Yeah, sure you would Linda. Bite off Gerry's head.  I don't think so.

Gerry tells everyone on the present Board what to do.  The picture truly shows that not only does Gerry still have his head, he is still smiling.

Is there any connection to Smyth's statment about biting off Gerry's head to the statement that is often made about "chopping off the head of a snake?" 

Is Smyth speaking in code to send a message to the public? 

are evidence of Smyth's independence.  *snark*

Linda Smyth's ill-considered remark about biting off Connolly's head does not justify "praying mantis" jokes.

While I am absolutely committed to seeing Charlie Hall defeat Smyth's re-election bid on 6/12, I have to go on record here to say that we should not resort to disrespectful sexist jokes.

My opinion.....

Different senses of humor, obviously.  But just to test it out, I'm going to ask my liberal/feminist wife and report back with the results. :)

comment is bizarre, but she doesn't like the praying mantis analogy.  I never disagree with my wife (well, at least half the time), so I'm removing the joke...

she definitely finds the "bite his head off" comment, combined with the fact that Connolly and Smyth are POLITICALLY "mated," does have significant humor potential.

There seems to be a different standard for criticisms leveled at female vs. male politicians.  Old stereotypes and sexual references still commonly infect the former.

I think what Linda said was stupid, and it is one of her hallmarks that sooner or later she alienates everyone. So roasting her with her own words is not the issue.  But this is a serious election with serious consequences, and jokes that demean Smyth based on her gender or through sexual references just don't fly with me.

But I don't want to hijack the discussion of the Post piece here.  I think the article was dead-on in predicting that this race may be a bellwether for Connolly's race in the Fall and his political future. 

I'm also wondering if Connolly's "loan" of campaign staff to Linda's campaign is a reportable contribution?

when Connolly abuses her constituents while or after they're testifying at public hearings? Of course, Smyth has spent her fair share of time doing the same thing, but only when she doesn't like what her constituent is saying.

in demanding that the debate moderator the other night followed the rules that both candidates had agreed to beforehand?

Good job as usual pointing out the hypocrisy

One last thing the true irony of this quote

"She also cites as major accomplishments the board's decision to spend a penny of the real estate tax rate on preservation of affordable housing"

Humm thats the same talking point fed by the moderator to Smyth during the debate

No doubt. I have watched this political theater unfold over the years, and Smyth is connected to Connolly with an umbilical cord. He gives her money (more like an allowance), props her up with his machine and tells her how to vote and what to say. She doesn't dare do anything he would disapprove of.

People in Providence need someone who represents them. Smyth can do that only if doesn't cross her master, Gerry Connolly.

If you support real transit-oriented smart growth solutions over sprawling mile-after-mile development and traffic congestion, then why not support Linda Smyth?

The anti-development NIMBYs are simply not productive arbiters of the growth and development issues, and there is no redevelopment in existing areas with existing infrastructure that will please them.  They don't want ANY development, but would rather see the land consuming sprawl stretch all the way to the Blue Ridge and to the Chesapeake.  They don't care what is efficient and good for everyone as long as it doesn't affect their street!

Idiots.

Linda Smyth may not be a bit of an awkward communicator or campaigner, but she's got the right idea on growth---and contrary to the NIMBYs opinions, it's not sponsored by developers.  It's sponsored by what kind of INEVITABLE growth and development will improve life and make communities more livable.

That should read, Linda Smyth may be a bit of..."

Connolly, Smyth's sponsor and benefactor, got a third of a million dollars in campaign contributions, the vast majority from development interests, during the first three months of this year and "It's not sponsored by developers"?

How about Smyth's contributions:

Greenwich Group International $4,338. A New York-based "global real estate investment banking firm with unparalleled access to the international flows of debt and equity for commercial real estate investment." Their investments include Tysons Corner Gateway Site, Tysons Corner Data Center and Office Portfolio, and Tysons Corner Office Building Portfolio.

Tysons Corner LLC $2,500. The mall that Smyth recently granted a huge density increase to, even before the Tysons Task force completed its replanning task.

