A Reston ~ASSOCIATION Live, Work, Play and Get … GENERAL/022312 APPROVED...Treasurer John Higgins; Directors Tom Vis, Andy Sigle, Ken Knueven, Mike Collins, ... President Driscoll

A Reston ~ASSOCIATION Live, Work, Play and Get Involved'"

1 2001 Sunrise Valley Drive I Reston I Virginia 120191-34041703-435-6530 I 'NWw.reston.org

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MINUTES Regular Meeting

February 23, 2012

PRESENT: President Kathleen Driscoll McKee; Vice President Paul Thomas; Secretary Joe Leighton; Treasurer John Higgins; Directors Tom Vis, Andy Sigle, Ken Knueven, Mike Collins, Cheryl Beamer, Amanda Andere; Legal Counsel Ken Chadwick, Esq.; Chief Executive Officer Milton Matthews; Assistant Secretary and Director of Administration, Member Services & IT Cate Fulkerson.

I. PROCEDURAL ITEMS

A. Call to Order & Opening Remarks President Driscoll McKee called the meeting to order at 7:03 pm and established that a quorum of the Board of Directors was present.

B. Adoption of Regular Meeting Agenda (Attached) Secretary Leighton, seconded by Vice President Thomas, moved to approve the February 23, 2012 Board of Directors Meeting Agenda, adding· the Biannual Report of the Pedestrian & Bicycling Advisory Committee between Items E and F.

The motion passed unanimously.

C. Approval of Board Meeting Minutes

President Driscoll McKee, seconded by Secretary Leighton, moved to approve the January 23, 2012 Board Meeting Minutes, as amended.


II. ACTION/DISCUSSION ITEMS

D. Comments from Reston Association Members & Board

1. Richard Chew. 2201 Cedar Cove Court- Topics: Running for the South Lakes Seat on the Reston Association Board of Directors; presentation of Super Bowl Champions caps to Directors Andere and Leighton in support of New York Giants winning the Super Bowl; recommend that the Board hold a separate member Forum on Item K- the New Affected Party Resolution.

2. Michael Sanio, 1307 Sawbridge Way- Topics: Running for one of the open At-Large Seats on the Reston Association Board of Directors; Sustainability Workshop hosted by the Association's Environmental Advisory Committee.

Reston Assoclatlon- Regular Board Meeting February 23, 2012

1

3. Jeremy Novak. 2005 Halyard Lane- Topic: Reston Association Board needs to create term limits for Design Review Board appointments.

»Treasurer Higgins arrived at the meeting at 7:22 pm.

4. Donna Miller Rostant. 11516 Hemingway Drive -Topics: Running for one of the open At-Large Seats on the Reston Association Board of Directors; thank you the Board for discussions and guidance.

5. John Farrell. 11545 Underoak Court - Topics: Design Review Board's action on Fairway Redevelopment; Reston Association Board has not asked for proffers for the Fairway Developer- the Board needs to ask; the MOU of Synthetic Fields should have been vetted in public; Running for one of the open At-Large Seats on the Reston Association Board of Directors.

The Board of Directors thanked the Members for their comments. The following topics were noted by one or more members of the Board: Reston Master Plan Special Study Task Force meetings in March; the University of Delaware will be holding a Presidential debate on October 3; form and color of Reston Association passes over the years; Fairway and Cameron Crescent complex changes in Lake Anne; thank you to Board Candidates for coming to the Board meeting; Reston Association is hosting an Apartment Owners Meeting on February 28; Fiscal Committee will be examining new ways the Association can look at budgeting the Association's resources; the Association needs a Park Ranger program; the Association will be hosting its second Past President's Luncheon on Saturday, February 25 and will be discussing Village Center redevelopment; Reston Community Orchestral Caribbean Night coming up soon.

E. Advisory Committee Reports President Driscoll McKee noted that minutes from the Association's Advisory Committee had been included in the Board Packet.

ADDITIONAL ITEM: Pedestrian & Bicycling Advisory Committee Biannual Report to the Board John Rosner, Chair of the Association's Pedestrian & Bicycling Advisory Committee (PBAC) provided, and the Board received information on the activities of the Committee over the past several months. Specifically, Mr. Rosner highlighted the following:

• Attended Sustainability Leadership Session held on February 11 • The PBAC is very active currently with six members; however, several community members

have been attending and will be seeking appointment on the PBAC. • As part of the 2012/2013 Budget, PBAC requested and was granted funding by the Board to see

that certain pathway improvements are completed on RA Common Area and that bike racks are being installed on RA Property.

• In 2011 the Association received honorable mention as a Bicycle Friendly Community. Such award is similar to receiving LEED status.

• The PBAC has a Bicycle Friendly Community Action Plan that we hope to accomplish in 2012 • Working to establish a partnership with Fairfax County Police on pathway safety. • Working more closely with the Communications Advisory Committee to get the word out about

the PBAC' s activities. • Reston on Foot is in the process of being edited.

Reston Association- Regular Board Meeting February 23, 2012

2

F. Committee Chair & Member Appointments

Board Motion 1: President Driscoll McKee, seconded by Director Sigle, moved to approve the reappointment of Bob Swartz to the Fiscal Committee for a term of two years, ending February 2014.


Board Motion 2: President Driscoll McKee, seconded by Vice President Thomas, moved to approve the reappointment of Mai Huynh as Co-Chair of the Reston Neighborhood Advisory Committee for a one year term, ending February 2013.


Board Motion 3: President Driscoll McKee, seconded by Vice President Thomas, moved to approve the reappointment of Rengin Morrow as Co-Chair of the Reston Neighborhood Advisory Committee for a one year term, ending February 2013.


Board Motion 4: President Driscoll McKee, second by Secretary Leighton, moved to approve the reappointment of Doug Pew to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee for a three year term, ending February 2015.


G. Legal Committee Report (Attached)

President Driscoll McKee, seconded by Director Knueven, moved to approve the report of the Legal Committee and authorize action to be taken on the cases reviewed during its meeting of February 1, 2012 as follows:

1. Lakeside Cluster: Defer the case to the Legal Committee Meeting of March 7, 2012 to allow Lakeside Cluster an opportunity to remove the overgrown vegetation in the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and Resource Protection Area as instructed by Fairfax County. Additionally, the Legal Committee encourages the applicant to meet with Fairfax County to discuss the possibility of trimming the bamboo in the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and Resource Protection Area that is not addressed in the waiver request approval. The Cluster is directed to regularly report and communicate to staff any updates that may occur before the March 7, 2012 meeting.

2. 11225 Leatherwood Drive: Defer action to the Legal Committee Meeting of March 7, 2012 regarding Reston Deed Section VI./ Design Covenants regarding the landscape plan (#76204} to allow the owners an opportunity to have their Design Review Board application be reviewed at the Full Design Review Board meeting of February 21, 2012.

3. 2354 Branleigh Park Court: Dismiss the case regarding Reston Deed Section V/.1. Design Covenants concerning the unapproved metal strips (case #116653) contingent upon payment of the $120 Notice of Violation filing fee.


3

4. 1528 Woodcrest Drive: Dismiss the case regarding Reston Deed Section Vl.1. Design Covenants concerning the unapproved deck support post color (case #119736} contingent upon payment of the $120 Notice of Violation filing fee.

5. 2356 Branleigh Park Court: File suit immediately following the February 23, 2012 Board of Directors Meeting against the owner of 2356 Branleigh Park Court to enforce Reston Deed Section Vl.2. (b)(8) Refuse and Debris regarding window, bike, cleaning products, plastic containers, bagged trash, tables, cooler, boxes, indoor rug, gas can, bag, chair (case #116672} and (c) Maintenance of Improvements concerning the rear wall, railing, and steps by the lower entry door (case #116671) and Reston Deed Section Vl.1. Design Covenants concerning the rear elevated deck, rear fence gate top trip board, and fence fabric/plastic screening (cases #99127, 128720, 128721}.

6. 2392 Branleigh Park Court: File suit immediately following the February 23, 2012 Board of Directors Meeting against the owner of 2392 Branleigh Park Court to enforce Reston Deed Section Vl.2. (b)(8} Refuse and Debris regarding boards, plastic containers, ladder, indoor chair, tools, broken toys, brooms, rakes, wheelbarrow (case #115474} and Reston Deed Section Vl.1. Design Covenants concerning the molded plastic sheds and shade structures (cases #122226, 115472).


H. Financial Report- Unaudited 2011 Financial Statements (Attached)

David Hopkins, Chief Financial Officer presented and the Board received the unaudited 2011 Financial Statements.

1. Treasurer's Report (Attached)

Treasurer Higgins presented and the Board received his summary of the unaudited 2011 Capital and Operating Budgets.

» Director Collins left the meeting at 8:44 pm and returned at 8:48 pm.

J. Amendments to Assessments & Finance Resolution 7; Purchasing & Procurement (Attached)

President Driscoll McKee, seconded by Director Knueven, moved to approve amendments to Assessments & Finance Resolution 7; Purchasing and Procurement, thereby allowing budgeted purchases in amounts less than $2,500 to be made by a Department Director without the issuance of a purchase order and signed authorization of the Chief Financial Officer and/or Chief Executive Officer.


K. New Design Review & Covenants Administration Resolution 10; Affected Parties (Attached)

President Driscoll McKee, seconded by Vice President Thomas, moved to approve Design Review & Covenants Administration Resolution 10; Affected Parties, which establishes formal procedures to govern the manner in which the Design Review Board processes Affected Party registrants.

Director Vis, seconded by Secretary Leighton, moved to table the motion until the March 8, 2012 Board of Directors meeting to allow staff time to address requested amendments.


4

The motion to table the item until March 8, 2012 passed unanimously.

L. Legislative Update (Attached)

Ken Chadwick, Esq., presented and the Board received information on the VA General Assembly Bills that have been introduced during the 2012 legislative session which have a direct impact on community associations. Specifically, Mr. Chadwick provided a synopsis of bills that are will likely pass in both sides of the legislature and have a positive impact on common interest communities:

• HB 410 Condominium and Property Owners' Association Acts; recovery of costs and interest; which provides that in cases in which the prevailing party is the association in an action against an owner for nonpayment of assessments in which the owner has repeatedly failed to pay assessments levied by the association, the Association shall be entitled to an award of reasonable attorney fees, costs expended in the matter, and interest on the judgment even if the proceeding is settled prior to judgment. The delinquent unit owner shall be personally responsible for all reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred by the unit owners' association, whether any judicial proceedings are filed.

• HB 418 Condominium and Property Owners' Association Acts; assessments; imposition of late fees; which Authorizes condominium and property owners' associations to impose a late fee of $15 or such other amount, not to exceed $50, as may be determined by the executive organ for any assessment or installment thereof on any regular or special assessment levied that is not paid on the due date for payment of such assessment.

M. CEO Report

Reston Association's Chief Executive Officer, Milton Matthews provided, and the Board received, his monthly report.

N. Status Report on Development & Redevelopment Projects in Reston (Attached)

Cate Fulkerson, Director of Administration, Member Services & IT presented and the Board received information on the development and/or redevelopment projects underway in Reston.

Director Knueven provided information to the Board on the recent meeting held by Hunter Mill District Supervisor Catherine M. Hudgins and the Fairfax County Department of Housing and Community Development about the solicitation for the potential redevelopment of the Crescent Apartment property.

0. For Your Information (Attached)

Included in the Board packets this month were the following items of interest:

February 16, 2012, VDOT New Release, "Three Major Parkways Now Primary Roads". January 25,2012, Washington Post Editorial Board article, "Keep Dulles Rail on Track". January 31, 2012, Washington Examiner article, "Va. Lawmakers push to prohibit mandatory union labor in Dulles Rail construction." January 2012, Fairfax Times article, "Dulles Rail needs a realistic financing plan". Janua.ry 2012, Dulles Corridor Rail Association article, "NOVA Chamber Partnership Pushes Richmond to Keep Dulles Corridor Metro Project on Track". January 29, 2012, Reston Patch article, "RCA: Forecast Overestimates Toll Revenue".

Reston Association- Regular Board Meeting 5 February 23, 2012

January 29, 2012, Washington Examiner article, "MWAA lacks authority to build Dulles Rail". January 24, 2012, Washington Examiner article, "Loudoun, Fairfax officials ask for tab on running Silver Line". February 2012, Dulles Corridor Metro Rail Project newsletter update. February 8, 2012, Fairfax County website list of Board of Supervisors' Priorities. February 1, 2012, Fairfax Time.com article, "Dulles Rail needs a realistic financing plan". January 31, 2012, Ashburn Patch article, "NOVA Chamber Partnership Pushes Richmond to Keep Dulles Corridor Metro Project on Track". February 14, 2012, Citybizlist.com article, "JBG Secures $58.75 M for Summit I & II in Reston, VA". February 2012, Dulles Corridor Metro rail Project newsletter on Phase 2. February 2012, Reston Association Report on RA News -weekly electronic newsletter- email campaign statistics.

P. Executive Session- Legal, Contractual, and Personnel Matters

President Driscoll McKee, seconded by Director Vis, moved to go into executive session to consult with Legal Counsel to discuss personnel and contractual matters.


The Board adjourned into executive session at 9:42pm and returned to open session at 10:50 pm.

President Driscoll McKee, seconded by Director Collins, moved to direct staff to evaluate the impact of additional units related to the Fairway Redevelopment project, and develop options for offsetting additional costs to the Association.


Ill. CLOSE OF MEETING

Q. Adjourn

Secretary Leighton, seconded by Vice President Thomas, moved to adjourn the meeting.


The meeting adjourned at 10:55 pm.

Respectfully submi.tted,

Jobton~ At-Large Director and Board Secretary

Attachments to Original:

February 23, 2012 Board Meeting Agenda Legal Committee Report Unaudited 2011 Financial Statements


6

Treasurer's Report

Amendments to Assessments & Finance Resolution 7; Purchasing and Procurement

New Design Review & Covenants Administration Resolution 10; Affected Parties Legislative Update

CEO Report

February Development/Redevelopment Matrix For Your Information Items


7

AGENDA Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors

Thursday, February 23, 2012, 7:00pm

NOTE: Times listed for Agenda Items are estimates onlv. Actual times may vary substantially dependent on circumstances. It is suggested that Members having an interest in a specific Agenda Item be in attendance from the start of the meeting.

I. Proceduralltems

Item

A. 7:00pm Call to Order & Opening Remarks Kathleen Driscoll McKee, President

B. 7:05 pm Adoption of Regular Meeting Agenda Kathleen Driscoll McKee, President

C. 7:10pm Approval of Minutes- January 26, 2012 Regular Board Meeting Minutes Kathleen Driscoll McKee, President

II. Presentations, Discussion & Action Items

Item

D. 7:15pm Member & Board Comments

E. 7:30pm Advisory Committee Reports Kathleen Driscoll McKee, President

F. 7:45pm Committee Member & Chair Appointments Kathleen Driscoll McKee, President

G. 7:50pm Legal Committee Report Kathleen Driscoll McKee, President

H. 8:00pm Financial Report- Unaudited 2011 Financial Statements David Hopkins, Chief Financial Officer

I. 8:15pm Treasurer's Report John Higgins, Treasurer

J. 8:20pm Amendments to Assessments & Finance Resolution 7; Purchasing and Procurement David Hopkins, Chief Financial Officer

K. 8:40pm New Design Review & Covenants Administration Resolution 10; Affected Parties Brevetta Jordan, Director of Covenants Administration

L. 8:55pm Legislative Update Ken Chadwick, Esq., Chadwick, Washington, Moriarty, Elmore & Bunn

M. 9:10pm CEO Report

N. Milton Matthews, Chief Executive Officer

9:20pm Status Report on Development & Redevelopment Projects in Reston Cote Fulkerson, Director of Administration, Member Services & IT

Reston Association Board of Directors Meeting

February 23, 2012

Disposition

Discussion

Action

Action

Disposition

Discussion

Discussion

Action

Action

Discussion

Discussion

Action

Action

Discussion

Discussion

Discussion

1

o. 9:30pm For Your Information Milton Matthews, Chief Executive Officer

P. 9:40pm If Needed, Executive Session - Legal, Personnel, and Contractual Matters

Ill. Close of Meeting

Item

Q. 10:15 pm Adjourn Kathleen Driscoll McKee, President

Reston Association Board of Directors Meeting February 23, 2012

Discussion

Action

Disposition

Action

2

AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY February 23, 2012

ITEM l: legal Committee Report

PRESENTER: Kathleen Driscoll McKee, President

Board Motion: Move to approve the report of the Legal Committee and authorize action to be taken on the cases reviewed during its meeting of February 1, 2012.

