Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Nature topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parks and Natural Resources chairs urge restoring invasive-removal funding and protecting tree canopy
Summary
Parks and Forestry chairs told the County Board that invasive-plant removal funding has fallen from a high of $300,000 to $100,000 and urged consistent baseline funding and restoration of key positions—warning that one-time funding prevents long-term planning.
Carolyn Haines, chair of the Forestry and Natural Resources Commission, and Jill Barker, chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission, urged the County Board to prioritize steady funding for invasive plant removal and urban forestry staff as part of the FY27 deliberations.
Haines said the proposed budget leaves four Parks and Natural Resources positions vacant in FY27 and flagged particular concern about the urban forester post. She argued that invasive species management needs baseline operating funds to enable multi-year planning.
Barker cited a fall in operating funding for invasive plant removal from a high of $300,000 in FY25 to $100,000 last year and proposed reinstating $300,000 in the FY27 operating budget while redirecting $1.5 million in capital natural resiliency funds toward invasive removal and native planting projects. "We are asking for a very small percentage, uh less than 1% of the value that these lands provide that be to be invested in the preservation for future generations," Barker said, urging ongoing investment to protect tree canopy and infrastructure benefits.
Both chairs supported continued funding for deer management, the Nature Center and the Northern Virginia Conservation Trust partnership. Board members and commissioners discussed the state’s new authority allowing volunteers to work on some public lands, the need for staffing to coordinate volunteer efforts, and that invasive removal is often a multi-year, follow-up intensive program rather than a one-off expense.
Why it matters: Commissioners argued that inconsistent, one-time funding undermines long-term ecosystem management, increases future costs, and risks degraded tree canopy and natural infrastructure that provide stormwater, health and climate benefits.
Next steps: Commissioners asked staff and legal teams to examine operating and CIP options and consider how best to embed invasive-species management in baseline budgets.