Merrifield Apartments $4,000. They're trying to get an increase in the density of their property AGAIN. They got a big increase in the planned density when Merrifield was up-planned by the County in 2001. They tried to get yet more density in 2004 but a TRUE citizens' task force (not one hand-picked to generate a desired result) shot them down.

Auto dealers are giving Smyth thousands. Why auto dealers? Well, they have tons of land near one of the proposed Metro stations at Tysons and are looking for huge profits as a result of increased density.

Entities associated with WestGroup have given her contributions totaling four figures. WestGroup is, of course, the largest landowner in Tysons Corner. And many of their properties are not within walking distance of a proposed station, so they may need some help to get the density they want.

Another property that is just outside of walking distance from the West Falls Church Metro station has given her $4,250. They too need some fudging of "Smart Growth" principles to get the high density that's going to bring them big profits.

Others:
Chesapeake Management Group of Washington DC: $2,000. What do they manage? Real Estate, of course.

Northern VA Assoc of Realtors: $2,000

"Not sponsored by developers"? Only to the most blindly partisan observer.

when you have money talking. This financial data of Smyth's makes me question her commitment to democracy. However, I don't question her loyalty to Tysons landowners or Merrifield developers, except when they have forgotten to deal with campaign coffers with an impending election year. I guess this is what happened with Fairfax City wanting to relocate their homeless shelter in Merrifield. Smyth "forgot" to tell the next door business (a major Merrifield developer) and the residents about it. She sure forgets alot, doesn't she? Where's her head?

They probably want to give her money because they've worked with her and know that she is fair and listens to everyone.

But your lame attempts to characterize her as beholden to development interests are unfair and grossly amiss.  Linda worked hard within every major proposal to make sure that developers contribute to the schools, roads, parks, etc. in and around their projects.  She has fought to make sure that developers meet their responsibilities in the community.  Her record on the Board speaks for itself in this regard--she insisted on several conditions and proffers for high density communities.

Which leads me back to my main point--you folks railing against her simply don't want to accept any density in your neighborhoods.  It's classic NIMBY.

Despite the fact that this is exactly the kind of transit-oriented development that will make our communities cleaner, more livable, and less congested in the future.

You can't have it both ways--you either support smart growth or you don't.

Insight into the "Pay to Play" scheme in Providence District was provided by the tale of the illegal $10,000 contribution that Linda Smyth eventually had to return since it was from a 501(c)(3), ie, a nonprofit organization that's not allowed to make political contributions.  This nonprofit needed approval from the Board of Supervisors for a project they were promoting in Providence, Smyth's district.

The insight came from a 2/9/05 Connection Newspapers article where the organization's Director of Marketing said the campaign contribution was:

"intended to help the project receive a favorable rezoning decision as it moves forward."

If that's not quid pro quo, I don't know what is.

I would question your characterization of what took place.

Any 501(c)(3) organization worth anything would know full well it cannot give political contributions.

Can you point to an OBJECTIVE informational source?  VPAP or an old article perhaps?  Why do you fail to give the name of the offending organization?

I provided the date and name of a newspaper article on the subject in my original post. The contribution can be found in Smyth's 1/13/05 finance report. The fact that she returned it is in her 7/15/05 filing. These are available on-line.

"smart growth."  The issue is what constitutes "smart" and how do we get there.  One way we know almost certainly will NOT get us there is by doing things in secret, without adequate input from the public, and with too much influence by rich developers (e.g., Bechtel's secret, no-bid deal on the Big Dig...er, Metro to Dulles project).  I'll let Charlie address this further when he live blogs later, but for now let's just say that there are a lot of issues here...

This seems pretty "smart" to me:

"Assess the impact on roads, schools, parks, streams and environment before voting on new development"

"Fight against the elevated train in Tysons and for a system of mass transit that will connect the community with the new Metro stations" (Lowell's note: elevated rail in Tysons is a killer for smart growth...talk about stupid!)

"Charlie will tie development to transportation improvements to alleviate gridlock and air pollution; he will work to preserve more green space and linkage of bicycle commuter routes."

