Sharon Schoeller Responds To Latest Deathstar Attack On City Schools

The Deathstar charter change candidates Nader Baroukh, Ed Hillegass, and Margaret Housen did another lit drop attack on the quality of of our public schools over the weekend. Frequent readers know their "no more children" message has always been a particular pet peeve of mine. I think it's just an awful message. So, apparently, does super-school advocate Sharon Scholler. Sharon wrote a scathing reply to the hit piece. Reproduced below (sorry for the length but it's all good):

May 3, 2008 Dear Friends and Neighbors, I just received a flyer, entitled “The Referendum…A Needed Tool for Change” with reasons to vote “Yes” on the referendum, which uses the future of the schools as a reason to do so. I no longer have children in the school system, so lost development in the City will not directly affect my children. I am writing this letter on behalf of all of you who still have children in the school system. I want your children to have the quality of education that mine have had and, to ensure this, I believe that you should vote “No” on the referendum question. Even if you do not have children in the schools, our home values are bolstered by our high quality schools. Here are some facts that counter only some of the misinformation in the flyer: While surrounding jurisdictions are making major cuts to their school systems or raising taxes because of falling residential real estate values, our City has just decreased your taxes, while fully funding the School Board’s request. The Council could do this because tax revenue from the new mixed-developments replaced income lost from the fall in residential values. Net revenues from approved mixed-use developments will add close to $5.5 million a year to the City’s coffers by 2013. These are revenues after the projected costs of additional services and students are deducted. When our City was planning the new middle school and the addition to Mt. Daniel, it was clear, even at that point, that the City would need to fund additional renovations/construction in the future. A “place holder” has been in the Capital Improvements budget for years and a schools’ facilities study is underway to determine what that construction should be. It has nothing to do with new students from mixed-use development. In fact, as Councilman Snyder said at the City Council meeting to approve the budget, mixed-use developers contribute to construction costs generated by new students projected for their buildings. There are one-third fewer children residing at the Byron, the Read Building and the Broadway than projected. A retired Arlington County planning expert at an Economic Development Forum on the possible impacts of the referendum change also noted that the mixed-use developments in Arlington did not bring in huge numbers of school children. The current School Board members all have stated in a letter to The Falls Church News Press (FCNP) in February that the school system can handle the growth in students from these developments. I believe the School Board members on this; they have been studying the issue for years. I will add a few words about development. For decades our City tried to attract commercial development. We could not. Experts at an April 23rd Economic Development Authority (EDA) Forum on the possible impacts of the charter change stated that Falls Church cannot compete with Arlington or Tysons Corner for large commercial development. We also do not have the critical mass of residents at the current time to attract regional retail. Based on our history and the current market, we will not attract this type of development. Council candidates who promise this without understanding the market are making false promises without the knowledge to back them up. Experts at the EDA Forum recommended that we do a visioning exercise and develop plans for particular parts and corridors of the City. All agreed that putting a mandate in the Charter is an extreme move that will stifle development. Also, please read the May 1st FCNP for coverage on this issue. When so many former mayors, the EDA chair and citizens who have been involved in the City for a long time and have worked hard to get it where it is now are against the referendum, please ask yourself why. The articles and many letters on this subject explain why. I think it is telling that no other jurisdiction has such a mandate in its charter and the proponents of the charter change have not given any examples of where else this has been done and how it has worked. I believe that making a radical change like this to our charter is dangerous. There are zoning codes and visioning exercises that can do this far better without trapping us into a certain formula for each development. The much-touted Streetworks project was 60% residential and could not be built under this formula. We could not get development like Shirlington (63% residential). The Read Building, cited as an example of what we want in the City by referendum proponents, is 60% residential. The strict formula in the referendum could force us to say “No” to developments that our citizens want. No one, including current City Council members, envisions a Falls Church City with one mixed-use development after another along Broad or Washington Streets. We will still have our small businesses and restaurants, our Cherry Hill Park and Farm House, the Memorial Day Parade and all the “village” aspects we love about our City. Mixed-use development adds to that a place where our “empty nesters” can sell their houses and stay in the City, where young couples and singles can live close to amenities and where there can be a critical mass of shops and restaurants. It has replaced blighted lots with new, high quality buildings and retail. Will it take some time to complete filling the retail spaces? Yes, but we have a good start and residents in the area and from around town enjoy the new amenities the mixed-use in the center of town has brought. For all of these reasons, I ask you to consider voting “No” to the charter change referendum and to vote for three Council candidates, Mayor Robin Gardner, Vice-Mayor Lindy Hockenberry and Lawrence Webb, who oppose it. Sincerely, Sharon Schoeller (Former Chair, Special Education Advisory Committee, President, Elementary/Middle School PTAs and HS PTSA, PTA/PTSA Budget Watcher, Co-Chair, All Night Grad Celebration)

Comments

[Bob]

BRAVO SHARON!!!!! The other element that is important to note is that mixed-use based development takes time to fully realize potential. Shirlington took 20 years to come into its own; a slow start has evolved beautifully and uniquely. The "YES" crowd wants it both ways---immediate results regardless of the current market for mixed use AND the ability to let so-called "commercially zoned" areas sit dormant, antiquated, under-performing decade upon decade with no hope of becoming anything more than a car traffic-generating office building.