BACKGROUND As per Reston Deed Section 111.8(b), the Legal Committee is delegated the authority of the Reston Association Board of Directors to review pending or proposed legal action and other legal matters and report its action to the Board.

The Board, by majority vote, may agree to review any decision of the Legal Committee, which shall have the effect of vacating the Legal Committee's decision.

ISSUES

At its meeting ofFebruary 1, 2012, the Legal Committee took action on six (6) cases, voting as follows:

1. Lakeside Cluster: Defer the case to the Legal Committee Meeting of March 7, 2012 to allow Lakeside Cluster an opportunity to remove the overgrown vegetation in the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and Resource Protection Area as instructed by Fairfax County.

Additionally, the Legal Committee encourages the applicant to meet with Fairfax County to discuss the possibility of trimming the bamboo in the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and Resource Protection Area that is not addressed in the waiver request approval.

The Cluster is directed to regularly report and communicate to staff any updates that may occur before the March 7, 2012 meeting.

2. 11225 Leatherwood Drive: Defer action to the Legal Committee Meeting of March 7, 2012 regarding Reston Deed Section Vl.l Design Covenants regarding the landscape plan (#76204) to allow the owners an opportunity to have their Design Review Board application be reviewed at the Full Design Review Board meeting of February 21, 2012.

Reston Association Regular Board Meeting Agenda Item Summary Prepared By/Date: Brevetta Jordan/February 16, 2012

2

3. 2354 Bran leigh Park Court: Dismiss the case regarding Reston Deed Section V1.1. Design Covenants concerning the unapproved metal strips (case #116653) contingent upon payment of the $120 Notice of Violation filing fee.

4. 1528 Woodcrest Drive: Dismiss the case regarding Reston Deed Section Vl.l. Design Covenants concerning the unapproved deck support post color (case #119736) contingent upon payment of the $120 Notice of Violation filing fee.

5. 2356 Branleigh Park Court: File suit immediately following the February 23, 2012 Board of Directors Meeting against the owner of 2356 Bran leigh Park Court to enforce Reston Deed Section Vl.2. (b)(8) Refuse and Debris regarding window, bike, cleaning products, plastic containers, bagged trash, tables, cooler, boxes, indoor rug, gas can, bag, chair (case #116672) and (c) Maintenance of Improvements concerning the rear wall, railing, and steps by the lower entry door (case #116671) and Reston Deed Section Vl.l. Design Covenants concerning the rear elevated deck, rear fence gate top trip board, and fence fabric/plastic screening (cases #99127, 128720, 128721).

6. 2392 Branleigh Park Court: File suit immediately following the February 23, 2012 Board of Directors Meeting against the owner of 2392 Branleigh Park Court to enforce Reston Deed Section Vl.2. (b)(8) Refuse and Debris regarding boards, plastic containers, ladder, indoor chair, tools, broken toys, brooms, rakes, wheelbarrow (case #115474) and Reston Deed Section Vl.l. Design Covenants concerning the molded plastic sheds and shade structures (cases #122226, 115472).


3

RESTON ASSOCIATION LEGAL COMMI1TEE

Minutes of February 1, 2012, Meeting

Committee Members Present: Board President Kathleen Driscoll McKee, Chief Executive Officer Milton Matthews, Director Ken Knueven, and General Counsel Kenneth Chadwick- (ex officio and nonvoting)

Committee Members Absent: Director Tom Vis, Director Mike Collins

At its February 1, 2012, meeting, the Legal Committee voted to take the following actions:

OLD BUSINESS

Maintenance Violation Cases

1. Lakeside Cluster 125751, 125415 Owner(s): c/o Kirby Yarbrough, Cluster President

Motion: Kathleen Driscoll McKee moved the following:

To defer the case to the Legal Committee Meeting of March 7, 2012 to allow Lakeside Cluster an opportunity to remove the overgrown vegetation in the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and Resource Protection Area as instructed by Fairfax County.

Additionally, the Legal Committee encourages the applicant to meet with Fairfax County to discuss the possibility of trimming the bamboo in the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and Resource Protection Area that is not addressed in the waiver request approval.

The cluster is directed to regularly report and communicate to staff any updates that may occur before the March 7, 2012 meeting.

Milton Matthews seconded the motion. The vote was AYE: McKee, Knueven, Matthews. The motion passed unanimously.

Design Violation Cases

2. 11225 Leatherwood Drive Owner: Patricia A .. Rutter



76204

4

3.

4.

To defer action to the Legal Committee Meeting of March 7, 2012 regarding Reston Deed Section VI.I Design Covenants regarding the landscape plan (#76204) to allow the owners an opportunity to have their Design Review Board application be reviewed at the Full Design Review Board meeting of February 21, 2012.


2354 Branleigh Park Court 116653 Owner: Cynthia F. Guest


To dismiss the case regarding Reston Deed Section VI.l. Design Covenants concerning the unapproved metal strips (case #116653) contingent upon payment of the $120 Notice of Violation filing fee.


1528 Woodcrest Drive Owners: Vinit Duggal

Roopa Duggal


119736

To dismiss the case regarding Reston Deed Section VI.1. Design Covenants concerning the unapproved deck support post color (case #119736) contingent upon payment of the $120 Notice of Violation filing fee.


NEW BUSINESS

Design and Maintenance Violation Cases

5. 2356 Branleigh Park Court 128721,128720,116671, 116672

Owner: Pedro Santana

Motion: Milton Matthews moved the following:

To file suit immediately following the February 23, 2012 Board of Directors Meeting against the owner of2356 Branleigh Park Court to enforce Reston


5

Deed Section VI.2. (b)(8) Refuse and Debris regarding window, bike, cleaning products, plastic containers, bagged trash, tables, cooler, boxes, indoor rug, gas can, bag, chair (case #116672) and (c) Maintenance of Improvements concerning the rear wall, railing, and steps by the lower entry door (case #116671) and Reston Deed Section VI.1. Design Covenants concerning the rear elevated deck, rear fence gate top trip board, and fence fabric/plastic screening (cases #99127, 128720, 128721).

Kathleen Driscoll McKee seconded the motion. The vote was AYE: McKee, Knueven, Matthews. The motion passed unanimously.

6. 2392 Branleigh Park Court 122226,1154 72,1154 7 4 Owner(s): David Crocker

Virginia Crocker

Motion: Milton Matthews moved the following:

To file suit immediately following the February 23, 2012 Board of Directors Meeting against the owner of 2392 Branleigh Park Court to enforce Reston Deed Section VI.2. (b)(8) Refuse and Debris regarding boards, plastic containers, ladder, indoor chair, tools, broken toys, brooms, rakes, wheelbarrow (case #115474) and Reston Deed Section VI.1. Design Covenants concerning the molded plastic sheds and shade structures (cases #122226, 115472).

Kathleen Driscoll McKee seconded the motion. The vote was AYE: McKee, Knueven, Matthews. The motion passed unanimously.

DISCUSSION

None


6

Reston Association Budget Variance Analysis

For the Month Year December 31, 2011

Revenues

Assessment Income: Assessment income is below budget $95, 386 which is approximately 340 tax relief properties where the assessment was reduced by $280 per property.

Open Space; Is under budget by $11,636, this is primarily due to low stream restorations fee

Community Pools: Aquatics revenue is under budget by $45,544 due to lower than expected sales of Non-Resident Family Pool Passes. The revenue was budgeted based on the 2008 and 2009 actual revenue.

Tennis: Tennis revenue is under budget by $31,622. This is comprised of the following major variance: Adult Group Lesson under budget by $14,688, Rental Income under budget by $4,000, Non-Resident Individual Members under budget by $6,094, and Tennis Tournament Fees under budget by $4,122.

Community Buildings: Is under budget by $7,570, this is due to low rentals to for profit groups.

Member Services, Senior Events, & Parks & Recreation Administration: Is under budget by $2,431, this is primarily due to lower than anticipated shipping and handling revenues.

Late Fees, Collection Fees & Finance Charges: The major variances in Collection are as follows: Transfer fees are under budget $93,250. This variance is permanent. Transfer fees were budgeted at I ,200 property sales qualifying for the fee and we expect about 800 in 2011. The demand letter fees are under budget $26,150 as we can no longer charge demand letter fees for accounts with Chadwick Washington. This is due to federal collections laws. Judgments are over budget by $43,974. Communications advertising revenue is over budget by $32,080.

Revenues - Continued

Covenant Administration: The sales ofPOAA documents are higher than expected. Also the billable POAA was budgeted at the old rate that was charged prior to the laws being changed. In addition the Covenants department has recognized $51,497 ofunbudgeted Judgment income.

Interest Income: The investments income is below budget due to lower returns than expected.

Expenses

All expense accounts are under budget except the following:

Legal Fees are over budget by $279,443. The total actual fees were $579,443, of which $278,258 are for collections and $300,686 are for all other legal issues.

Management Services: is over budget by $77,176. This is due to the application of two required year end GAAP adjustments. The first requires that rent expense is presented at the average monthly rent for 12 month in a fiscal or calendar year. The average monthly rent is based on the average over the term of the lease, which is 144 months. The adjustment was additional rent of$525,610.80 and the second was the recognition of deferred income. The deferred income is related to the tenant improvements we received from the landlord. This adjustment reduced rent expense by$ 157,308. The net effect of these two adjustments was to increase rent expense by $368,302.80.

Depreciation and Amortization Expense is over budget by $262,962. This is due to amortization ofleasehold improvements and under estimating depreciation in the budget process.

RESTON ASSOCIATION Balance Sheet

For the Month Ending December 31st Modified Accrual Basis

UNAUDITED DRAFT

20ll 2010

Assets

Cash $ 492,580 $ 39,692 Investments Operations 4,152,800 2,734,696 Investment R&R 3,801 '169 3,747,198 Short-Term Investments 281,380 285,031 Accounts Receivable 891,251 986,774 Allowance for Bad Debts (96,623) (152,097) Due from Related parties 42,000 Prepaid Expenses 210,427 180,206 Property & Equipment 36,145,273 35,614,935 Improvement in Progress 814,204 545,361 Accumulated Depreciation (17,714,978) (16,625,502)

Total Assets $ 28,977,482 $ 27,398,294

Liabilities

Accounts Payable $ 216,111 $ 356,263 Accrued Salaries & Taxes 512,133 486,054 Payroll Withholdings 40,215 40,791 Deferred Income 1,622,861 59,742 Deferred Obligations 2,834,146 2,469,494

Total Liabilities 5,225,467 $ 3,412,344

Equity

Equity--Fund Balance 2,707,760 $ 3,643,991 Equity--Land & Improvements 8,661,617 8,661,617 Equity--Facilities 8,985,369 8,985,369 Net Income Year-To-Date (233,947) (936,243)

Total Operating Fund 20,120,798 $ 20,354,733

Repair & Replacement Fund 3,631,217 3,631,217

Total Liabilities & Equity $ 28,977,482 $ 27,398,294

Assessment Revenue and Accounts Receivable are being carried on a modified accrual basis. Collection Fees and legal Fees are being recognized when legal counsel settles each account.

RESTON ASSOCIATION STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES

FOR THE MONTH ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2011 ACCURAL BASIS

UNAUDITED DRAFT

··,··~i*!,.!·i::::!!!:•••!' .. ,, .•. :.'.~~;i::;:il1 !::~::;:;::~i~~·: •.•••••. ;, •. ;;~::~j,., •. ,.:.:···:~~:~f~~l I .. -.... -.. ~· '\:"1UWENll!&r. 'TJ?]

Assessments $10,790,325 $ Open Space 699,819 Community Pools 724,309 Tennis 200,678 Community Buildings 57,572 Member srv, events, senior pgms, P&R admin 36,489 Late fees, collection fees, finance charges, & misc. 712,829 Covenants Administration 189,631 Interest income Capital Gains

216,000

98,101 21,853

$ !1,006,325 $!1,101,7!1 699,819 $ 711,455 724,309 $ 769,853 200,678 $ 232,300

57,572 $ 65,142 36,489 $ 38,920

712,829 $ 701,500 189,631 $ 131,500 98,101 $ 338,851 21,853 $

Total Revenues $13,411,652 $ 335,954 $ 13,747,606 $14,091,232

F -- ,,., .. ,·,.: ·.··: '':8XPtJii\$£S'·· ... ·. I Covenants Administration $ 965,347 $ 965,347 $ 1,065,771 Open Space 4,094,818 4,094,818 4,359,423 Community Buildings 109,695 109,695 130,580 Community Pools 1,499,608 1,499,608 1,542,558 Tennis 406,151 406,151 395,651 Events & senior programs 138,007 138,007 172,421 P&R and Capital administration 343,357 343,357 359,536 Communications 595,681 595,681 570,479 Corporate & Board 155,173 155,173 201,983 Finance 1,024,085 1,024,085 1,027,174 Legal 588,011 588,0!1 308,028 Management Services 2,521,851 2,521,851 2,444,675 (Gain) Loss on sale of assets Depreciation 1 539,769 1,539,769 1,276,806

Total Expenses $13,981,554 $ $ !3~981,554 $ 13,855,085

Excess (Deficit) of Revenues Over Expenses * $ (569,901) $ 335,954 $ (233,947) $ 236,147

(95,386) -05)1}0 {1 1.636) -1.6~:0

(45,544) -5.9% (31,622) -lJ.m·o

(7,570) -11.6~-'0

(2,431) -6.2% 11,329 1.6% 58,131 44.2%

(240,750) -71.0% 21,853 0.0%

(343,625) -2.4C:·O

(100,424) -9.4% (264,605) -6.1%

(20,884) -16.0% (42,951) -2.8% 10,500 2.7%

(34,414) -20.0% (16,178) -4.5% 25,202 4.4%1

(46,810) -23.2% (3,089) -0.3%

279,984 90.9% 77,176 ~ ")(I•

.' ... /(>

0.0% 262,962 'J0.6<"!-'0

126.469 0.9(~:0

(470,095) -199.1~-~~

2/16/2012 5:13PM

· :zon/

$10,560,731 445,595 4.2% $ !1,101,71' 650,466 49,354 7.6% 711,45: 723,108 1,202 0.2% 769,85: 224,349 (13,672) -10.60:·0 232,30l

57,744 (172) -0.3%, 65,14: 27,277 9,2!1 33.8% 38,921

694,463 18,365 2.6% 701,501 172,199 17,432 10.1% 131,501 172,199 (74.098) -43.0% 338,85

21,853 0.0%

$13,282,536 $ 4§:i,070 3.5% $ 14,091,23:

$ 971,989 (6,642) -0.7% $ 1,065,77 4,435,125 (340,307) -7.7% 4,359,42:

107,565 2,130 2.0% 130,581 1,529,706 (30,099) -2.0% 1,542,55:

420,081 (13,929) -3.3% 395,65 130,491 7,516 5.8% 172,42 336,159 7.199 2.1% 359,531 573,543 22.138 3.9~--;, 570,47' 184,108 (28,935) -15.7% 201,98. 970,549 53,536 5.5% 1,027, J7. 508,454 79.557 15.6~··0 308,02

2,616,461 (94,610) -3.6% 2,444,67 0.0%

1,457,027 8:2.742 5.7<"!·"0 1,276,80•

$14,241,258 $ (259,704) -1.8% 13,855,08

$ (958,722) $ 724,774 -75.6% $ 236,14

'" . .. :· ·;·;••J(EPEfiraBS:k'' I

Assessments $10,790,325 Open Space 699,819 Community Pools 724,309 Tennis 200,678 Community Buildings 57,572 Member srv, events, senior pgms, P&R admin 36,489 Late fees, collection fees, finance charges, & misc. 712,829 Covenants Administration 189,631 Interest income Capital Gains

Total Revenues $13,411,652

I · · ; ; · . ; •EX!'!!NSJ!S:" · · I Covenants Administration $ 965,347 Open Space 4,094,818 Community Buildings 109,695 Community Pools 1,499,608 Tennis 406,151 Events & senior programs 138,007 P&R and Capital administration 343,357 Communications 595,681 Corporate & Board 155,173 Finance 1,024,085 Legal 588,011 Management Services 2,153,548 (Gain) Loss on sale of assets Capital Expenditues 1,242,748

Total Expenses $13,316,230

Excess (Deficit) of Revenues Over Expenses * $ ,,

95,422

RESTON ASSOCIATION STATEMENT OF REVENUES A.~ EXPENSES

FOR THE MONTH ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2011 MODIFIED CASH BASIS

UNAUDITED DRAFT

$ 216,000 $ 11,006,325 $11,101,711 (95,386) 699,819 $ 711,455 (11,636)

724,309 $ 769,853 (45,544) 200,678 $ 232,300 (31,622)

57,572 $ 65,142 (7,570) 36,489 $ 38,920 (2,431)

712,829 $ 701,500 11,329 189,631 $ 131,500 58,131

98,101 98,101 $ 338,851 (240,751))

___ 21,853 21,853_$ 21,853

$ 335,954 $ 13,747,606 $ 14,091,232 (343,625)

$ 965,347 $ 1,065,771 (100,424) 4,094,818 4,359,423 (264,605)

109,695 130,580 (20,884) 1,499,608 1,542,558 (42,951)

406,151 395,651 10,500 138,007 172,421 (34,414) 343,357 359,536 (16,178) 595,681 570,479 25~02

155,173 201,983 (46,810) 1,024,085 1,027,174 (3,089)

588,011 308,028 279,984 2,153,548 2,444,675 (291,127)

1,242,748 1,934,685 (691,937)

_$_ $ 13,316~230 $14,512,963 {1,196,733)

$ 335,954 $ 431,376 $ (421,732) 853,107

2116/2012 4:43PM

·· • ••· •zow:·

~0.9% $10,560,731 445,595 4.2% $ II,IOI,n -1.6% 650,466 49,354 7.6% 711,45: ~5.9% 723,108 1,202 0.2% 769,85:

-!3.6% 224,349 (23.672) -10.6% 232,301 -11 .6%~ 57,744 (172) -0.3%~ 65,14:

-6.20.:0 27,277 9,211 33.8% 38,921 1.6% 694,463 18,365 2.6% 701,501

44.2% 172,199 17,432 10.1% 131,501 -7 t.o~:o 172,199 (74,098) -43.0%~ 338,85

0.9% 21,853 0.0%

-2.4'% $13,282,536 $ 465,070 3.5% $ 14,091,23:

-9.4% $ 971,989 (6,642) -0.7% $ 1,065,77 -6.1% 4,435,125 (340,307) -7.7% 4,359,42:

-16.0% 107,565 2,130 2.0% 130,581 -2.8% 1,529,706 (30,099) -2.0% 1,542,551 2.7~-0 420,081 (13,929) -3.3% 395,65

-20.0% 130,491 7,516 5.8% 172,42 -4.5% 336,159 7.199 2.1% 359,53< 4.4~-~ 573,543 22.138 3.9~:0 570,47'

-23.2% 184,108 (28,935) -15.7% 201,98: -0.3% 970,549 53,536 5.5~:0 1,027, 17, 90 9'% 508,454 795·57 15.6~:0 308,021

-11.9% 2,616,461 (462,913) -17.7% 2,444,67: 0.0% 0.0% -35.8% 1,457,027 (214,279) -14.7% 1,934,68:

-8.2% $14,241,258 $ (92~.~-_-6.5% 14,512,96:

-202.3% $ (958,722) $ 1,390,097 -145.0% $ (421,73:

2011 Capital Categories

Pathways Tennis Community Buildings and CSF Lakes, Ponds and Dams Recreational and Natural Areas Aquatics Administration

Total Capital

2010 Carrv Forwards

Barton Hill Lake Thoreau Spa wall & Steps Newbridge Deck Bridge Replacement Dogwood Pool Renovation North Shore Pool Concrete Deck Ridge Heights Deck Lighting North Shore Front Entrance Stairs North Shore Entrance Renovation Leasehold Improvements Reston On Foot 2010 Carry-Forward Sub-Total

Grand Total

$

RESTON ASSOCIATION CAPITAL EXPENDITURES

FOR THE MONTH ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2011 UNAUDITED

DRAFT

204,586 $ 242,201 $ (37,615) -16% 184,334 222,415 (38,081) -17% 18,778 15,500 3,278 21% 24,949 28,617 (3,668) -13%

149,163 143,173 5,990 4% 312,731 885,085 (572,354) -65% 171,577 185,000 (13,423) -7%

$

l~iJl $ 1.066.119 $ 1.721.991 $ (655.872) -38.09%

$ 9,010 $9,010 $ - 0% l'f}ij ,,',:. $

:,:-:::-~

- - - 0% 577 - 577 0%

38,460 - 38,460 0% 89,347 134,026 (44,680) -33% 37,706 17,658 20,048 114%

- 28,000 (28,000) -100% - 5,000 (5,000) -100% - - - 0% - 19,000 (19.000) -100%

242,201 $ 37,615 $ 239,875 222,415 38,081 222,415

15,500 (3,278) 15,500 28,617 3,668 28,617

143,173 (5,990) 143,173 885,085 572,354 885,085 185,000 13,423 185,000

9,010 $ - $ 9,010

- (577) 577 ,, 31,475 (6,985) 31,475

102,551 13,205 102,551 17,658 (20,048) 17,658 28,000 28,000 28,000

5,000 5,000 5,000 19,000 19,000 19,000

- - 219

RESTON ASSOCIATION INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO

As of December 31, 2011 UNAUDITED

IJR/\ FT?JTii?I~~Nr~~::0[0Z~;wJ

STI Classic Fund Money Market .II%@ $1 per unit N/A N/A

$ 1,138,386 $ US Government Ultra Short Term Bond Fund .88% Weekly Yield

IRe:>liz<:d Capital Gains/(Losses) NAY~ $10.10 Um·ealiized Capital Gains/(Losses) NAY~ $10.10

Market Value

$ 3,000,000 $ $ 13,758 $ $ 655 $

$

NOTE: Allocations between Operating and R&R Funds are estimated until the 2011 audit is complete.

12-2011 INV.xla Summary

2/16/2012 3:39PM

10,414

1,432,612 6,500,000

10,287 11,069

Operations Data: 2011

YTD December

Revenue

Assessments s 11,006,325 Open Space 699,819 Community Pools 724,309 late Fees, Collection Fees, etc. 712,829 Interest Income 98,101 Capital Gains 21,853 All Other 484,370

13,747,606

Expenses

Covenant Administration s 965,347 Open Space 4,094,818 Community Pools 1.499,608 Finance 1,024,085 Management Services 2,521,851 All Other 3,875,845 Total Expenses 13,981,554

Excess (Deficit) Revenues over Expenses s (233,947)

Other Key Performance Indicators Capital Expenditures s 1,242,748

Balance Sheet Data

~rations

Cash and Investments

Cash s 489,188 Money Market 1,138,389 Ultra Short Term Bond Fund (SIGVX) 3,000,000 Realized Capital Gains/(losses) 13,758 Unrealized capital Gains/(Losses) 655

s 4,641,990

Other Assets Accounts Receivable, net Uabllities Accounts Payable

Accrued Salaries and Taxes Payroll Withholdings Deferred Rent Uability

Staffing

Regular Full Time Regular Part Time Seasonal

RESTON ASSOOATION FINANCiAl DATA SUMMARY

FOR THE PERIOD ENDING OECEMBER31, 2011

ACCURAL BASIS DRAFT

UNAUDITED

Vs CUrr YTD Budget 2010

Budget F/(U) % YTD December

$ 11,101,711 s (95,386) -0.9% s 10,560,731 711,455 (11,636) -L6% 650,466

769,853 (45,544) -5.9% 723,108

701,500 11,329 1.6% 694,463

338,8S1 (240,750) -no% 172,199 21,853 0.0%

467,862 16,508 3.S% 481,570 14,091.232 (343,625) -2.4% 13,282,536

s 1,065,771 100,424 9.4% s 971,989 4,3S9,423 264,60S 6.1% 4,435,125 l,542,SS8 42,951 2.8% 1,529, 706

1,027,174 3,089 0.3% 970,549

2,444,67S (77,176) -3.2% 2,616,461

3,415 483 (460,362) -13.5% 3,717,427 13,8SS,085 (126,469) -0.9% 14,241,258

s . 236147 s (470,~ -199.1% s __ (958,722)

s 1,934,68S s 691,937 35.8% s 1,779,727

December- December-2011 2010

R&R Total -----=rotai

s s 489,188 s 39,692

294,226 1,432,615 981,894 3,SOO,OOO 6,500,000 5,500,000

(3,471) 10,287 10414 11,069 357

s 3,8011169 s 8,443,159 s 6,521,943

s 843,367 s 834,677 233,401 363,711 519,188 486,054

40,215 S9,742 2,185,434 2,181,756

78 76 4 3

23 27 105 106

2011 vs 2010 2011 vs Annual Budget

F/(U) % Forecast Budget ~ %

s 445,595 4.2% s 11,010,525 $ 11,101,711 s (91.:126) -0.8% 49,354 7.6% s 639,5S9 711,455 (71,896) -10.1%

1,202 0.2% s 718,845 769,783 (50,938) -6.6% 18,36S 2.6% s 608,238 701,500 (93,262) -13.3%

(74,098) -43.0% s 98,235 338,851 (240,616) -7LO% 21,853 0.0% s 21.204 21,204 0.0%

2,800 0.6% s 6n,709 467,932 209,n7 44.8% 465,070 ~ ~.n4,316 14,091,232- (316,916) -2.2%

6,642 0.7% 1,028,357 1.065,771 37,414 3.5% 340,307 7.7% 4,164,169 4,359,423 195,254 4.S%

30,099 20% 1,488,S53 1,542,558 54,005 3.5% (53,536) -5.5% 1,062,629 1,027,174 (35,454) -3.5% 94,6W 3.6% 2,228,366 2,444,675 216,309 8.8%

(158,417) -4.3% 3,864,245 3,415,482 (448,763) -13.1% 259,704 ~ 13,836,319 13.855,084 18,765 0.1%

s 205,366 ~ s (62,003) s _ _TI§_,148 s (298,151) -1263%

s 536,979 30.2% s 1,934,629 s 1,934,629 s 0.0%

Operations Data: 2011

YTD December

Revenue Assessments $ 11,006,325 Open Space 699,819 Community Pools 724,309 Late Fees, Collection Fees, etc. 712,829 ln'll:!rest Income 98,101 Capital Gains 21,853 All Other 484,370

13,747,606

Expenses Covenant Administration $ 965,347 Open Space 4,094,818 Community Pools 1,499,608 Finance 1,024,085 Management Services 2,153,548 All Other 3,578,824 Total Expenses 13,316,230

Excess (Deficit) Revenues over Expenses $ _____§1,376

Other Key Performance Indicators capital Expenditures $ 1,242,748

Balance Sheet Data ~rations

cash and Investments Cash $ 489,188 Money Market 1,138,389 Ultra Short Term Bond Fund (SIGVX) 3,000,000 Realized Capital Gains/(Losses} 13,758 Unrealized Capital Gains/(Losses) 655

$ 4,641,990

Other Assets Accounts Receivable, net Uabilities Accounts Payable

Accrued Salaries and Taxes Payroll Withholdings Deferred Rent Uability

Staffing Regular Full Time Regular Part Time Seasonal

RESTON ASSOCIATION FINANOAL DATA SUMMARY

FOR THE PERIOD ENDING DECEMBER 31,2011

MODIFIED CASH BASIS DRAFT

UNAUDITED

Vs CUrrYTD Budget 2010

Bud~ _!L[U) % YTD December

$ 11.101,711 $ {95,386) -0.9% $ 10,560,731 711,455 (11,636) -1.6% 650,466 769,853 (45,544) -5.9% 723,108 701,500 11,329 1.6% 694,463 338,851 (240,750) -71.0% 172.,199

21,853 0.0% 467,862 16,508 3.5% 481,570.