*"...consistent approval of high-density land use projects-such as those at Vienna Metro West, Merrifield, and Tysons-without requiring the parallel roadway improvements, only adds more cars to our already gridlocked streets."

She expresses nearly identical support for such measures.

I don't understand the vitriol directed at Linda.  She's done a good job.

Smyth's record in the last 4 years has not been to support infrastructure improvements prior to approving development proposals. This includes the MetroWest rezoning. Her actions have never mirrored her campaign promises. She mimics her opponent then "forgets" her commitments.

Gee, that's funny Herbie, because that's the exact opposite of what I remember her advocating at several MetroWest hearings and also opposite of what was eventually passed.

Gee, why these inconsistencies?

are in your memory. Phased development with infrastructure improvements were not included.

Can you prove that too, Herb?

What about the traffic generation benchmarks?  What about the substantial intersection improvements in the area?  What about the proffers to schools?

They were all written up in the Washington Post for cyrin out loud.

Come on Herb!

And Linda has a long history of standing up to Connolly when they disagree.  For instance, in her 2003 race, she laid out a very clear transportation plan with an emphasis on mass transit, and pointed out how it contrasted with Connolly's transportation plan of more and wider roads.

As for development, it appears to me that Linda understands that we cannot simply freeze or halt development in Fairfax County.  High density development is an efficient and logical way to limit the negative effects of development.  Granted, a heavy dose of NIMBY comes into play with any major development, but in the long haul, planned, high density communities are the way to go for a metro area such as Fairfax.

Linda's dedication to constituent matters can also not go unnoticed.  As a former resident of Providence District, I called her office numerous times on various matters, and got quick and useful help or advice ever single time.  Linda is not afraid to go to the bat and battle the bureaucracy for her constituents.  For instance, I was under a temporary, 90 day driver's license when I left Fairfax County.  Somewhere between Fairfax and my new county, the DMV lost the paperwork to give me my permanent license.  After over a month of battling them, I called Linda, who promptly got the ball rolling in the right direction.  This attention to detail is worthy of note, especially in an officeholder in such a relatively high office.

Linda Smyth is neither a perfect person nor a savvy politician.  She is, however, an honest person and a hard worker who strives to do the best for her constituents, and I have every confidence that she will continue to do so if and when she is reelected. 

needs a blog

I vividly remember a public hearing in December for a rezoning in Providence District in which Connolly browbeat and bullied a PTA president. And she wasn't even opposing the rezoning, only asking for proffer money to go to her school!

But Linda Smyth sat idly by and allowed Connolly to abuse one of her constituents. And Smyth crows about being school-friendly by virtue of being a former substitute teacher in the FCPS. Yet she didn't lift a finger to defend this lady or chastise Connolly's arrogant behavior.

I later asked around and was told that it was the first time the PTA president had ever testified before the Board and would probably be the last.

I have been a close observer of Providence politics since before Smyth entered the arena and I have no idea what your "long history of standing up to Connolly" is based on. A more accurate description would be "a long history of being Connolly's lap dog". That obedient behavior got her an appointment by Connolly as Planning Commissioner and then as his annointed replacement as Supervisor when he moved up to Chair. I would be glad to produce numerous other examples of Smyth not standing up to Connolly as well as her engaging in demeaning and condescending behavior toward her constituents.

Providence citizens need a Supervisor who will be their champion and really stand up to Connolly or anyone else who threatens her constituents or their well being.

That person is clearly not Linda Smyth.

...and the feeling by many citizens that they aren't being heard.  I'll let my Fairfax friends like Lee Diamond fill in the gory details.

