Acting City Manager Melanie Zipp and CFO JC Martinez presented the draft FY 2027–2031 Capital Improvement Program to the Fairfax City Planning Commission on Nov. 10, laying out a five‑year request of $636,700,000 with roughly $449,000,000 expected from the general fund.

Zipp said finance tightened the CIP to include only true capital projects and moved maintenance and software items back to the general fund. She also noted that some projects still rely on American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds and that ARPA spending must be completed by Dec. 31, 2027; “we are on track to meet that deadline,” Zipp said.

The increase over the previous CIP is largely driven by two school-bond–related projects — elementary school renovations and a new high‑school roof — and by a substantially higher estimate for the long‑planned property-yard project. Zipp told commissioners earlier estimates of about $65 million were refined and “the price tag has more than doubled to a $155,000,000.” CFO JC Martinez said much of the property-yard construction and associated costs are scheduled in FY2030–FY2031, which concentrates large expenditures in the out years.

Martinez described the FY27 general‑fund portion of the draft as “as lean as can be,” with only seven new projects identified for FY27 and many larger items phased into later years. He noted a potential statewide policy change under discussion that could allow an additional 1 percentage point sales tax dedicated to school capital if the General Assembly and local referenda approve it; that revenue could substantially offset school costs if enacted and adopted locally.

The presentation covered other capital priorities and constraints: vehicle and equipment replacement will remain in the CIP, with fleet manager Lee Hall reevaluating replacements; bus lead times are about 18 months and fire‑apparatus lead times 3–5 years; Q buses are treated as obsolete by the FTA after 12 years and DRPT rules prevent preordering, requiring the city to perform extended maintenance while waiting for deliveries.

Commissioners asked about cost reclamation, property transfers and long‑range alternatives for the property yard and Green Acres. Zipp said some options depend on council direction and legal restrictions (for example, deeded parkland), and staff will consult the city attorney on constraints and possibilities. Commissioners also urged broader 10– to 15‑year planning discussions to place CIP choices in a longer strategic context.

Staff said the draft CIP would be posted that night (or the following morning) for commissioner review and that the commission is scheduled to approve recommendations on Jan. 26 and meet jointly with council on Feb. 3. Martinez said staffing and project phasing choices were made to reduce FY27 general‑fund pressure while preserving options in out years.

What’s next: the commission will receive the full draft online, discuss it again at its Nov. 24 meeting and identify priorities to inform the Jan. 26 recommendation to City Council. Final city budget adoption, including the CIP, is planned for May 5; projects projected to start in FY27 may begin as of Jan. 1, 2026.