14,091,232 (343,625) -2.4% 13,282,536

$ l.065,n1 100,424 9.4% $ 971,989 4,359,423 264,605 6.1% 4,435,125 1,542,558 42,951 2~% 1,529,706 1,027,174 3,089 0.3% 970,549 2,444,675 291,127 11.9% 2,616,461 4,073,362 494,538 12.1% 3,717,427

14,512,963 1,196,733 8.2% 14,241,258

$ (421,732) $ 853,107 -202.3% $ _ (958,7El_

$ 1,934,685 $ 691,937 35.8% $ 1,n9,727

December- December-2011 2010

R&R Total ----;:;;tai

$ $ 489,188 $ 39,692 294,226 1,432,615 981,894

3,500,000 6,500,000 5,500,000 (3,471) 10,287 10,414 11,069 357

$ 3,801,169 $ 8,443,159 ~S21,943

$ 843,367 $ 834,677 233,401 363,711 519,188 486,054

40,215 59,742 2,185,434 2,181,756

78 76 4 3

23 27 105 106

2011vs2010 2011 VsAnnuaiBudget

F/(U) % Forecast Budget F/(U) %

$ 445,595 4.2% $ 11,010,525 $ 11,101.711 $ {91,186) -0.8% 49,354 7.6% $ 639,559 711.455 (71,896) -10.1%

1,202 0.2% $ 718,845 769,783 (50,938) -6.6% 18,36S 2.6% $ 608,238 701,500 (93,262) -13.3%

(74,098) -43.0% $ 98,235 338,851 (240,616) -71.0% 21,853 0.0% $ 21.204 21,204 0.0%

2,800 0.6% $ 677,709 467,932 209,7n 44.8% 465,070 3.5% 13,774,316 14,091,232 (316,916) -2.2%

6,642 n1% 1,028,357 ]..065,771 37,414 3.5% 340,307 7.7% 4,164,169 4,359,423 195,254 4.5%

30,099 2.0% 1,488,553 1,542,558 54,005 3.5% {53,536) -5.5% 1,062,629 1,027,174 (35,454) -3.5% 462,913 17.7% 2,228,366 2,444,675 216,309 8.8% 138,603 ...2Z!§. 3,514,245 4,073,361 559,116 13.7% 925,028 6.5% 13,486,319 14,S12,963 1,026,644 ~

$ (45~,9S8) ~ $ 287,997 $ (421,73~) $ 709,728 -168.3%

$ 536,979 30.2% $ 1,934,629 $ 1,934,629 $ 0.0%

RESTON ASSOCIATION BUDGET SUMMARY

R & R FUND AND CAPITAL BUDGET AT DECEMBER 31, 2011

2011 2011

Budget Actual Variance

Opening Fund Balance 3,631,217 3,631,217

Additions

Minimum Transfer 216,000 216,000

Budget Decision Transfer 1,276,806 1,276,806

Interest 338,851 101,523 (237,328)

2010 Additions 1,831,657 1,594,329 (237,328)

Available 5,462,874 5,225,546 (237,328)

Expenditures

Carried Over from Previoius Year

Barton Hill 9,010 9,010

Lake Thoreau Spa Wall & Steps

Newbridge Deck 577 (577)

Bridge Replacement 31,475 38,460 (6,985)

Dogwood Pool Renovation 102,551 89,347 13,204

North Shore Pool Concrete Deck 17,658 37,706 (20,048)

Ridge Heights Deck Lighting 28,000 28,000

North Shore Front Entrance Stairs 5,000 5,000

North Shore Entrance Renovation 19,000 19,000

Leasehold Improvements

Reston on Foot 1,530 (1,530)

2010 Carryover Items 212,694 176,630 36,064

2011 Capital Expenditures

Administration 185,000 171,577 13,423 Bridges

Community Buildings & CSF 15,500 18,778 (3,278)

Equipment

Lakes 28,617 24,949 3,668

Pathways 242,201 204,586 37,615

Pools 885,085 312,731 572,354

Recreation Areas 143,173 149,163 (5,990)

Ballfields

Tennis & Multipurpose Courts 222,415 184,334 38,081 Walker nature Education Center

Dredging

1,721,991 1,066,118 655,873

Closing Available Fund. Balance 3,528,189 3,982,798 454,609

Change in Fund Balance (103,028) 351,581 454,609

RESTON ASSOCIATION BUDGET SUMMARY

OPERATING BUDGET AT DECEMBER 31, 2011

2011 2011 Over Budget Actual (Under)

Assessments 11,101,711 11,006,32S (9S,386)

Reserve Transfer, Minimum (216,000) (21,6,000)

Reserve Transfer, Budget (1,276,806) (1,276,806)

Operating Fund Assessment Revenue 9,608,90S 9,S13,S19 (95,386)

Communicatoins & Advertising Late Fees, collections 701,500 591,S83 (109,917) Covenants Administrtion 131,SOO 138,676 7,176

Open Space 711,4SS 608,208 (103,247) Community Pools 769,853 710,68S (S9,168)

Tennis 232,300 213,811 (18,489) Community Buildings 6S,142 41,840 (23,302) Member Services, Seniors, P&R 38,920 20,208 (18,712)

Operating Revenue 12,259,57S 11,838,S30 (421,045)

Covenants Administrtion 1,065,771 965,347 (100,424) Open Space 4,359,423 4,094,818 (264,605) Community Pools 1,542,558 1,499,608 (42,950) Tennis 39S,6S1 406,151 10,500 Community Buildings 130,580 109,695 (20,885) Member Services, Seniors, P&R 531,957 481,364 (SO,S93) Lakes, Ponds, & Streams Communications S70,479 S9S,681 2S,202 Corporate & Board 201,983 1SS,173 (46,810) Finance 1,027,174 1,024,08S (3,089) legal 308,028 S88,011 279,983 Management Services 2,444,67S 2,S21,8S1 77,176

Total Expense 12,S78,279 12,441,784 (136,49S)

Revenue Excess I (Deficit) (318,704) (603,2S4) (284,SSO)

DRAFT

Assessment & Finance Resolution 7!i; Purchasing and Procurement

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors is responsible for the administration and operation of the Association consistent with the amended provisions of the Reston Documents; and

WHEREAS, Section 111.2(a) of the First Amendment to the Deed of Amendment to the Deeds of Dedication of Reston ("Amended Reston Deed") delineates that it is a purpose of the Association to interpret, administer, and enforce the protective covenants and restrictions of the Deed; and

WHEREAS, Section 111.2(b) of the Amended Reston Deed delineates that, for the benefit of the Members, it is a purpose of the Association to acquire, own, sell, mortgage, convey, encumber, and lease property, real or personal, and to improve, administer, and maintain such property in neat and good order; and

WHEREAS, Section III.S(e) of the Amended Reston Deed provides the Board of Directors with all powers necessary and appropriate for carrying out the purposes of the Association which are enabled by law or the Reston Documents; and

WHEREAS, Section III.S(f) of the Amended Reston Deed authorizes the Association to exercise the powers now or hereafter conferred by law on Virginia nonstock corporations as may be necessary or desirable to accomplish the purposes of the Association; and

WHEREAS, Section Vl.7 of the Amended Reston Bylaws provides the Chief Executive Officer ("CEO"), as well as the President, with the authority to execute all deeds, contracts, or other documents on behalf oft he Association; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors and CEO deems it to be prudent to adopt an administrative policy for third party contract processing so as to protect the financial interests of the Association.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the following policies will govern the manner in which the Association processes all third party contracts for services:

1. The Chief Executive Officer ("CEO:} may delegate third party contract signing authority to Department Directors.

2. A P.gurchases under $±;-G002,500 does not require a purchase order and invoices will be approved caR 13e a~JtAerizea by the appropriate CliO, CFO, era Department Directors.

Reston Association Assessments & Finance Resolution 7; Purchasing and Procurement Sep!em~er 28, 2(}(}6Februarv 23. 2012

1

DRAFT

3. 8_Jlgurchases between $2,500±;QOO and $4,999 are--requireLEi--2 purchase order and must te be signed by the Department Director and CFO or CEO, and the purchasing agent must obtain at least two verbal bids.

4. A purchase equal to or greater than $5,000 requires a purchase order signed by the Department Director, CFO, and the CEO.

5. The purchasing agent will obtain at least two S;Wwritten quotations/bids FR~st 13e shall 13e el3taiAea from competitive sources, to the extent practicable, for purchases equal to or greater than $5,000. The quotations/bids will be attached to the purchase order for approval.

4. , fer eeAtraets fer serviees e€j~al te er iA e)Eeess ef $5,000.

§,_A record of the quotations/bids received and the basis for any award of a contract for service shall be retained by the Association for one year after t!Te-completion of the contract.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that in an effort to integrate environmental considerations into the purchasing process, the Association shall strive to:

1. Increase acquisition of environmental friendly products and services to the extent feasible, andt consistent with price, performance, availability,y and safety; and,

2. Take into account environmental factors as early as possible in the purchasing process.

ATTEST: Resolution was adopted at a Regular Meeting of the Reston Association Board of Directors held on June 22, 2006; amended on ami-September 28, 2006; and amended on February 23, 2012.

Assistant Secretary

Reston Association Assessments & Finance Resolution 7; Purchasing and Procurement Sefl!emeer 28, 2G96Februarv 23. 2012

2

DRAFT

Design Review & Covenants Administration Resolution 10; Affected Parties

WHEREAS, Section 111.5(e) of the First Amendment to the Deed of Amendment to the Deeds of

Dedication of Reston ("Amended Reston Deed") provides the Reston Association ("RA") Board of Directors with all powers necessary and appropriate for carrying out the purposes of the Association which are enabled by law or the Reston Documents; and

WHEREAS, Section 111.6 of the Amended Reston Deed sets forth the composition and responsibilities of the Design Review Board ("ORB"); and

WHEREAS, Section 111.6(d)(l) of the Amended Reston Deed delineates the responsibilities of the ORB stating that the DRS has the power to interpret, administer, and render decisions involving the design covenants in Deed Section Vl.1 in accordance with the published Design Guidelines; and

WHEREAS, Section l.l(a) of the Amended Reston Deed defines Affected Party as any owner of Property subject to the Amended Reston Deed, including but not limited to the Board of Directors, or Cluster, or Condominium, or their agents who register with the ORB and who is materially impacted by the use or design of another Property owner; and

WHEREAS, Section 111.6(4)(vi) of the Amended Reston Deed delineates that notice of DRB decisions

be delivered to the applicant and all Affected Parties; and

WHEREAS, Section 111.6(4)(vii) of the Amended Reston Deed states that the DRB is to consider and

decide appeals from applicants or any Affected Parties; and

WHEREAS, Section X.2 of the Amended Bylaws for Reston ("Bylaws") stipulates that any applicant or

Affected Party shall have the right to meet with and be heard by the full-ORB or the ORB Panel

considering an application; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the following procedures shall govern the manner in which

the Design Review Board processes Affected Party registrants:

1. Definition of Affected Party. Any owner of Property subject to the Amended Reston Deed,

including but not limited to the Board of Directors, or Cluster, or Condominium, or their agents who register with the DRB and who is materially impacted by the use or design of another Property owner. Such owner or agent must request Affected Party status in accordance with

the procedures in Section 2 of this Resolution .• INo Affected Party status shall be granted fora ORB application y;hich meets the qualifications for "Staff Review" as delineated In Design RevieW & CoV~nants Administration Resolution !111: ] ________________________________________ ·····------ _ _ ___ __ -· Comment [CFl]: Correet reference?

Design Review & Covenants Admlnls1ration Resolution 10; Affected Parties February 23, 2012

1

Comment [CF2]: Rework??

DRAFT

2. Affected Party Registration Procedures. Any person wishing to register as an Affected Party shall provide in writing the reasons for making such a request to the ORB Secretary. bettefS Written requests of registration from those receiving "neighbor notification", as per Section ll.c.2 of Design Review & Covenants Administration Resolution 8, about a Design Review Application must be sent within five business days from the date of notification. The DRB Secretary shall provide written notice to the applicant prior to the DRB meeting to consider the application that a request for Affected Party status has been made.

3. DRB Criteria for Considering Affected Party Registration Requests. The 1"11 QRB er aA'/ QRB PaRel may e'eR)' s1:1eA reql:Jest fr:em aA·; ewAer feJ!Eef3t tAe ResteR P.ssaeiatieA BearEJ), if it eleterFAiRes that tRe evJRer's 13FSf3erty is Rot affeeteel mater:ially lay ti=le af3j9lleatieR. If erigiAally heare b'l the 1"11 QRB, '""h eeeisieR eaRAet be a~~ealea, ~ewever, if tAe Affeetee Party stat"' aeeisieR is eeAiea by a QRB PaAel, theA tAat aeeisieA eaA lle a~~ealea te the 1"11 9RB. If Atfeete8 Party stat1:1s is EleAieel aAEI tl=le MemBer wisl=les te 3J3f3eal tRe SeeisiaR sf tRe QRB PaAel, theA tAe MeA'lber "'"'t state tAelr iAteAt verbally at tAe QRB PaAel A'leetiAg, aAd review ef the a~~lieatieA lA ~"estieA v,•e"la be delayea ""til after tAe f"ll QRB A'lakes a aeteFA'liAatieA. In determining whether a property is materially affected, the DRB shall consider the following criteria:

a. What is the location of the owner's property relative to the applicant's property;

b. Will the alteration or improvement be clearly visible from the owner's property;

c. Will the proposal significantly affect the privacy, view, value, structural integrity, natural environment, or peaceful enjoyment of the owner's property or, in the case of a Cluster Association, that of individual Cluster properties or the Cluster's Common Area;

d. Will the proposal, in the case of a Cluster Association, contravene or alter the Cluster's standards/Design Guidelines; and

e. Will the proposal establish a precedent within the neighborhood for review of similar Items?

The full-DRS or any ORB Panel may deny such request from any owner (except the Reston Association Boardt if it determines that the owner's property is not affected materially by the application. If originally heard by the full-ORB, such decision cannot be appealed. However, if the Affected Party status decision is denied by a DRB Panel, then that decision can be appealed to the fuii-DRB. If Affected Party status is denied and the Member wishes to appeal the decision of the DRB Panel, then the Member must state their Intent verbally at the DRB Panel meeting, and review of the application in question would be delayed until after the fuii-DRB makes a determination.

4. Affected Party Rights. Any owner of property who has registered for, and not been denied, Affected Party status has the right:

Design Review & Covenants Administration Resolution 10; Affected Parties February 23, 2012

2

--{iormatted: Indent: Left: 0.25"

DRAFT a. To be heard at meetings of the fuii-DRB or DRB Panels in accordance with Section 5 of this

Resolution;

b. Shall be sent notice of DRB decisions and any subsequent reviews to be held by the DRB; and

c. Shall be sent notice of an appeal by the applicant, and may file his or her own appeal of any DRB decision made subsequent to registration, all with respect to the application which impacts the Affected Party's property and all in accordance with these procedures.

5. Presentations by Affected Parties. Affected Parties may present their comments and supporting material in writing, orally, or both. If presented orally, Affected Parties shall abide by the following rules:

a. When called to speak by the chair of the fuii-DRB or a DRB Panel, a speaker will state his/her tl>eif.full name and street address.

b. Individual Affected Parties, representing their own interest or opinion, are allotted approximately three (3) minutes to speak.

c. Affected Parties speaking on behalf of a homeowners' group, Reston Association committee, or Reston based organization are allotted approximately five (5) minutes.

d. Comments shall be timed by the DRB Secretary. The DRB Secretary will indicate when the speaker's allotted time, as outlined above, has expired. This is done to ensure all speakers are given equal time. Rules a- c above are subject to change at the discretion of the chair of the fuii-DRB or a DRB Panel.

ATTEST: Resolution was adopted at a Regular Meeting of the Reston Association's Board of Directors held on February 23, 2012.

Assistant Secretary

D~slgn Review & Covenants Administration Resolution 10; Affected Parties February 23, 2012

3

Bill Number

House Bill 377

House Bill 410

Title

Condominium and Property Owners' Association Acts; information requested by lenders (Brenda L. Pogge)

Condominium and Property Owners' Association Acts; recovery of costs and interest (Vivian Watts).

COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS INSTITUTE VIRGINIA LEGISLATIVE ACTION COMMITTEE

2012 VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Legislation Affecting Community Associations

Synopsis of the Legislation (as a~endetfl

HOUSE BILLS

R-eEjaires aa asseeiatiEHa ta pre\'iGe inffiFmatien retJHesteEl Hem a leaEler fer a fH:H"ehaser wi-thffi 1 Q ln%Sffiess 8:ays ef tfte reEf1;1est. The bill aatherieeEi tl:te asseeiatiea te eharge statatery fees for J3re•,.idffig litis iafemoatiea. The bill sets ellt lite raaaaer "'whieh lite re""'estea iafomoaaea may ee fumished te lite leader. Exempts disposition of a lot by a sale at an auction, where the resale certificate packet was made available as part of an auction package for prospective purchasers prior to the auction sale from provisions of§§ 55-79.88 through 55-79.93 subsections A and C of§ 55-79.94 and§ 55-79.97 of Condominium Act. The bill contains technical amendments.

Provides that in cases in which the prevailing party is the association in an action against an owner for nonpayment of assessments in which the owner has repeatedly failed to pay assessments levied by the association, the Association shall be entitled to an award of reasonable attorney fees, costs expended in the matter, and interest on the judgment is maadatery with lite eellf'~ even if the proceeding is settled prior to judgment. The delinquent unit owner shall be personally responsible for all reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred by the unit owners' association, whether any judicial proceedings are filed.