But I don't hear of any secrecy from Linda, do you?  What are you talking about?  If you are referring to the sessions on the Metro tunnel vote and such, have you not seen Gerry Connolly's explanation of why that was recommended?  I don't like Bechtel or sole-source contracting either.  But more central to this race in my opinion is having a Supervisor who works hard on issues important to her community and is willing to see the big picture.  Linda is that kind of Supervisor from what I can gather.

past couple of weeks here at RK, you've heard lots of people talking about their unhappiness with secrecy and lack of quality access to the Board in general, and to Linda specifically.  Also, we've seen Linda refusing the Vienna Little League debate (and that's "bush league" if you ask me).  We've seen her refuse to come on the blogs, or on Blog Talk Radio.  We've seen her not only go along with, but actually encourage, a wildly biased format and out-of-control moderator at the one debate she DID appear at.  I could go on and on, but what's the point?  You support Linda, I support Charlie.  See you on election day! :)

That's exactly what Linda has engaged the communities in her district in defining ever since she took office.

I am really offended when I see coordinated efforts to smear the name and work of good people.

The fact of the matter is, you have a thinly veiled movement (and not a majority one I would point out) that is attempting to abscond the ideals and language of a real movement (smart growth) to further their localized and selfish ambitions.  Real smart growth solutions are going to require some substantial change in certain neighborhoods.  I know some of the people in those neighborhoods don't want the changes, but we as a region need to recognize how necessary they are.

I moved to the Richmond Highway corridor HOPING that increased density and redevelopment will transform my area in a transit-served livable/walkable/community-oriented area.  I hope some developers start looking at our corridor and our proximity to Old Town and DC.  When they do, I'll be looking for them to behave responsibly toward the community, to develop a diversity of housing options and good retail, many transit improvements on Route 1, parks and attractive public spaces, etc.  I can only hope that Supervisor Hyland fights for my community at that time as hard as Linda Smyth has for hers.

How do you know what she has done to really work with and not against Providence residents?

And how do you know?

Nice try, Doug. Living in Mt Vernon and supporting this extreme upplanning in Tysons is a nice way for you not to live by this "smart growth" effort and traffic impact. With only 18,000 trips per day (by 2030) that will be absorbed by metro rail, if built, I have seen conservative numbers that state that over 400,000 new car trips per day will hit the area roads here. With only Rte 7, 123 and the toll road to absorb this load, the goose will be cooked in Tysons. BTW, you don't make communities more livable by creating 12 lane highways that divide them (as planned for Rte 7 and 123).

I moved from Sterling to Mount Vernon (Richmond Highway corridor) partly because it is expected to undergo exactly this kind of transit-oriented transformation in the coming years.

Try the car trips that Fort Belvoir and the BRAC changes are going to generate, there, Herbie. The only way to accomplish these kinds of communities is with density served by transit.  Other mitigations are necessary, but without that backbone, it's not possible.  It is however, absolutely necessary to save any quality of life in the metro area, to reduce future emissions, and a long list of other environmental, cultural, and aesthetic benefits.

Would you rather eat up the most precious commodity man has---the land that sustains us--from the Blue Ridge to the Chesapeake?  Wake up people.

Get a clue.

you plan Mt Vernon and support having a task force made up of Providence & Dranesville residents (who will be impacted by Tysons) and the local businesses plan this community. This is not what is being advocated by Smyth.

I think you are just lying Herb.

Sorry, but Linda has worked with her residents in all her communinities---just because she doesn't always reach the conclusions with them that you want, don't attempt to label her as "advocating" anything other than concern for the community.  That's just disingenuous.

Thanks, I will get involved in planning in my community when that time comes.  In fact, I already am---and we have watched the Tom Davis-generated MetroWest mess develop with piqued interest down here.

I wasn't going to pipe in but

now you are outright lying

Davis rescued Providence from Metro-West.  Smyth didn't want to change anything to the plans it wasn't until Davis got involved that a compromise was reached that was acceptable to all parties.

Someone with more time could find some article links that would be helpful

As a sidenote its interesting to see the partisanship appearing in this race.  I thought progressives were about commmunity input change and getting rid of the status quo. 

I guess just like on our side there are some people that will march in lockstep just because someone has a D in front of their name. 

The hypocrisy is unbelieveable because these are some of the same individuals who think having an R next to your name is akin to being evil incarnate but if someone dare challenges the D establishment the claws come out even faster.... pot kettle black

That is laughable at best.

