Paul S. Hughes, President

FAIRFAX COALITION FOR SMARTER GROWTH

Before
Merrifield Revitalization Task Force

Falls Church High School

The Fairfax Coalition believes, however, that the Task Force plan presented this evening, as well as the process that produced it, is deficient in at least three major respects: a lack of genuine citizen involvement; an inattention to serious citizen suggestions, particularly the light rail proposal offered by the Fairfax Coalition; and the "fast track" schedule for obtaining approval of the proposed changes. These deficiencies stand in contrast to the platform the Task Force has offered to ad hoc development proposals, such as the proposed 8,000-seat minor league baseball stadium (which may or may not be appropriate to consider once there is a community consensus for what the citizens and local businesses want the Merrifield area to look like 20-30 years from now).

Lack of Genuine Citizen Involvement

We all understand that the Merrifield Business Area is in need of revitalization and Smart Growth planning that can turn the existing area into a viable town center while achieving major reduction in traffic congestion. We also believe, however, that insufficient involvement of affected citizens and local businesses has occurred in the Task Force’s deliberations to enable this plan to claim the support of the community. We do believe, though, that this draft report can be a "starting point" upon which an expanded Task Force can take its recommendations to the many residential neighborhoods and businesses in the Greater Merrifield Area in order to listen to their reactions, suggestions, and follow-up ideas in a process that could take up to a year to fully accomplish.

While the Merrifield Task Force apparently met some 50 times over the past two years, these meetings were neither well publicized to citizens nor was citizen participation beyond simple "observer" status permitted even for those who attended. Moreover, this single evening meeting tonight during the holiday season is clearly insufficient for busy citizens (many of whom are hearing the details of this plan for the first time tonight) to absorb the complexities of the Task Force’s findings and recommendations and to offer thoughtful suggestions. Such serious public dialogue can only occur during a series of meetings scattered over a number of months that allow interested citizens to digest the report, reflect upon its implications, consult with their neighbors about its effects, and transmit their reactions and recommendations to their supervisor and the Task Force.

Lack of Attention to Light Rail and other Forms of Public Transit

The Fairfax Coalition also is concerned about the woeful lack of emphasis in the draft plan on encouraging public transit, reducing (as opposed to merely accommodating) the number of vehicles projected to be traversing the Merrifield area in the future, and reducing vehicle-miles-traveled as required in the County Comprehensive Plan. In this regard, the Coalition is disappointed in the apparent unwillingness of the Task Force to consider such thoughtful citizen ideas as the Fairfax Coalition’s "White Paper for Light Rail along Gallows Road" presented to the Task Force in May 2000 and the five alternatives for light rail, Metro rail, and monorail currently being evaluated by Del. David Albo’s Task Force on Rail in the Beltway Corridor.

No Necessity for "Fast Track" Plan Approval

Information circulated by Supervisor Connolly’s office prior to tonight’s meeting indicated that following this single public meeting, the Task Force would meet to discuss issues identified during the meeting, prepare a revised draft plan as necessary, and present the revised plan to the Planning Commission for hearing in January or February, with a final public hearing by the Board of Supervisors in March. Are citizens to understand that a plan that took a couple of dozen Task Force members 2 ½ years to understand and formulate can be absorbed and intelligently discussed by laymen and professional planners in one 3-hour meeting, followed by two legal public hearings. Is this the way we really want to plan our communities? Don’t those responsible for this draft plan understand their obligation to now take the results of their efforts out into the community and engage citizens in a dialogue about their implications until a community consensus emerges? Thus far, only the Task Force understands the scope and complexity of the proposal. They and our elected leaders owe the citizens a better process of decsionmaking.

The Fairfax Coalition maintains that it is adherence to this traditional public participation process that produces recommendations that lack community consensus and "buy in". Such a traditional public participation approach generally considers direct input from citizens in the final stages of the decisionmaking process during which elected officials and their appointees undertake to "sell" their program to the citizens – frequently accompanied by brief comment periods and a fast-track approval process, as appears to be the case in this instance.