VALAC Position

OJ3!'esed J3Srtiea relateS. te re'¥lests fer iRfar-matiea 9~' leaders

Support, as amended.

Status

2/14/2012 Passed House by Block Vote (100-0).

2/8/2012 Passed House 98-2 [Byron, Morris]; 2/9/2012 Referred to Senate Committee on General Laws and Technology.

Note: Scheduled to be considered by Senate Committee on General Laws and Technology of Monday, February 20, 2012.

February 17,2012 viO

Bill Number

House Bill418

House Bill 423

House Bill 902

House Bill 917

Title

Condominium and Property Owners' Association Acts; assessments; imposition of late fees (Vivian Watts).

Common Interest Community Board; duties (David L. Bulova)

Condominium Act; time limits for expansion, contraction, or conversion of condominium (J. Randall Minchew).

Required meetings of regulatory boards at the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (J. Randall Minchew).

Synopsis of the Legislation (as amended)

Authorizes condominium and property owners' associations to impose a late fee of aot more that $15 or such other amount, not to exceed$50, as may be determined by the executive organ for any assessment or installment thereof on any regular or special assessment levied that is not paid on the due date for payment of such assessment.

Requires the Common Interest Community Board to develop and publish best practices for declarations and develop a model declaration consistent with the best practices and the requirements of the Condominium Act (Chapter 4.2 (§55-79.39 et seq.)), the Real Estate Cooperative Act (Chapter 24 (§ 55-424 et seq.)), and the Property Owners' Association Act (Chapter 26 (§ 55-508 et seq.)) ofTitle 55.

Increases from seven years to 10 years from the date of recordation of the declaration the time limit in which a declarant/developer of a condominium must exercise his rights to expand, contract, or convert a condominium.

Replaces specified intervals and number of meetings for regulatory boards at the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation with the requirement that such boards meet at least once each year.

2

VALAC Position

Support wit!! elffi=iHeatiea as amended.

Monitor.

Support.

Monitor.

Status

2/8/2012 Passed House 97-1 [Morris]; 2/9/2012 Referred to Senate Committee on General Laws and Technology.


2/8/2012 Passed House by Block Vote 98-0; 2/9/2012 Referred to Senate Committee on General Laws and Technology.


2/8/2012 Passed House by Block Vote 98-0; 2/9/2012 Referred to Senate Committee on General Laws and Technology.


2/l/2012 Passed by House Block vote; 2/212012 Referred to Senate Committee on General Laws and Technology.


February 17, 2012 vlO

Bill Number

House Billl219

Senate Bill472

Senate Bill 627

Title

Common Interest Community Board; authorizes to terminate inactive condominium, etc. registrations (C. Matt Fariss).

Common Interest Community Board; Virginia Condominium Act; Virginia Real Estate Time-Share Act (Mamie E. Locke).

Solar panels in community associations (J. Chapman Peterson).


Authorizes the Common Interest Community Board to terminate inactive condominium or time-share registrations. In addition, the bill clarifies the authority of the Common Interest Community Ombudsman to assist individual members of common interest communities regarding rights and processes available under applicable laws and regulations. The bill also makes technical amendments (See also Senate Bill 472).

SENATE BILLS

Authorizes the Common Interest Community Board to terminate inactive condominium or time-share registrations. In addition, the bill clarifies the authority of the Common Interest Community Ombudsman to assist individual members of common interest communities regarding rights and processes available under applicable laws and regulations. The bill also makes technical amendments.

Removes the provision that allows covenants restricting the installation of solar power devices to continue to be enforceable if they became effective prior to July I, 2008.

3

VALAC Position

Support.

Oppose.

Status

2/14/2012 Passed House by Block Vote (100-0).

2/10/2012 Read third time and passed Senate (40-0).

2/10/2012 Passed Senate (31-8).

February 17,2012 v!O

Bill Number Title Synopsis of the Legislation VALAC Status (as amended) Position

Senate Bill 628 Virginia Property Owners' Limits any management contract, employment contract, or 2/14/2012 Passed Senate (40-0); 2/!6/2012 Association Act; limitation lease of recreational or parking areas or facilities that is Referred to House Committee on General Laws. on certain contracts and entered into during the period of declarant control to two leases by Declarant (Mark years. The bill also provides that any such contract or Herring). agreement entered into on or after July 1, 2012, may be

terminated without penalty by the association or its board of directors upon not less than 90 days' written notice to the other party given not later than 60 days after the expiration of the period of declarant control contemplated by the governing documents. In addition, the bill requires the declarant to include, with other information provided upon transfer of control to the association, the number of lots that may be subject to the declaration upon completion of development, and the number of members of the board of directors and number of such directors appointed by the declarant together with names and contact information of members of the board of director.

OTHER BILLS

House Bill 229 Doctrine of Necessaries Provides that a lien arising out of a judgment under the Monitor. 1127/12 Read third time and passed House (Gregory D. Habeeb). doctrine of necessaries shall not attach to the principal BLOCK VOTE (98-0); 2/!3/2011 Reported from

residence of a husband and wife that was held by the spouses Senate Committee for Courts of Justice (15-0); as tenants by the entireties immediately prior to the death of 2115/2012 Passed Senate (40-0). either spouse.

House Bill286 Previous garnishments, Allows costs incurred by a judgment creditor in connection Support. 1/30/2012 Voted- Passage in House (80-19); costs (Salvatore R. with a prior garnishment to be collected in a subsequent 1/31/2012 Referred to Senate Committee for Iaquinto). garnishment attempt that is based on the same judgment (see Courts of Justice; 2/15/2012 Reported from

also Senate Bill 56!). Senate Committee for Courts of Justice (9-4);

House Bill648 Confession of judgment by Allows a substitute attorney-in-fact, pursuant to a power of Monitor. 2/3/2012 Passed House by Block Vote (!00-0); a substitute attorney-in-fact attorney, to confess judgment. The bill requires that a 2/6/2012 Referred to Senate Committee for Courts (Gregory D. Habeeb). designation of a substitute attorney-in-fact be duly executed of Justice; 2113/2011 Reported from Senate

and acknowledged and filed by the clerk with the confession Committee for Courts or Justice (15-0); 2115/2012 of judgment. Passed Senate (40-0).

4 February 17,2012 vlO

Bill Number Title

House Bill 761 Recording deeds; statement of preparation (Lynwood W. Lewis, Jr.).

Senate Bill 561 Previous garnishment; costs (Mark D. Obenshain).

Synopsis of the Legislation V ALAC (as amended) Position

Provides that the circuit court clerk shall reject for filing or Monitor. recording a deed unless it states on its first page that it was prepared either by the owner of the property or by an attorney licensed to practice in Virginia.

Allows costs incurred by a judgment creditor in connection Support with a prior garnishment to be collected in a subsequent garnishment attempt that is based on the same judgment. The provisions of this bill apply to garnishment summonses issued on or after January I, 2007.

5

Status

2/3/2012 Passed House by Block Vote (I 00-0); 2/6/2012 Referred to Senate Committee for Courts of Justice; 2/13/20 II Reported from Senate Committee for Courts of Justice (15-0); 2/15/2012 Passed Senate with amendments (40-0); 2/16/2012 Placed on House Calendar.

2/9/2012 Read third time and Passed Senate (40-0); 2/13/2012 Referred to House Committee for Courts of Justice; 2/15/2012 Reported from House Committee for Courts of Justice with amendment (14-4).


Bill Number Title Synopsis of the Legislation VALAC Status (as amended) Position

INACTIVE BILLS

House Bi1128 Foreclosure procedures; Provides that the trustee under any deed of trust or mortgage Monitor. 12/8/2011Referred to House Committee for assignment of deed of shall not proceed with any sale of the property unless the land Coutts ofJustice; 1113/2012 Assigned to House trust. (Robert G. Marshall). records of the county or city in which the property is located Committee for Coutts of Justice Civil

contain a duly recorded assignment to the person who asserts Subcommittee; 2/112012 House Committee for that he is the holder of the obligation. The trustee may proceed Coutts of Justice Civil Subcommittee with the sale (i) upon the recordation of any assignments not recommends laying on table. recorded or, if an intervening assignment cannot be located, upon the receipt of an affidavit from the party secured that he is the party secured by the deed of trust, and (ii) upon the payment by the person who asserts that he is the holder of the obligation of any fees and taxes for recording the assignment The bill also provides thaJ: a nominee of a grantee or mortgagee for a deed of trust or mortgage has no authority to request that the trustee proceed with any sale of the property conveyed to him by the deed of trust or mortgage, The bill also requires thaJ: the party secured by the deed of trust or mortgage provide notice of his intent to foreclose to the property owner at least 45 days before any proposed sale. The bill provides further thaJ: a person who (i) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used any false or fraudulent record, document, or statement or (ii) knowingly swears or affirms falsely to any matter, in support of any foreclosure is liable for a civil penalty of$5,000, which shall be paid into the local treasury. The bill also creates a civil cause of action for such a violation in favor of the owner of the property foreclosed on.

House Bi11297 Condominium Act and Increases from $50 to $100 the charge that may be assessed by Support. 1110/2012 Referred to House Committee on Property Owners' an association for a rules violation for a single offense. General Laws; 1113/2012 Assigned to House Association Act; charges Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #1-for rules violations Housing; 1125/2012 Subcommittee recommends (Edward T. Scott, by no action by voice vote. request).

6 February 17,2012 vlO

Bill Number

House Bill411

House Bill 412

House Bill 443

Title

Condominium and Property Owners' Association Acts; recovery of costs and interest (Vivian Watts).

Condominium Act; Property Owners' Association Act; foreclosure on lien for llllpaid assessments; priority of certain liens (Vivian Watts).

Debt collection practices; penalty (Robert Brink).


Requires the award to the prevailing party in an action brought under the Condominium and Property Owners' Association Acts for noncompliance with the declaration of reasonable attorney fees, costs expended in the matter, and interest on the judgment. In cases where the prevailing party is the association in an action against an owner for nonpayment of assessments and, except for the instant case, the owner has not previously been in arrears in the payment of assessments, the award of reasonable attorney fees, costs expended in the matter, and interest on the judgment is discretionary with the court.

Provides that a property owner or condominium association may conduct a foreclosure sale on a lien for unpaid assessments subject to the lien of a first trust The bill also provides that such portion of the unpaid assessments due and owing the association for a period not to exceed three years that is directly attributable to providing the maintenance and upkeep of the common areas and such other areas of association responsibility expressly provided for in the declaration, including capital expenditures, shall be prior to all other liens and encumbrances, except real estate taxes. The bill contains technical amendments.

Prohibits debt collectors from engaging in certain types of conduct when attempting to collect personal, family, and household debts, and requires debt collectors to comply with certain requirements when contacting a debtor, as is currently prohibited or required by the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. A violation constitutes a prohibited practice under the Virginia Consumer Protection Act. Provisions currently requiring persons to comply with the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act are amended to require compliance with this counterpart state law.

7

VALAC Position

Oppose.

Oppose (supports theory, but opposes limitation to maintenance and upkeep assessments).

Oppose.

Status

1110/2012 Referred to House Committee for Courts of Justice; 1/13/2012 Assigned to House Committee for Courts of Justice Civil Subcommittee; 1130/2102 Referred from Courts of Justice by voice vote, Referred to Committee on General Laws; 1/3112012 Assigned GeneraJ Laws Subcommittee #1- Housing; 2/112012; 2/1/2012 House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #I recommends striking at request ofpatron.

1/10/2012 Referred to House Committee for Courts of Justice; 1113/2012 Assigned to House Committee for Courts of Justice Civil Subcommittee; 211/2012 House Committee for Courts of Justice Civil Subcommittee recommends laying on the table.

1/10/2012 Referred to House Committee on Commerce and Labor; 1/13/2012 Assigned to House Committee on Commerce and Labor Subcommittee #2; 2/2/2012 House Committee on Commerce and Labor Subcommittee #2 recommends laying on the table.


Bill Number

House Bill539

House Bill 605

House Bill617

House Bill 668

Title

Private Road Maintenance (Charles D. Poindexter)

Virginia Property Owners' Association Act; board of directors; duty of care; enforcement of rules (James LeMunyon).

Grass; authorizes locality to require by ordinance that owners of certain real estate cut (James M. LeMunyon).

Condominium and Property Owners' Association Acts; posting of documents on association website (Scott Surovell).


Provides that any county may by ordinance require that, in any instance where individual lots for residential use are subdivided from a larger tract, the deed shall require that each lot purchaser contribute a pro rata share for required private road maintenance. The ordinance may also authorize the majority of lot owners on any private road, whether acting as a group or through a duly organized homeowners' association, to collect from each lot owner on the private road a pro rata share of the reasonable costs of repair, upkeep, and maintenance of the private road.

Establishes a duty of care for officers and members of the board of directors. The bill also authorizes a board to increase the total charges that may be assessed in the case of a member's continuing failure to comply with architectural guidelines pertaining to the renovation or expansion of a structure to an amount equal to 20 percent of the increase in the value resulting from the renovation or expansion.

Authorizes any locality to require by ordinance that owners of certain real estate cut the grass growing on their property. Currently the law grants such authority to specific counties.

Requires the board of directors to post on any website maintained by the association a copy of the declaration, any articles of incorporation, and all rules and regulations adopted by the board of directors.

8

VALAC Position

Monitor.

Oppose portions.

Monitor.

Oppose.

Status

1110/2012 Referred to House Committee on Counties, Cities and Towns; 1113/2012 Assigned to House Committee on Counties, Cities and Towns Subcommittee #2; 1/19/2012 Subcommittee recommends reporting (11-0); 1/20/2012 Reported from Counties, Cities and Towns (18Y, 3N); 1/23/2012 Read first time; 1124/2012 Motion to reconsider passed by for the day agreed to; 1124/2012 Referred to House Committee on Transportation; 1/27112 Assigned Transportation sub: #1; 2/6/2012 Subcommittee failed to recommend reporting (2Y, 3N). 1110/2012 Referred to House Committee on General Laws; 1117/2012 Assigned to House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee # 1 -Housing; 1/25/2012 Subcommittee recommends no action by voice vote.

1/10/2012 Referred to House Committee on Counties, Cities and Towns; 1/16/2012 Assigned to House Committee on Counties, Cities and Towns Subcommittee #1; 1/20/2012 Tabled in Counties, Cities and Towns.

Ill 0/2012 Referred to House Committee on General Laws; 1/17/2012 Assigned to House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee # 1 -Housing.; 211/2012 House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #1- Housing recommends passing by indefinitely.


Bill Number

House Bill 901

House Bill 979

House Bill 993

Title

Condominium and Property Owuers' Association Acts; suspension of certain owuer rights for rules violations (Delegate Brink).

Virginia Property Owuers' Association Act; adoption and enforcement of rules (James M. Scott).

Homestead Exemption (Roxann L. Robinson - by request).


Gives condominium and property owuers' association boards the authority, even in cases where the declaration does not expressly grant the authority to the boards, to (i) suspend a unit owuer's right to use facilities or services, including utility services, provided directly through the association for nonpayment of assessments that are more than 60 days past due, to the extent that access to the unit through the common elements is not precluded and provided that such suspension shall not endanger the health, safety, or property of any owuer, tenant, or occupant and (ii) assess charges against any owuer for any violation of the declaration or of the rules or regulations promulgated pursuant thereto for which such owuer or his family members, tenants, guests, or other invitees are responsible. The bill contains technical amendments.

Authorizes the board of directors or its agents to enter onto a lot subject to the declaration as may be reasonably necessary to remedy the failure of the lot owuer to comply with the declaration or rules and regulations of the association. The authority may be used only after the board has exhausted all other internal efforts to achieve compliance, including an opportunity for the lot owuer to take corrective action, and reasonable notice is provided.