Tom Davis--a federal official--COMPLETELY and IMPROPERLY inserted himself into a local land use matter.

That act earned him more recognition as the snake oil salesman that he really is moreso than any positions uttered out of both sides of his mouth (depending on the audience) or lousy vote against the interests of his district ever did---unfortunately.

The hypocrisy of which you speak, Middle-whatever, I can assure you DOES NOT lie with me.  If there is ever anyone who can stand up with integrity and honesty in a minority within my Party, you're reading his words, trust me.  I am nobody's lockstep and there are plenty of people who may attest to that.  I have in my own time challenged the Democratic establishment time and time again, and will continue to do so.  But I will always respect those who work hard and respectfully within our family, and we will always be friends.  Unlike in the GOP.

Your assessment of the situation and TD's influence is laughable; you clearly do not know what happened.

Tom Davis ran into the situation looking like a fool and whimpered out like a fool as knowing such.

Tom Davis was even called out by the Post when he tried to lend the perception that Metro West is very close to his home.  Sure, he has a Vienna postal city address but he and JMDD actually live in the SULLY DISTRICT.  The darn paper even drew out a map and distance between their house and Metro West!!  I laughed for two days at that one!

TD thought he could capitalize on a controversial situation, but he quickly found out that he was on the wrong side of the issue and then limped off.

Connection Newspapers and the Time Community Newspapers must be "idiots" as well.  I'd love to hear how this is "smart growth":

Pulte says 80 percent of the residences at MetroWest will be within a five-minute walk of the Metro station. That is why some are puzzled by Pulte's plan to start building the other 20 percent, those farthest away, first. Would it not make sense in a "transit-oriented development" to start with the units more oriented to the transit station?

Part of the problem is Pulte needs a staging area to perform the millions of dollars in road and infrastructure upgrades it has agreed to make to better connect its community with the Metro station. It cannot begin the high-rise condos and offices near the station until that work is done.

Pulte and the county ought to agree to limit the number of homes that can be built until a more significant portion of the buildings closest to the Metro station are in place or nearly finished.

Right now, Pulte has committed to having just one and a half of the dozen or so high-rises nearest the station in place by the time it has 1,000 units, or nearly half of all residences, built elsewhere on the property.

Brilliant.

this:

Fairfax County's entire growth strategy is based on a bold promise: High-density development around Metro stations need not produce a corresponding increase in traffic. So when county officials approve new development, they extract agreements from builders to help achieve that goal.

But Fairfax officials have done little to enforce compliance or otherwise encourage developers and employers to promote less driving. County officials concede that companies have disregarded agreements to limit traffic at their buildings, without consequence.

For example, when the owners of Tycon Tower, the high-rise office complex adjacent to Tysons Corner Center mall, sought Fairfax's permission to expand in 1998, they agreed to give a 50 percent discount on the building's parking garage to car- and vanpools to limit traffic around Tysons.

But eight years later, garage parking at the tower costs the same across the board. The building's property manager, Mikele Torgler, with Quadrangle Management Corp., said she was aware of the requirement but is unsure why it is being ignored. "I wasn't here in 1998," she said. "I need to check into it."

The result of this type of attitude towards government?

In Fairfax, the county has attempted to reduce traffic only in cases in which developers were seeking to build or expand, instead of having such measures apply to everyone in congested areas. In 1999, when Charles E. Smith Properties sought to build a fourth office building at its Dulles Plaza complex in Tysons, it agreed to a host of traffic management measures, including premium spaces for carpools, a ride-share database and a 20 percent reduction in car trips.

But for unrelated reasons, the fourth building was never built. Now, said Paul Chadaj, 30, an information technology worker in the complex, parking is free and almost no one carpools or takes transit.

"There was one guy who [carpooled], but he quit because it was too much of a pain," he said.

Again, who are the "idiots?"  I'm all for smart growth, but not if it's just a fig leaf for big developers to do whatever the heck they want, but definitely not anythnig anyone would recognize as "smart."  Actually, I'd say that's the worst of all worlds - politicians get to say they did something, developers make a fortune, huge amounts of money go down a rat hole, citizens and the environment get screwed.  Great stuff!

