
to
be
able
to
actually
constrain
the
size
of
our
program,
but
we
have
a
lot
of
impervious
surface
and
a
lot
of
good
strategies
to
address
it
and
I
would,
for
one
be
so
much
more
encouraged
to
see.
D
You
know
major
transitions
of
large
surface
parking,
lots
into
natural
spaces
and
and
individual
homeowners
to
the
extent
reasonable,
making
decisions
to
to
introduce
pervious
surfaces
where,
where
formerly
there
was
you
know,
a
large
amount
of
runoff
I
would
find
that
to
be
such
a
better
outcome
than
seeing
you
know
not
not
to
pick
on
them,
but
just
seeing
more
invasive
removals
right,
like
those
are
worth
doing.
D
They're
they're
great
for
our
community
I
I
remain
a
little
unpersuaded
that
that
is
going
to
make
the
large-scale
difference
in
the
resiliency
and
the
and
the
and
the
flood
resistance
of
this
community
that
actually
conversion
of
impervious
surface
to
perfect
surface
as
the
largest
scale
possible.
D
So,
as
is
our
want,
you
know
we
we
tell
you
everything's
great,
do
more,
and
staff
is
of
course,
already
stretched
very
thin,
but
I
would
I
would
be
encouraged
if
we
could,
maybe
could
just
continue
to
give
more
thought,
as
we
have
done
for
the
as
you
all
have
done
for
the
credit
program
to
that
that
question
of
conversion
as
well,
but
certainly
the
credit
program
as
as
designed,
has
my
support.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
and
I'll
just
say
for
me
very,
very
happy
to
proceed
as
you
have
proposed
on
all
three
areas.
A
You
know
I
will
say:
I
I,
don't
love
the
credit
program,
not
because
of
anything
you've
done
just
the
fact
that
we
have
to
have
one
in
the
first
place
and
and
the
reason
I
say
that
I'm
very
much
convinced
that,
as
you
have
taken
careful
pains
to
acknowledge
this
is
not
really
an
incentive
program
in
the
sense
of
a
financial
incentive.
It
doesn't
pencil
out
for
anybody
to
do
any
of
this
stuff,
and
so
therefore
we
have
credits
that
effectively
amount
to.
What
did
you
describe?
A
Thank
you
for
doing
well,
but
that
add
to
the
overall
program
costs
that
we
have
to
then
share
with
everyone.
So
it's
like
what
the
heck
are
we
doing
here.
It
doesn't
really
make
sense,
but
that's
not
your
fault,
that's
something
to
to
just
look
at
in
the
future
and
to
Ms
Crystal's
point
the
things
that
would
really
move
the
dial
and
make
a
difference.
A
A
I
do
believe
that
for
the
vast
majority
of
them,
the
most
important
thing
for
them
to
be
able
to
meet
this
new
obligation
is
just
the
time
to
to
raise
the
money
to
to
do
it
so
I
think
we're
we're
meeting
that
and
we'll
work
with
the
rest,
who
have
particular
circumstances
not
already
accounted
for
Mr
Karen
Thomas
for
the
last
word.
E
I
will
add
my
thank
you
first,
similar
to
my
colleagues.
I
have
to
say
the
to
your
first
question
about
the
rate
structure:
I'm
I'm,
fine,
with
with
the
word
this
is
the
with
with
the
with
work
he
already
presented.
E
I
have
to
think
about.
You
know
how
do
we,
you
know
all
credit
programs
and
everything
we
do
if
we
want
to
induce
good
good
behavior,
it
has
to
translate
into
something
that
helps
you
know,
reduce
and
and
make
make
the
the
storm
water
more
manageable.
Therefore,
so
less
expensive
Etc.
So
for
now
we
are
providing
credits
on
a
good
faith
basis
that
are
somehow
reducing,
but
we
cannot
quantify
that.
E
People
who
contribute
a
lot
and
or
have
a
lot
of
of
an
ability
to
to
invest,
they
would
count
somewhere
else,
and
some
of
these
programs
have
been
penalizing
those
who
haven't.
So,
for
example,
there
is
a
two
or
four
here
that
goes.
You
know,
linear
per
year,
U
I
can
imagine
in
the
future
that
you
say
well
Linear
by
aru,
but
after
a
certain,
you
know,
above
a
certain
surface
about
a
certain
number
of
your
use.
Your
burden
will
be
90
percent
higher
make
something
to
make
to
bring
it
back.
E
Show
me
the
equivalent
of
reducing
that,
and
for
me
this
is
a
this
is
the
the
line
of
how
I
feel
how
I
think
about
that.
If
somebody
has
an
enormous
parking
lot-
and
you
know
they
may
have
the
capacity
you
know
a
mall,
for
example
the
capacity
of
mitigating
that
for
now
linearly,
but
we
actually
as
a
community,
we
just
literally
don't
want
them
to
have
this.
E
We
want
them
to
reverse
to
something
that's
way
more,
sustainable
and
manageable,
and
and
contributes
less
to
the
pro
to
the
burden
of
the
program
in
total
to
the
cost
of
the
Pronto.
So
we
would
have
to
build
at
some
point
in
in
an
incentive
from
this
point
of
view
of
you
know,
penalizing
their
their
use.
The
credit
program
I
already
commented
on
that
I'm
very
interested
in
see
what
we
can
do
to
find
out
who
is
most
burdened
here
and
who
will
really
have
a
transition
issue.
For
me,
it's
just
a
matter
of
math.
E
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Do
we
have
all
we
need
Mr
Schwartz.
Thank
you.
Okay,
thank
you.
Consider
this
work
session
concluded.
Thank
you
for
the
very
hard
work
this
has
been.
We
know
in
an
enormous
undertaking
over
the
course
of
the
year.
So,
thanks
to
all
of
you,
I
know
you
had
a
great
consultant
team
behind
you
and
I
think
we
all
on
the
board
appreciate
being
kept
in
the
loop,
as
you
encountered.
A
Major
touch
points
that
you
wanted
to
get
this
sort
of
okay
to
proceed
on
so
I
think
this
has
really
worked
well
and
let's
move
it
toward
the
finish
line.
Thank
you,
okay.
So
with
that
colleague,
I
will
move
that
we
finish
this
work
session
and
then
move
to
convene
a
close
meeting
is
authorized
by
Virginia
code
sections,
2.2
3711
a19
for
a
discussion
with
staff
of
plans
to
protect
Public
Safety,
as
it
relates
to
terrorist
activity
and
actions
taken
to
respond
to
such
matters
and
to
also
have
a
briefing
by
staff.