Raises the homestead exemption from $5,000 to (i) $25,000, (ii) 20 percent of the property's tax-assessed value, or (iii) 40 percent of the property's tax-assessed value if the householder is 65 years of age or older. The bill requires that the real or personal property subject to the exemption be claimed as the householder's homestead.

9

VALAC Position

Support with clarification about internal due process.

Oppose.

Status

1/10/2012 Referred to House Committee on General Laws; 1/17/2012 Assigned to House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #I -Housing; 2/8/2012 House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #I -Housing recommends laying on the table at the request of patron.

1/10/2012 Referred to House Committee on General Laws; 1/17/2012 Assigned to House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #I -Housing; 2/8/2012 House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #I - Housing recommends laying on table (sent to Housing Commission).

1/11/20 II Referred to House Committee for Courts of Justice; 1/17/2012 Assigned to House Committee for Courts of Justice Civil Subcommittee; 1/24/2012 House Civil Subcommittee recommends laying on table.

February 17, 2012 v!O

Bill Number

House Bill 1008

House Bill 1093

Title

Condominium and Property Owners' Association Acts; rights of owners (David Ramadan).

Garnishment (Charniele L. Herring)

Synopsis of the Legislation V ALAC (as amended) Position

Provides that no provision of the declaration or rules or Oppose. regulations adopted pursuant thereto shall prohibit an owner or any person entitled to occupy a unit or lot from exercising his constitutionally protected right of freedom of speech upon property to which the owner or person entitled to occupy has a separate ownership interest or a right to exclusive possession. The bill further provides that any provision of a declaration or rule or regulation adopted pursuant thereto that prohibits the exercise of such right upon such property shall be void as against public policy. The bill allows, however, an association to establish reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on such property provided the restrictions are necessary to protect a substantial interest of the association. In any action brought by an association for a violation of such restriction, the association bears the burden of proof that such time, place, or manner restriction is necessary to protect a substantial interest of the association. Finally, the bill provides that the association may restrict an owner's exercise of freedom of speech upon the common areas.

Provides that the garnishee shall pay any money or other Monitor. property held on behalf of a judgment debtor directly to the judgment creditor or the judgment creditor's attorney instead of to the court, which is current practice. The judgment creditor or his attorney shall mail a statement to the garnishee and the judgment debtor for each month in which money or other property is paid to the judgment creditor on the judgment debtor's behalf setting forth how much was paid and how it was applied to the debt. The bill also allows the court to fiX the return date for the garnishment summons. Currently, the summons is returnable within 90 days or 180 days in the case of a wage garnishment. The bill also provides that subsequent garnishments based on the same judgment are considered to be a continuation of the original garnishment proceeding and not a new action.

10

Status

llll/2012 Referred to House Committee for Courts of Justice; 1/23/12 Referred from Courts of Justice by voice vote; l/23/12 Referred to Committee on General Laws; 1/27/12 Assigned GL sub: #I Housing; 2/l/2012 House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #I - Housing recommends laying on the table (may be reconsidered); 2/8/2012 House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #I -Housing carries bill over to 2013 at request of patron.

llll/2011Referred to House Committee for Courts ofJustice; 1/17/2012 Assigned to House Committee for Courts of Justice Civil Subcommittee; 1/30/2012 Subcommittee recommends laying on the table by voice vote.

February 17, 2012 viO

Bill Number

House Bi111276

House Bill1213

Title

Virginia Private Recreational Club Act; created (Peter F. Farrell, by request).

Virginia Condominium Act; assessment of charges for violations; lien for assessments (James M. Scott).

Honse Bill 1256 Condominium Act; Property Owners' Association Act; lien for assessments; priority (Mark Sickles).

Synopsis of the Legislation (as amendetl)

Virginia Private Recreational Club Act; created.

Removes the cap on charges that a unit owners' association may assess against any unit for a violation of the condominium instruments or rules or regulations. Currently such charges are limited to $50 for a single offense and $10 per day for up to 90 days for any offense of a continuing nature. Under the bill, such charges must be reasonable in consideration of the seriousness of the violation and the history of previous violations. The bill authorizes the unit owners' association to file a lien on a condominiwn unit for current and future unpaid assessments.

Provides that such portion of the unpaid assessments due and owing the association for a period not to exceed three years that is attributable to providing the maintenance and upkeep of the common areas and such other areas of association responsibility expressly provided for in the declaration, including capital expenditures, shall be prior to all other liens and encumbrances except any real estate tax liens, deeds of trust or mortgages, regardless of when recorded, on the unit or lot The bill contains technical amendments.

11

VALAC Position

Status

1120/2012 Referred to House Committee on Commerce and Labor; 2/14/2012 Left in House Committee on Commerce and Labor.

1/19/2012 Referred to House Committee on General Laws; 1127/12 Assigned to GL sub: #I Housing; 2/8/2012 House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #I- Housing recommends laying on the table at request of patron.

1/20/2012 Referred to House Committee on General Laws; 1127/12 Assigned House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee: #I Housing; 2/1/2012 House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #I recommends reporting with V ALAC amendments; 2/8/2012 House Committee on General Laws Subcommittee #IHousing recommends carrying bill over to 2013.


Bill Number Title

Senate Bill 166 Homestead exemption; exemptions in banlauptcy petition, etc. (J. Chapman Peterson).

#65747vl0


Makes various changes to homestead exemptions, including providing that the official schedule of property claimed exempt filed with the United States Banlauptcy Court in a banlauptcy proceeding constitutes a sufficient writing to exempt such real and personal property from creditor process. Currently, the person claiming such an exemption must record a writing in the manner deeds are recorded where the person resides for personal property or where the real property is located The bill provides that a claim of exemption shall only be effective for seven years from the date the exemption is first claimed. The bill also provides that a householder may hold exempt from creditor process real or personal property that the householder or his dependent claims as a primary residence not exceeding $25,000 in value. This exemption is in addition to the current $5,000 ($10,000 if the householder is 65 years of age or older) exemption allowed by law. The bill adds certain specific items of personal property to the list of what a debtor may hold exempt from creditor process.

The bill also repeals the provision that establishes that only the exemptions allowable under Virginia law, and not the exemptions specified in subsection (d) of § 522 of the Banlauptcy Reform Act, may be claimed in any banlauptcy proceeding. Currently, Virginia, as permitted by federal law, has opted out of the federaJ exemptions in favor of its own exemptions.

12

VALAC Position

Status

2/8/2012 Stricken at the request of patron in Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

February 17,2012 vlO

Dale February 23, 2012

Inside This Report

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Introduction

Human Resources

AM SIT

Communications &

Community Outreach

Covenants

Administration

Parks & Recreation

Finance

Respectfully submitted

Milton W. Matthews Chief Executive Officer

703-435-6515 [email protected]

INTRODUCTION I am pleased to pass on to the community and the Reston Association (RA) Board of Directors an account of highlights and accomplishments of the organization over the past month and information about our upcoming community events.

HUMAN RESOURCES • HR is accepting applications for 2012 seasonal positions; 37 returning

aquatics employees have submitted their applications and we are receiving applications from returning camps employees.

• HR plans to attend a job fair at the A.nnandale Campus of the Northern Virginia Community College (NOVA) in April.

• The 2012 Well ness Program kicked off with a Lunch 'n' Learn brown bag on navigating provider online resources. This session had a 13% participation rate. Additionally, we held a Milton's Mixer and a second Brown Bag Lunch 'n' Learn covering natural remedies and supervisory training.

• HR met with RA's healthcare provider to determine how the organization can better utilize well ness resources offered to RA employees.

• A Request for Proposals (RFP) is being developed to solicit bids to conduct a benchmark study of RA's salary and benefits plans.

• Training resources for the Association's supervisors and managers were identified for staff through the Virginia Institute of Governments, an affiliate of the University of Virginia.

• Total Compensation Statements have been distributed to employees.

• Planning for the 1st Quarter All Staff Meeting is underway; the meeting will be held on March 20, 2012.

PAGE 2 REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE 9FFIGER: MILTON W. MATTHEWS ' ' '

ADMINISTRATION, MEMBER SERVICES, IT

• This spring, Reston Association Members will elect three individuals to RA's Board of Directors. One from the South Lakes District and two At-Large Directors. Each director will serve a three-year term.

Five Members are vying for the At-Large seat: John Farrell, Donna Miller Rostant, Michael Sanio, Eve Thompson and Tom Vis. One Member is running for the South Lakes District Seat: Richard Chew.

Members will have an opportunity to meet the 2012 Board Candidates during a Question & Answer Forum scheduled for Wednesday, March 14, 7 pm at Reston Association Headquarters at 12001 Sunrise Valley Drive.

Ballots will be mailed to Members on March 7. Members will have a choice of voting methods. Votes can be cast by filling out the paper ballot and returning it by mail in the self-addressed envelope or voting can be conducted online. To vote online, Members will need their unique username and pass code, which will be found on the back of the ballot.

• As of February 17,2012, Member Services has sold 2,000 resident passes, a dozen non-resident memberships, and more than 20 prepaid pool and tennis guest passes.

• Member Services staff has reached out to local non-profits, shelters and low-income housing providers to begin the process of supplying complimentary recreational passes to those in need.

COMMUNICATIONS & COMMUNITY OUTREACH

• Representatives from the Embassy of Japan and the country's Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transportation and Tourism visited Reston to learn about developing successful urban areas. Communications coordinated the visit, which included presentations by Heidi Merkle of the Fairfax County Department of Planning & Zoning, Reston Association's CEO Milton W. Matthew, Marion Myers of Myers PR, and Barbara Rovin, Executive Director of the Reston Town Center Association.

• The February edition of Reston Today features a story on a grant from the U.S. Tennis Association which will assist with the conversion of two under-utilized tennis courts to six courts sized for children 10 and under. Additionally, there is an update on the renovations at Dogwood Pool, and an invitation to the March 29, 2012 Newcomers' Night.

• Graphic Designer Benjamin Weiss created a logo for the Virginia Swim Advisory Group. RA's Aquatics Manager, Laura Kowalski is a member of the group.

• The Communications Advisory Committee is seeking additional Reston Association Members with a professional background in communications. Interested individuals should send an e-mail to Cate Fulkerson at [email protected].

• TheRA News e-mail, with a circulation of about 2,000 subscribers, is exceeding industry standards in terms of the percentage of subscribers who open the e-mail each week (over 30 percent). Readers are also interacting with RA News e-m ails by clicking on news items and event listings that often link them to the Association's website www.reston.org and social media, which also provides users with more information about RA. Both the "open rate" and "click rate" are about 10 percentage points

REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER: MILTON W. MATTHEWS PAGE 3

higher than the average for other non-profits and similar associations. Videos in RA News are particularly well received and are viewed by over 40 percent of people who open the e-mail.

COVENANTS ADMINISTRATION

•

•

•

•

•

100

160

140

120

100

eo

eo

40

20

0

The Associations' Reston Neighborhood Advisory Committee hosted a Pesticides Workshop on February 6, 2012. Guest speakers included Ron Rubin of Thrive'M Plant Health Care Solutions and Nicki Bellezza, RA's Watershed Supervisor.

On February 14, 2012, Arlene Whittick, RA's Covenants Neighborhood Outreach Specialist, attended Community Associations Institute (CAl) Day at the Virginia General Assembly to lobby legislators on bills of importance to community associations.

The President-to-President Helpline has been active with topics including: Addressing Residents Who Refuse to Pay Special Assessments and Updating Cluster Documents.

As required by Virginia Code §55-512, the Reston Association is responsible for preparing and making available to an owner or their authorized agent a disclosure packet, which the seller provides to the purchaser of a residential property. The Association's Covenants staff prepares these Virginia Property Owners' Association Act or "POAA" packets.

Below are yearly and monthly comparative statistics to date:

POAA STATISTICS Year-to-Date Comparisons January 2012

POAA Monthty State

/\ ' / \ ~. / \ Plot Area

y v----- ~ ~ -----...--.January

""" / ,..~-- .......... -----------·..---+

v

2003 2004 2C05 -.-006 2007 20)8 2009 2010 2)11 2012

PAGE 4 REPORT OF THE I=HIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER: MILTON W. MATTHEWS

PARKS & RECREATION

•

•

•

•

•

A community meeting at Forest Edge Elementary School and stream walk took place February 11, 2012 on the Buttermilk Creek Stream Reach. The purpose of the walk was to explain the history of the project, discuss the plans for the stream reach and address any concerns of the participants. Twenty Buttermilk residents attended the meeting and most were present for the stream walk.

Permission letters for egg addling were sent to residents with a history of goose nests on their properties. RA performs egg addling between March and June of each year with a federal permit to manage the Canada Goose population in Reston.

The Camps Department is looking forward to another great summer of friendship and fun! The Association has provided camps for over 35 years. Eleven different camp programs are available June 25, 2012 through August 24, 2012, with over 1,600 slots for children and teens ages 3-16 years old. Registration is in full swing, with 63% of camp slots already sold. There are already waitlists for many of the camps.

Returning camp staff applications are currently being received; new applicants may start applying on March 1, 2012.

All interested parents should log on to the Reston website at www.reston.org to enroll or contact the Camp Office at [email protected] or 703-435-6551.

FINANCE

• Accounts Payable prepared and issued 478 W-2's on January 13, 2012. The task was completed 18 days prior to the IRS due date of January 31, 2012. The department also prepared and issued all 1099's electronically, and submitted required year-end reports to the IRS.

• The mid-year FUTA & SUTA adjustment was prepared and paid as required due to tax law changes.

• Collections prepared and issued 17,486 individual 2012 Annual Assessment Notices and 23 Apartment Complex Assessment Notices for 3,858 units.

• Nearly 50% of the 2012 Annual Assessment has been collected. Finance is preparing to send out approximately 9,600 Reminder Letters to those Members who have not paid.

Reston Development/Redevelopment Tracking Matrix

1. Reston Spectrum LP seeking approval of PRC plan for mixed use development.

2. Fairway Apartments Redevelopment Proposal

3. RTC Partnership, LLC seeking to remove

the current office building known as the

"Town Center Office Building" at 1760

Reston Parkway, and redevelop a 23-story,

Class A mixed-use office and retail building.

4. Luis and Carla Marty of 1307 Deep Run Lane, Reston, VA. Special Exception

Application for Day care use.

5. Reston Association: Dogwood Pool

Renovation, 2460 Green Range Drive,

Reston.

Key:

ORB= Reston Association Design Review Board PZ = Reston Planning & Zoning Committee RTC =Reston Town Center Architectural Board of Review

Updated: 2/17/2012 12:45 PM

I N/A lin process N/A of collecting information fromPZ

I ORB Work Sessions 1/25/12 and 2/8/12.

In process I N/ A of collecting

Full ORB review information scheduled for from PZ. 2/21/12 (seeking approval in concept). 8/16/11 ORB Before the N/A approved in concept P&Zagain

on 02/27/12.

11/16/11 Found in In process N/A Violation by the of collecting Covenants information Committee from PZ.

8/16/11 ORB N/A N/A approved

FXCOPC = Fairfax County Planning Commission FXCOBOS =Fairfax County Board of Supervisors BZA- Board of Zoning Appeal/Special Permit

10/13/11 Defer the decision indefinitely, with the record remaining open for written and electronic comments.

Approved 07/21/11 I Public hearing to be held 03/20/12 at 4:30pm

11/17/11 Defer the decision indefinitely.

