Falls Church Council directs staff to prepare budget amendment to spend prior-year surplus on schools, parks, sidewalks and bike plans

City staff on Oct. 21 asked the Falls Church City Council for direction on a proposed budget amendment that would appropriate prior‑year revenue surplus and reallocate remaining ARPA and local funds to a set of capital and one‑time priorities, including a revenue share with the Falls Church City Schools and local matches for electric school buses.

Staff summary and next step

Staff told the council the amendment is intended to move available year‑end funds into projects that had been identified during the Budget and Finance Committee review. Staff said the city could maintain its unassigned fund balance policy and still direct one package of allocations; the recommendation shared two scenarios for capital reserves and long‑range projections showing drawdowns over the next six years. Staff asked the council for consensus direction so staff could prepare a first‑reading ordinance for the next regular meeting.

Why it matters: money, priorities and reserve policy

The amendment links near‑term project funding to a choice the council must make about capital reserves. Staff presented two allocation scenarios; under the more aggressive spending path capital reserves fall in later years toward or below the policy target. Several councilmembers urged caution about any practice that would use reserves to smooth debt service without broader council agreement, and asked staff for multiyear scenarios that exclude using reserves for debt service so the council can assess risks before final action.

What the amendment would fund

• School revenue sharing and buses: Staff proposed continuing the five‑year revenue‑sharing formula with the school division and allocating $449,000 to that purpose. Council discussed a school request to purchase two electric school buses; staff said the pair cost roughly $850,000 total, with a $400,000 grant available and a requested local match of $400,000 (the schools would contribute about $50,000). Council asked staff to confirm that any federal or commercial vehicle tax credit (about $40,000 per bus, per staff) would be returned to the city if the city funds the purchase, and to clarify timing and documentation with school administration.

• Fellows Park: Staff recommended $1.75 million to move Fellows Park from conceptual planning to formal design, bidding and construction steps; the sidewalk portion alone is substantial (staff cited roughly $650,000). Council members debated phasing—doing design first and returning for construction appropriations—or appropriating a capped amount now and instructing staff to manage scope to that figure. Several members framed the sidewalks as also providing broader neighborhood and school‑route safety benefits.

• Bike Master Plan design work: The amendment includes $300,000 for design work on two routes from the adopted bike master plan (the route to the secondary campus and West Street). Staff noted limited project‑management capacity now and said design contracts would be pursued in 2025 as staffing and contracts allow.

• Parklets and sidewalks: The council discussed the final parklet (Tinner Hill Plaza) built in the alley adjacent to Fox’s Music and nearby businesses. Staff said prior parklets (South Maple, Triangle Park) are complete or near completion and that about $452,000 remains toward the last parklet from earlier appropriations. Staff reported that a full‑scope build could exceed that amount (design and survey estimates of about $770,000 and worst‑case construction estimates around $670,000 were discussed) and described options: reduce scope, shift other sidewalk ARPA funds, or delay. Several councilmembers favored scaling back the Tinner Hill design to reduce near‑term costs; others urged honoring prior community engagement and keeping the project broadly consistent with earlier plans.

• Other CIP items and carryforwards: Staff listed additional one‑time funding needs including $200,000 for community‑center HVAC work (to be funded by ARPA/local swaps), $330,000 for the Lincoln Avenue project, $189,000 for the Annandale/South Mabel roundabout, and carryforwards to support 70th‑anniversary programming (about $72,000 remaining) and downtown business improvements ($25,000 hotel‑tax funding; $23,000 signal‑box art wraps).

Council direction and followups

After extended discussion about tradeoffs and reserve policy, council members reached a working consensus: leave the total parklets appropriation at the previously allocated total ($708,000 across the three parklets, with the remaining balance applied to the last parklet), direct staff to pursue $300,000 for bike‑plan design work (covering both routes), and ask housing staff to return a needs‑based recommendation for any affordable‑housing allocation before final appropriation. Council also directed staff to memorialize in the amendment (and in communications with the schools) the expectation that any bus tax credit or rebate would be returned to the city if the city is the funding source. Staff said they will prepare a first‑reading budget amendment for the next council meeting and circulate a summary memo of tonight’s consensus points.

Quotes from the meeting

• On school buses, staff said: “The two buses cost 850,000… the grant is 400, and we’re putting a match of 400, and they’re gonna use some local funds that they have of 50,000 to make it full.” (Ms. Bawa, staff)

• On the parklet budget challenge, the project lead noted: “If you include the $770,000 for design and survey work…the remaining construction estimate, worst‑case scenario, I think we've been tracking is around $670,000.” (Mr. Young, city staff)

• Several council members urged caution on long‑range reserves: “The overriding concern I have is that we fail fiscally as an enterprise… I want to pause here for a minute and do some worst‑case analysis before we spend all that $3.5 million.” (Councilmember Dave)

What’s next

Staff will circulate a memo memorializing tonight’s guidance, confirm details with school administration about rebate expectations, refine affordable‑housing recommendations with housing staff, and return next week with a proposed first‑reading budget amendment for council consideration. No final appropriation was adopted tonight; council gave direction only.