To all,

I apologize in advance because this will be a long post. To avoid overwhelming you, I will on a second posting reprint an item I put in www.notlarrysabato.com earlier today, in response to Doug of Mount Vernon. It accurately explains some of my thinking about transit-oriented development.

We have always tried to raise this as an issue of county policy, and not as a NIMBY, anti-growth matter. I hope that Doug reads it in its entirety and reassesses some of the inaccurate comments he has made. I want to add that many people I have worked with, including Dana Kauffman, Planning Commissioner Walter Alcorn, and even Linda Smyth and Gerry Connolly, can attest that the positions I'm sketching out on growth policy are consistent with what I and others have raised in the last three years.

On the other topics above, I'd encourage everyone on all sides to take a step back, catch your breath and dial down the heat of this discussion, and if you plan to call someone an idiot or a liar, please have the consideration and courage to sign your name to your posting. Otherwise, you're mucking up an important community dialogue.

It is my experience, based on a number of town halls, long meetings of a planning committee process to define transit-oriented development policy, and just countless hours of discussions with people of all perspectives, that there's more agreement than disagreement on the key issues surrounding "smart growth."

So where's the beef? And to answer Doug, what's the significant difference between me and Linda that voters should know about?

The difference is about actions versus words, reality versus rhetoric. In the last three years, as community concerns about county development policy began to crystalize, there has been a considerable gap between Linda's record as a supervisor, and the very handsome brochures she has put out lately.

To take one example, she has labeled herself a "progressive leader." One quality of a leader is the ability to step out in front on emerging big issues and inform and unite the public.

One of the biggest failures of MetroWest was of public outreach. As I've said elsewhere, Arlington had years of public meetings to work with the public and prepare them for the coming urban development. Gerry Connolly could only point to one public meeting on Fairlee/MetroWest, held in March 2003 at Oakton High School, while he was still Providence supervisor.

I understand that supporters of Linda say she engaged the community, but all through MetroWest, she never once called a public meeting to say, "Here's what's going on, and what do you think?" In the last year, as the community has wrestled with Tysons Corner and the question of a Tunnel versus an elevated train, once again, she has never called even one public meeting to discuss this critical topic and ask people what they think.

Trying to fill the vacuum, citizens held numerous town hall meetings on growth and transportation policy, including one attended by 600 people. With one exception, Linda never attended.

I believe even people who support Linda would have a difficult time contradicting the record on this. On two of the biggest issues of her four-year term, she simply never reached out in this way. I might add that other Fairfax supervisors have a much better record in this regard.

Second, those of us who spent many hours trying to bring even incremental improvements to MetroWest found it difficult to get her cooperation even on issues that clearly had broad support.

I'll name two: We were concerned, and I still am, that MetroWest will have difficulty becoming a mixed-use project in practice, if the market doesn't support offices or retail. We urged Linda at some length to include a phasing provision, so that not all 2,250 units could be built until the office component was begun. She was resistant for well over a month until two supporters of MetroWest, the Sierra Club and the Coalition of Smarter Growth, joined FairGrowth in pushing for this prudent measure. Phasing was added grudgingly, and only at the last minute.

Similarly, all the major athletic leagues joined FairGrowth in asking Linda not to spend $6 million in developer money on a stand-alone, automobile-only county building that stands separate from MetroWest. We wanted to fold most or all of these facilities into the ground-floor offices of MetroWest, where they would have benefited residents and been accessible to public transit.

Two other added benefits: Four acres of mature trees would have been saved, and the proffer money from Pulte could have been used to secure desperately needed recreational  space and upgrade local athletic fields.

Linda flatly refused a request to study this alternative, as had been requested by such mainstream community groups as Vienna Youth Soccer and Vienna Little League. In this case, she not only failed to promote a community consensus, she spurned one that did emerge.

I said during last week's debate that the best local government is a "we process, not an I process." The community has worked hard to come together constructively, even when we started at different positions.