Public hearing to be held 03/14/12 at 8:15pm

12/08/11 PC recommended that application be presented to BZA/SP.

Awaiting final site plan sign off to apply for VDOT entry permit for construction

1

6. JBG/RIC, L.L.C. and RIC Retail, L.L.C. {Reston Heights) 11800 &11842 Sunrise Valley Drive revised PRC plan for mixed use development.

In process of collecting information from PZ.

request of applicant, this application has been indefinitely deferred.

7. RPB & M, LCC: 11401, 11403, 11407, I N/A In process of collecting information from PZ.

N/ A I Planning staff is waiting for additional information from the Applicant regarding the 527 traffic analysis.

11411 & 11417 Sunset Hills Road, Reston: rezoning application for mixed use residential office and retail. Charles A. Veatch Properties.

8. CSP 2009-HM-014 Hospital Corporation America E. side of Fairfax County Parkway; n. side of New Dominion Parkway; w. side of Town Center Parkway) (For cohesive system of signs for new buildings at Reston Hospital)

9. 2232A-MD06-10-1- WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY Location of a Train Control Room for Traction Power Substation 10, located on Sunset Hills Road, Reston.

10. Reston District Police Station and Governmental Center: Proffer Condition Amendment (PCA 74-2-113-4)/Development Plan Amendment (DPA 74-2-113-8)/PRC Plan PRC 74-2-113-2 and Feature Shown 2232-H11-18.

Key:

ORB= Reston Association Design Review Board

PZ =Reston Planning & Zoning Committee RTC =Reston Town Center Architectural Board of Review

Updated: 2/17/2012 12:45 PM

In process collecting information from PZ.

In process of collecting information from PZ.

FXCOPC = Fairfax County Planning Commission

FXCOBOS =Fairfax County Board of Supervisors

BZA- Board of Zoning Appeal/Special Permit

07/28/11

Approved 4/L~/11

Public hearing rescheduled For 1/18/12

FXCOPC recommended for

Public hearing scheduled for 2/28/12 at 3:30pm

2

11. Pare Reston Condominiums: Corner of Reston Parkway and Temporary Road, proposing redevelopment of site.

12. Sunrise Valley Elementary Renovations (PRC -c -377): Renovations

10824 Cross School Road. Reston

13. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.: Convert into fast food restaurant at South Lakes Village Shopping Center, located at 11160

G2 South Lakes Drive. Reston. VA

14. Coresite Real Estate LLC: at 12100 Sunrise Valley Drive is requesting an

approval of Special Exception- SE 2011-HM-019

15. Crescent Apartments: at 1531 Cameron Crescent Drive is releasing a Request for Proposal (RFP) to solicit a

to redevelop the nrnn"rt"

16. Reston Hospital Center: Site plan addition to hospital campus near 1830, 1850, and 1860 Town Center Drive. (SP-

006039-008-2

Key:

ORB= Reston Association Design Review Board PZ = Reston Planning & Zoning Committee RTC =Reston Town Center Architectural Board of Review

Updated: 2/17/2012 12:45 PM

ORB approved in concept only.

ORB approved signage.

N/A I Public hearing scheduled for 03/29/12 at 8:15pm

N/A

ic hearing scheduled for 03/29/12

N/ A I No information currently available

No information currently available

FXCOPC = Fairfax County Planning Commission FXCOBOS = Fairfax County Board of Supervisors BZA- Board of Zoning Appeal/Special Permit

Current land use application. 12/2011



No information currently available

No information available

FXCO staff held community meeting re; future redevelopment on 02/08/12

3

NEWS RELEASE

RELEASE: Immediate CONTACT: Joan Morris 703-259-1799 (office)

571-238-5030 (cell) Joan Morris@VDOT. Virginia.Gov Jenni McCord 703-259-1779 (office) 571-230-2926 (cell) [email protected]

VirginiaDOT .org

Feb. 16,2012

THREE MAJOR PARKWAYS NOW PRIMARY ROADS New route numbers and funding for Fairfax County, Prince William, and Franconia

Springfield parkways

FAIRFAX-The Commonwealth Transportation Board approved the transfer yesterday of the Fairfax County Parkway, Prince William Parkway and Franconia-Springfield Parkway to primary roads, making them eligible for new funding and maintenance priorities.

As primary roads, the routes can receive federal funding for paving, guardrail, bridge improvements and other projects. Federal funding typically covers 80 percent of the cost to maintain interstates and primary roads, with the remaining 20 percent from state funds.

The Fairfax County Parkway (Route 71 00), which runs from Route 1 to Route 7, will be renamed Route 286. The 32-mile road carries between 22,000 and 75,000 vehicles per day.

The Franconia-Springfield Parkway (Route 7900), which runs from Beulah Road to the Fairfax County Parkway, will be renamed Route 289. The 4-mile road carries between 53,000 and 57,000 vehicles per day.

The Prince William Parkway (Route 3000), which runs from Route I to Route 234, will be renamed Route 294. The 16-mile road carries between 25,000 and 54,000 vehicles per day.

Over the next three months, VDOT will replace signs with the new route numbers and add additional signs indicating "Old Route 7100," "Old Route 3000," and "Old Route 7900." Drivers will see the old route number alongside the new route number for about a year so that hotels, businesses, map companies, etc. have ample time to update their materials.

Roads may be considered for the transfer from secondary to primary when they meet a majority of certain criteria, such as carrying a minimum traffic volume; carrying a minimum percentage

of out-of-state, truck, tractor-trailer, or bus traffic; and serving as a link for highways, county seats or sites of historic or scenic interest.

There are now about 4 70 miles of primary roads in northern Virginia, and 8,000 miles of primary roads statewide.

Keep Dulles rail on track

By Washington Post Editorial Board, Published: January 25,2012

AFTER YEARS of laboring in contented obscurity, the authority that runs Dulles International and Reagan National airports has lately found itself in the eye of various political hurricanes, some largely of its own making. Given that the authority is master 6f a $6 billion construction project- Metro's Silver Line rail extension to Dulles- and overseer of a road that handles 300,000 daily trips- the Dulles Toll Road- some controversy is unsurprising. What's important is that the disputes not be allowed to interfere with progress on the 23-mile Silver Line, the first half of which is scheduled to open late next year.

A clash last year over where to locate the Silver Line station at Dulles prompted a months-long impasse, resolved finally thanks to the mediation of U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. Now, two fresh quarrels have created new uncertainties.

One involves legislation Congress enacted late last year to expand and reform the 13-member board that runs the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority. The bill's sponsor, Rep. Frank Wolf(R-Va.), thought the authority would be improved by adding four members (including two from Virginia) to the board and ensuring that members actually left the board when their terms expired.

The board, not thrilled by what it regards as congressional meddling, has taken the position that the legislation is moot until both Virginia and the District- which together created the authority to run the airports under a lease from the feds- amend their joint compact to reflect the changes. That stance appears legally correct, though Mr. Wolf, in whose district Dulles is located, is furious.

The question is what comes next. Democrats in Virginia have blocked a quick approval of the amendments, though they are likely to go along eventually. But D.C. Mayor Vincent C. Gray (who would get to appoint a new board member) is mum. No one knows whether he'll go along with changing the compact. He should.

The risk is that a prolonged period of confusion could delay the Silver Line's progress, possibly by casting doubt on the validity of contracts. That cannot be allowed to happen.

Further questions about the project's second phase are being raised in Loudoun County, which is on the hook for about $250 million of the cost and where the extension's two westernmost stations would be built. Some members of Loudoun's new, all-Republican Board of Supervisors are questioning the Silver Line's cost-effectiveness. If Loudoun decides to withdraw from the project, sacrificing its two stations, that would also add uncertainty- though it would also shave Silver Line costs.

At the heart ofthe matter are concerns about the airports authority's ability to build the Silver Line on time and on budget. Confidence in the authority has already been shaken by reports that the project's first phase is behind schedule. The Silver Line is critical both to the future of Dulles and the region's economic vitality. The stakes are too high for the authority in charge of it to take its eye off the ball.

Va. lawmakers push to prohibit mandatory union labor in Dulles Rail construction By: Liz Essley 1 01/31/12 8:10PM, Washington Examiner

Examiner Staff Writer! Follow on Twitter @lizess/ev

Virginia lawmakers moved Tuesday to withhold $150 million in funding for Dulles Rail if the

authority in charge of the project forces contractors to use a union-friendly labor agreement.

Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling used his tie-breaking vote in the Senate for the first time Tuesday to side

with Republicans in favor of a bill that would prohibit the Metropolitan Washington Airports

Authority and other state-funded entities from requiring that contractors use union-friendly

project labor agreements.

MW AA, whose leaders said at their most recent meeting that they would prefer to hire union

friendly contractors for the $2.8 billion second phase of the rail line, may have to choose

between $150 million in state funding and the mandatory agreement if the governor signs the

bill into law, as he has promised to do.

A similar bill also passed the House of Delegates Tuesday.

"All this bill does is have free and open competition for everybody," said Del. Barbara Comstock,

R- McLean and one of the bill's sponsors. "The taxpayers and our citizens will get the best deal."

Democrats opposed the bill, arguing it was unnecessarily hostile in a state that is already right

to-work

Tuesday's labor bill wasn't the only one that could shape the future of the Dulles Rail project.

Del. Tom Rust, R-Herndon, is joining three Democrats to sponsor a budget amendment that

would provide $500 million in state funding for the second phase of the rail line-- far more than

the $150 million Gov. Bob McDonnell had promised. The money would offset the amount that

Dulles Toll Road users would have to pay toward the rail project. For Rust, it's a regional issue.

"The rationale is quite simple. In the governor's budget, his proposal is almost $900 million to

reduce tolls in [other parts of the state] and only $150 million to reduce the construction costs of

[Dulles Rail]," he said. "We're just asking to be treated equally."

The House of Delegates split earlier this month along party lines when Del. Joe May, R

Leesburg, tried to pass an emergency initiative allowing McDonnell to appoint two new

members to the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, the board overseeing the

construction of the Dulles rail project. Democrats said they wanted more time to consider the

bill.

Now, a non-emergency measure that would allow the new members to be appointed in July is

likely to pass the House of Delegates with some Democratic support, officials said.

Examiner staff writer Steve Contorno contributed to this report.

I essleu ((iJ washi ngtonexami ner. com

Dulles Rail needs a realistic financing plan The recent Dulles Toll Road toll increase to $2.25 one way is just the latest in a series of expected toll increases during the next several years. Rather than just pay for maintaining the Toll Road, tolls are also being directed to pay off debt and interest used to build Dulles Rail. So far, $1.2 billion in debt has already been issued by the Washington Metropolitan Airports Authority (MWAA), to help pay for the $2.8 billion cost of Phase I of the Dulles Rail project, which extends from the Orange Line near West Falls Church through Tysons Corner to the Wiehle Avenue station in Reston. MW AA is responsible for building the rail project. Tolls are expected to reach $5 each way in the next decade and continue to increase for more than two decades afterwards just to pay off debt that has been financed already. A recent constituent survey that I conducted within the last few weeks in which more than 600 citizens responded, found that more than half of those who use the Toll Road have already reduced their use of the road because of the $2.25 toll. Forecasts prepared for MWAA agree that use of the Toll Road will go down as tolls go up. Incredibly, an additional $1 to $1.5 billion in debt-to be paid by accelerating planned toll increases--is under serious consideration to complete Dulles Rail (Phase 2) to the airport and Loudoun County, because the federal government is unlikely to provide additional financing. The Governor and some members of the General Assembly want to help the project by providing $150 million in state money for Phase 2, with a few members requesting considerably more to "buy down" the tolls. Although the state contribution is well intended, it would still allow tolls to double from the current forecasts by allowing additional debt financing to go forward. We shouldn't need examples like Greece, Italy, and the U.S. Government's $15 trillion debt to realize that using too much debt intended for some public good usually results in something bad. Here's what too much Dulles Rail debt is already doing: Y It has reduced use ofthe Toll Road by customers and employees of Dulles Corridor businesses, harming economic activity. Ironically, Dulles Rail was intended to improve economic activity along the Dulles Corridor; Y As my survey indicates, high tolls are chasing cars off the Toll Road and making other roads more congested, like 1-66, Route 7, the Beltway, Route 28, and secondary roads. Major transportation improvements should make substantial reductions in traffic congestion in Northern Virginia, not just re-arrange the problem; Y Serious inequities arise with too much debt. The state government recently issued $3 billion in debt to fund other transportation projects statewide for the benefit of 8 million Virginians. Dulles Rail debt, of nearly the same amount for Phases I and 2, will be shouldered in the form of tolls by fewer than I 00,000 daily Northern Virginia motorists on the Toll Road-approximately I to 2 percent of the state's population-for the next four decades. By definition, these motorists won't be riding Metrorail and enjoying its benefit. Using too much borrowed money backed by tolls to pay for most of the remaining cost of Dulles Rail creates as many problems as the project solves. Alternatives include financing the project with fees paid by future Metrorail riders, especially those who use the airport, or other airport fees.

Dulles Rail needs a realistic financing plan-including a substantial federal component--before Phase 2 is started and saddles us with excessive debt, high tolls and little congestion relief for decades to come. Jim LeMunyon (R-67) represents portions of Western Fairfax and Eastern Loudoun Counties in the Virginia House of Delegates.

© 2012 Post-Newsweek Media, Inc./FairfaxTimes.com

NOVA Chamber Partnership Pushes Richmond to Keep Dulles Corridor Metro Project on Track

• The Northern Virginia Chamber Partnership -which includes the Dulles Regional, Greater Reston and Loudoun County chambers of commerce - recently announced that it is urging legislators in Richmond to support two critical initiatives to help keep the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project moving forward.

The Partnership is actively supporting budget amendments introduced by Sens. Mark Herring (D-33) and Janet Howell (D-32) in the Senate and Dels. Ken Plum (D-36) and Tom Rust (R-86) in the House that would increase the state's contribution to the Silver Line, which will extend rail through the Dulles Corridor and on to Ashburn. The amendments would increase the state's contribution to as much as $sao million, which will directly reduce the amount of the project that will be paid for by users of the Dulles Toll Road.

"It is critical that we get as much state funding for Dulles Rail as possible to reduce the impact this project will have on our members and their employees who use the Dulles Toll Road on a daily basis," Tony Howard, President and CEO of the Loudoun County Chamber, stated in a release from the Partnership.

The Partnership also has taken a leadership role in "The Fair and Open Competition in Government Contracting Act." (HB 33/SB 242). That legislation would ensure fair and open competition on Virginia and Virginia-assisted construction projects by prohibiting anticompetitive and costly government-mandated project labor agreements. The organizations within the Partnership oppose a mandated PLA for Phase 2 Dulles Rail project.

"These bill will help taxpayers get the best possible construction project at the best possible price by increasing competition, reducing waste and eliminating favoritism in public contracting. This is particularly important with the Dulles Rail project," Howard said.

This legislation does not prohibit PLAs - it simply prohibits government -mandated PLAs on the front end of the bidding process, enabling the contractor to determine what is best for each specific project.

· HB 33 and SB 242 were both passed in committee this week, with strong Partnership support. Each will be considered on the floors of their respective bodies in the coming week. The budget amendments will be debated as part of the budget negotiating process.

The Northern Virginia Chamber Partnership represents more than 2,8oo businesses and wo,ooo jobs, and is focused on protecting a strong pro-business climate in Northern Virginia and the Commonwealth.

Patricia Nicoson, President Dulles Corridor Rail Association 11800 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite B Reston, VA 20191 Phone: (703) 716-5750

Fax: (703) 716-5751 www.dullescorridorrail.com [email protected] ·

Metro to Ashburn: Questions Have Been Raised About Planned Parking

The business community as well as commuters from 50/606 corridor push for adequate accommodations.