Fairfax Coalition Proposal

The Fairfax Coalition does believe that this situation can be remedied. Instead of a single public meeting on December 12^th (in the middle of the holiday season), a County Planning Commission hearing in January or February, and a vote by the Board of Supervisors in March, we believe a more inclusive and reflective approach is needed. The Fairfax Coalition for Smart Growth is tonight recommending that a "Collaborative Citizen Planning Process" be used that builds upon the preliminary work the Task Force has just released. Under this concept, elected officials and agency staff can work with members of the public and interest groups to develop mutually agreeable solutions. In such a process, different stakeholders are involved in different ways, depending on factors such as their respective levels of interest in the issues, the time they have available to participate, and whether they represent others or themselves solely. The process is guided by five principles described in a widely publicized Federal Transit Administration report that was adapted from earlier work by a George Mason University professor:

Inclusiveness – all stakeholders must have a meaningful voice in the planning process, so that their input is reflected in the final product(s) developed. These include: primary stakeholders typically brought together in a working group for face-to-face collaborative problem solving; secondary stakeholders offered multiple ways to participate in forums held throughout the process; and the "public at-large" kept informed of the proceedings and invited to participate in open forums. The following stakeholders are included: those who are, or could be, significantly affected by the plan or project, either directly or indirectly; those who could ensure implementation of potential solutions, including representatives of relevant governmental agencies; and those who could block implementation of potential solutions.

Variety of ways to become involved – each stakeholder need not be involved in the same way. A variety of ways can meet stakeholders’ varying levels of availability and investment in the project.

Planning process itself is subject to approval by stakeholders – the decision-making agency staff work with a representative group of stakeholders to develop the preliminary process design that, when the group is satisfied with the design, is presented to the full group of participants at community meetings designed to discuss it and negotiate any modifications necessary so that all stakeholders feel comfortable with it.

Planning process goes beyond search for an acceptable compromise – consensus-based decisionmaking strives for three kinds of stakeholder satisfaction: substantive (negotiated agreement), procedural (process perceived as fair), and psychological (participants feel their views were heard, respected, and carefully considered). Work is accomplished in a collegial, rather than adversarial, environment and, by working toward a common goal, and the group can mobilize around proposed solutions developed by the group.

Planning process is linked effectively to conventional decisionmaking process already in place – being linked to the formal decisionmaking process gives the process legitimacy; otherwise, it would be simply a time-consuming exercise.

To implement such a genuine citizen involvement process, elected officials and public agencies must embrace at least seven outreach perspectives:

Present information at special conferences, workshops, community meetings, civic organization presentations, and public hearings, both orally and in writing, in a format that can be readily understood outside professional planning circles.

Institute a comprehensive, ongoing citizens outreach and notification program that enables new relationships of mutual trust and understanding to be developed around the overall planning process as well as specific projects.

Involve the public early in the planning process, so that citizens are involved in a meaningful dialogue on plan and project options, and there is sufficient time for a community consensus on solutions to emerge.

Fully analyze citizen suggestions, being prepared to explain their advantages and disadvantages and why they may or may not be feasible to implement from a technical standpoint.

Provide timely public notice of opportunities for citizen involvement in plan and project decisions.

Seek out and consider the needs of traditionally underserved populations, such as seniors, low-income households, the mentally and physically disabled, youth, and minority households.

View community groups as resources, rather than problems, by engaging them in early, continuous, and meaningful ways throughout the planning and project implementation phases.

The Task Force’s draft serves as a catalyst for getting the community’s "creative juices" flowing and for genuinely enlisting citizens in a meaningful process to chart the future of the Greater Merrifield Community. We hope to work closely with Supervisor Connolly and members of the Task Force in "taking this show on the road" and beginning to elicit truly meaningful citizen involvement that ultimately will result in an even better plan that enjoys the support of the entire community. The Fairfax Coalition believes that adoption of a collaborative citizens planning process can go a long way toward achieving such a community consensus and ‘buy in’ for the application of Smart Growth concepts to the Merrifield revitalization effort. In its absence, the Merrifield Revitalization Task Force recommendations will lack legitimacy because they do not reflect the consensus view of the Greater Merrifield Community.