As I also said at the debate, it's not personally comfortable for me to criticize Linda Smyth. But when I met with members of the community in late February and March to see if they would support a candidacy, there was an overwhelming feeling that Linda had not progressed as a real leader in her handling of the district's biggest issues. That feeling has been affirmed in many conversations with voters since.

Actions do speak louder than words. I will pledge to meet early and often with residents, calling town halls and other public meetings on any issue of major community significance. We are a vibrant, passionate and well-informed community. By breaking down the walls and working with each other in a tone of respect, everyone will gain.

As I said many words ago, I will post my note on transit-oriented development policy in a moment, but I thank everyone who had the patience to read through this.

Best regards to all.

Charlie

Charlie,

Thanks for taking the time to provide all this information.

Others I have spoken to do have a very different account of what Linda Smyth offered to the community in terms of dialogue and discussion on the MetroWest project.  That said, I agree with you on the ideas you mention.

So, why is there this difference in recollections and versions out there?

I don't know, but I assume whatever that is why you are running.

I wish both sides would simply ratchet the heat down as you mentioned, and behave more respectfully.  I think the RK community has largely gone off the deep end over this race and its just not merited.  And I say that as someone who nearly always agrees with Lowell and most of what RK argues.

Anyway, good luck in the election, and regardless of the outcome, thank you for doing your part to sustain a healthy democracy.

You can find this entire discussion in www.notlarrysabato.org, but I was answering a note from Doug of Mount Vernon that was similar to what you've read already in this discussion.

Dear Doug,

I appreciate your comment because it gives me a chance to set the record straight on a big piece of misinformation that has been widely spread in recent years.

I have never opposed transit-oriented development, nor has a group I helped found called FairGrowth. If you look at our extensive writings on the subject, we have always supported the concept. I think you'll also find, if you look at www.charliehall2007.org, you won't find anything that is anti-development, and certainly nothing that promotes the sprawl-development strategy you outlined above.

At MetroWest, we urged less density to allow, among other things, more ground-level greenspace. At MetroWest, at least 10 acres of trees will be cut needlessly to allow maximum density, and much of the open space is up on fifth-floor balconies. Even Manhattan has parks, and it's vital to the ground-level living environment. Fairfax's new high-rise projects generally have minimal greenery on the ground level.

We also had grave concerns about the county's lack of any meaningful enforcement on traffic strategies. It's nice that the developer promises to cut morning rush hour traffic by 50 percent, but it's never been done in a suburb like this, and the county still has no staff to enforce such programs.

Please be aware that as a newspaper reporter covering Arlington County, I had many opportunities to learn about the history and function of the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor. When done right, with extensive community involvement, adequate infrastructure and a full mix of uses, it can create a wonderfully vital environment. Done wrong, as a developer-driven process that ignores community needs in the name of maximum density and profit, it can do real damage to our community.

My hope, as supervisor, is to help Fairfax incorporate the best of the Arlington model, where transit-oriented development was so successfully pioneered. Many of us from FairGrowth encouraged the county to establish a countywide policy defining transit-oriented development, because it had none at the time of MetroWest, and we worked many hours to develop that policy in a committee masterfully led by Planning Commissioner Walter Alcorn.

When the Board of Supervisors approved this policy earlier this year, it included many citizen contributions, including language on community involvement that I jointly wrote with a land-use attorney.

Arlington proved that there is no contradiction between community-based planning and well-crafted urban development.

I'm very proud of the citizen contributions in moving Fairfax toward a better model of doing transit-oriented development.

One of my great disappointments was that a thoughtful, positive dialogue was often detoured by inaccurate labels like "Nimby." Another is that the current Board of Supervisors was so grudging, and at times hostile, in acknowledging any validity to concerns that many citizens treat as self-evident.

As supervisor, I hope to make it easier on citizens to be positive and active contributors to our county's future.

My goal is balanced development, with working roads, schoools and parks. I hope this answer clarifies the concerns that citizens have raised in recent years.

Best regards,

Charlie

Is Connolly's first name pronounced like "Jerry" or "Gary"?

n/t

that has sort of a ring to it.....