By Dusty Smith

Email the author

January 31, 2012

The current plan for the Route 6o6 Metro station, according to the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project's most recent update. Part of the existing park-and-ride lot can be seen on the right side of the picture. Dulles Corridor Metro rail Project

context

As the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority's contractor works to finalize the preliminary engineering of constructing Metro's planned Silver Line to Dulles, and Ashburn, there are various aspects of the project worth considering, such as convenience and the maximization of economic development.

[Don'tforget to take the poll at the bottom of the page.]

The Loudoun Board of Supervisors- which recently raised questions about the value of rail compared to the investment - will have 90 days after receiving the preliminary engineering information, which will include the latest estimated cost, to decide whether the county's in or out. Up to now, successive county boards have consistently voted in favor of the project.

Among the more apparent concerns for supervisors to consider, particularly to anyone who has ever tried to drive in and park at an existing Metro station: available, convenient parking.

In the latest plans, 3,300 spaces have been planned at the Ryan Road(Route 772)/Moorefield station and 2, 750 have been planned at the Route 6o6 station.

It's not uncommon for the second stations from the end of Metro lines to have lower parking than the last station. While Franconia-Springfield has 5,069 spaces, VanDorn has 361; Shady Grove has 5,745, compared with 524 at Rockville; and Vienna's 5,169 usurps the 1,326 spaces at Dunn-Loring. In the case of Dunn-Loring, the private sector has private significant additional parking.

Clearly those other areas are not like Ashburn, making comparison an inadequate determiner. Spaces are also planned at the Route 28 (2,000), Herndon-Monroe (3,500) and Wiehle Avenue (2,300) stations.

Anecdotally, commuters from Loudoun are all too familiar with the precision timing required to land a space at the Vienna Metro station, or any of the park-and-ride lots between Ashburn and the station. Vienna has doubled its parking decks since opening and it remains a problem.

"We've also seen the experience in Vienna," said Tony Howard, president and CEO of the Loudoun Chamber of Commerce and past COO and senior vice president of the Fairfax County Chamber of Commerce. "It's sold out very early in the morning."

Stone Ridge Homeowners Association Board member Mike Rhodes has experienced Vienna.

"I've tried to take the Metro from Vienna a number of times," he said. At the same time, with respect to parking at the Ashburn station, he admits "I haven't looked at it in much detail."

For commuters in communities along the Route so corridor -including Stone Ridge, South Riding and Kirkpatrick Farms - Route 6o6 is likely to be their targeted station; it has also been dubbed the "commuter station" in past county discussions, despite having fewer spaces planned than Ryan Road.

And while the spaces at Ryan Road, as currently planned, are split north and south of the Dulles Greenway, those at Route 6o6 are all planned only north of the Greenway. In addition, those spaces include the existing park-and-ride lot, which is not exactly adjacent to the planned lot from the planned station.

For those driving north to the Route 6o6 station, the planned parking may seem elusive at first; they'll have to take a left beyond the 6o6jGreenway interchange and loop back past the existing lot to the planned parking garage.

The Loudoun Chamber has raised questions about the proposed parking, and looks forward to a study the county has undertaken to estimate ridership and from which direction those riders will come.

"We are wondering is there are enough space planned at both stations," Howard said. "Are they sufficient and are they located in the right place. We've had.discussions with county administrator and the board of supervisors. We know that there's going to be a tremendous amount of traffic coming from the south. And the north and west."

Other business entities have also offered comments about the parking or its location. In an Oct. 1, 2010 letter to MW AA from the Committee for Dulles threw its "strong" support behind a current or future addition of a parking garage to tile south of the 6o6 station "to intercept the very heayy ridership demand coming from the south along Route 606."

On the same day, the Dulles Regional Chamber of Commerce sent a letter to MW AA stating that the 2,ooo planned additional spaces appear "far from adequate." The letter also ·questions the station's location within the 6o6jGreenway interchange, east of initial plans for which the existing "bubble" in the Greenway route was created.

The Antigone family owns a significant portion of land around the 6o6 station and has pushed for MW AA to move the 606 station west 6oo feet to accommodate, not only a parking deck to the south, also a touted potential economic development engine called International City.

MW AA has opposed the move and many supporters of rail fear such a change could derail progress. There are those who argue any change could kill the project, while others argue the project will fail if not adequately planned.

Christopher Antigone has argued that a past decision by supervisors not to study such a move was based on faulty information. While the cost of such a move was estimated at $30 million to $40 million, little rationale for the estimate was presented. Antigone concedes that the cost would be significant, but points to the potential benefits - a parking deck to the south and a significant increase in economic development return. He also said his engineers estimate the cost of actually moving the station much lower; it's many of the accoutrements - many of which benefit commuters as much as his property- that drive up the cost.

Loudoun County Chairman Scott K. York (R-At Large) was critical of the past board of supervisors for declining to examine such a move, not just for parking but also for potential economic development value of International City. [Editor's note: Economic development potential will be the subject of a future story.]

"I think it's also going to be easier to put more commuter parking on the south side," he said back in December. "That's going to be a huge need. At the end of the day, is moving it better, ultimately, than keeping it where it's at? That's what would be worth studying."

The Chamber's Howard points out that parking decks, as currently planned, are very expensive, and that concerns about overbuilding are equally warranted.

"It's kind of a balancing act. Parking decks are expensive," he said, estimating the cost at $2o,ooo a space. "That's real money."

All the more reason, the county need accurate ridership estimates. At moment, county on hook for decks - a multimillion dollar undertaking- which will compete for space within the county's debt capacity with schools and other needs.

In addition, Howard pointed to the Dunn-Loring station in Fairfax, where the private sector stepped up to provide significant parking to supplement Metro. Such opportunities "can -fill in some of the need," he said.

Jeff Salmon, a member of the Loudoun Planning Commission and the South Riding Proprietary Board, speaking only as an individual, said parking is an issue he suspects many community associations will begin to examine.

"Frankly, we haven't talked a whole lot about it," he said. 'Tm not sure how many people are going to use the Metro, but there seems to only be parking on one side of the road. The parking, to me personally, is something I'd want to make sure whoever does this has done their due diligence on the ridership and number of spaces needed."

While Stone Ridge also has not spent much time thinking about Metro parking up to now, Rhodes said he finds the questions about parking intriguing and wonders whether bus service "might mitigate some parking demand."

To learn more about the project, visit the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project website.

[Correction: The previous figure cited for parking garage costs were mistated. The number also included other amenities, some outside of Loudoun.]

RCA: Forecast Overestimates Toll Revenue

Reston group wants additional study done before Silver Line Phase 2 gets going.

By Karen Goff, Reston Pattch, Janaury 29, 2012

The Reston Citizens Association says that a recent forecast of traffic and revenue from the Dulles Toll Road contains "many very large errors" and wants an additional study be untertaken before there are any more decisions made on moving forward with Phase 2 of the Metro Silver Line.

"Our analysis of a number of Wilbur Smith Associate's forecasts for toll facilities indicates they frequently overestimate the toll revenues," said Colin Mills, President of the Reston Citizens Associations (RCA) Board of Directors.

"These overestimates have led to major financial restructurings and even toll road bankruptcies in the cases we looked at, resulting in major losses to investors and bondholders as well as often requiring new public funding and higher tolls."

RCA sent its study on Friday to Gov. Bob McDonnell, Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Chair Sharon Bulova, Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Board Chair Michael Curto and other stakeholders in Phase 2.

The study was finished as Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) is about to complete its third traffic and revenue forecast for the Dulles Toll Road and the funding partners for the Silver Line are preparing to approve a decision to move forward with Phase 2 of the line's construction.

The 81-page analysis, titled Wilbur Smith Associates' Traffic and Revenue Forecasts: Plenty of Room for Error, examines the "optimism bias" -overestimating traffic and revenues-in toll road forecasts.

Data from a national study of toll road overestimates indicates WSA's forecasts averaged a 127 percent overestimate of revenues-more than double-for the first five years for 12 projects it supported. Other forecasting groups performed nearly as poorly, but WSA's forecasts did not improve over that time span while the others improved markedly.

The RCA assessment notes that WSA's work in its two studies of the Dulles Toll Road so far (2005 and 2009) show overestimates as well. Its 2005 forecast put the revenue maximizing toll at $2; its 2009 study called for tolls to reach $11.25. It used the highest available population and employment forecasts in both forecasts, overestimating 2010 Fairfax employment by 25 percent in 2005 and 52 percent in 2009.

The pattern of overestimates in WSA's forecasts suggests a substantial risk in proceeding with the Metrorailline's current financial plan. Among the risks:

Lenders will not fund the $3 billion needed to finance Dulles Toll Road construction, or will require state guarantees or funding for an investment grade rating.

Tolls may double those forecast by WSA to meet debt servicing requirements, compensate for the revenue overestimate, pay higher interest rates, and offset reduced traffic demand.

Much higher toll rates on the Dulles Toll Road will discourage economic growth along the Dulles Corridor and force a substantial flow of traffic to already congested nearby highways and roads.

MWAA may have to use airport revenues to pay Dulles Toll Road debt servicing obligations.

MW AA may face default or restructuring of its Dulles Toll Road debt at a greater debt servicing-and greater toll- expense over a long period of time.

RCA also calls for MWAA to release the upcoming traffic and revenue study as soon as possible, and for all the funding partners to engage the public in a dialogue on whether and how to proceed with Phase 2 under the current financial plan. Longer term, it calls on FHW A to oversee a process that would lead to a substantial improvement in traffic and revenue forecasts.

"RCA has long been enthusiastic about Metrorail to Dulles via Reston," said Terry Maynard, the report's principal drafter, said in a statement. "But we do not want a rail line at any price, especially one that forces Dulles Toll Road users to absorb most of the financial burden and area communities to absorb added traffic on already crowded local roads. The prospects are even worse if the WSA forecasts overestimate revenues as much as our research suggests."

The entire report can be found here: RCA Study·· Wilbur Smith Traffic & Revenue Forecastsn 012712

MW AA lacks authority to build Dulles Rail

By: Rob Whitfield I 01/29/12 8:05PM, Washington Examiner OpEd Contributor

Last month, most members of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority board thumbed their noses at Congress, President Obama and Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell.

They did so concerning a recently passed law authorizing expansion of the MW AA board from 13 to 17 members. They claimed that this change in MWAA's bistate compact cannot be implemented without ratification by the Virginia General Assembly and the D.C. Council.

This raises a basic question: Why did MW AA not seek similar ratification when former Gov. Tim Kaine unilaterally decided to transfer control of the Dulles Toll Road and responsibility for building Dulles Rail to MW AA in December 2005, an action that significantly amended provisions ofthe 1986 congressional act, which created the bistate MWAA compact?

In the Metropolitan Washington Airports Act of 1986, no mention is made of "off airport" activities other than reference to the Dulles Airport Access Road, which links the airport to the Capital Beltway.

The MW AA's takeover of the Dulles Toll Road and the building of Dulles Rail were never provided for or contemplated in existing Virginia law either. Thus, it appears that MWAA acted outside its expressly provided authority.

Further, Virginia has not given specific authority for MWAA to collect Dulles Toll Road tolls at ever-escalating rates, which most view as a never-authorized tax.

A court could somehow find that building a rail line within the federally owned, 400-foot-wide Dulles Access Road's right of way does not violate the 1986 act.

However, the two-mile detour designed to raise the potential land value of Tysons Corner by $5 to $1o billion over the next decade is clearly outside the scope of the current Airports Act.

On March 2, 1987, the U.S. secretary of transportation and the chairman of MW AA's Board of Directors entered into a so-year lease of Washington National and Washington Dulles International airports, later extended to So years.

Following execution of the lease, Virginia and the District of Columbia amended their enabling acts to conform with the terms of the Transfer Act.

The Virginia statutes included the following provision:

"Pursuant to Section 6oo7(b) of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Act of 1986, the Authority is established solely to operate and improve both metropolitan Washington airports as primary airports serving the metropolitan Washington area and shall be independent of the Commonwealth and its local political subdivisions, the District of Columbia and the federal government in the performance and exercise of the airport-related duties and powers enumerated in subdivisions 1 through 16 of subsection A of this section.

"Any conflict between the exercise of these enumerated powers by the Authority and the powers of any local political subdivision within which Authority Facilities are situated shall be resolved in favor of the Authority."

More than 90 percent of projected Dulles Rail riders will be commuters or other travelers starting or ending their trips at Metrorail stations other than Dulles Airport.

By what legal theory does MW AA claim that such travel is solely for the benefit of operating and improving our Virginia airports?

The present Dulles Rail funding plan has never been subjected to a comprehensive public review and approval process even though MW AA expects Dulles Toll Road users to pay the majority of construction costs.

For Phase 2, MWAA proposes that DTR users pay 75 percent of the $3 billion-plus capital costs-a potential $10 to $15 billion in tolls over the next 50 years.

Given Dulles Rail's lack of economic and financial feasibility, particularly the proposed Phase 2 extension into Loudoun County, it's time for MWAA to cease its unauthorized non-airportrelated activities and revert Dulles Toll Road operations and Dulles Rail construction to the commonwealth of Virginia.

Rob Whitfield is a member of the Dulles Corridor Users Group.

Loudoun, Fairfax officials ask for tab on running Silver Line

By: Kyt;ja Weir I 01/24/12 8:05PM, Washingotn Examiner Examiner Staff Writer Follow Her @kytja

Fairfax and Loudoun counties are asking for the bill on how much the Silver Line will cost them to operate before they agree to build the rest of the Metro line.

The two counties are slated to help pay for the $2.8 billion construction costs of the remaining half of the 23-mile Dulles Rail line.

But in the longer term, they also are on the hook for a major portion of the annual operating costs of running it as part of the Metro system. That means additional costs every year.

Fairfax County's Board of Supervisors unanimously passed a motion Tuesday to seek how much the line will cost the county to run for the next 15 years-- both with and without Loudoun's involvement in case its neighbor pulls out. Last week, Loudoun County leaders asked for an estimate of the bill before they have to decide whether to fund construction of the second phase.

"It's important we have everything in front of us," said Fairfax County Supervisor Pat Herrity, RSpringfield. "Clearly you need to understand the long-term costs."

The jurisdictions that Metro serves subsidize the transit system's annual operating costs because riders' fares don't cover the full cost of running trains and buses. In the next budget cycle, taxpayers are being asked to pay $711 million, but the number will rise as the system grows.

Fairfax and Loudoun want to determine the Silver Line's costs before they make a decision on whether to build the second phase of the line, which would extend from Reston to Washington Dulles International Airport and beyond. That deadline could be as early as June.

But those numbers may be hard to come by so soon.

Metro has said it expects the initial ramp-up costs of hiring and training workers to be $20 million next year, before the line begins running. The first year of operation would cost about $43 million. Additional estimates haven't been made public.

And those numbers haven't been divvied up to show which jurisdictions would pay which portion of those costs. Overall, Virginia generally pays about 30 percent of the rail subsidy costs, but the formula for determining who pays what is based on ridership, population and the number of stations, among other factors, so the weight would shift when the line opened.

Metro spokesman Dan Stessel said officials have had to update the ridership and cost numbers because of the change to the location of the airport spot, but haven't received the new numbers that will help determine the costs from the Federal Transit Administration.

[email protected]

Loudoun, Fairfax officials ask for tab on running Silver Line Fairfax and Loudoun counties are asking for the bill on how much the Silver Line will cost them to operate before they agree to build the rest of the Metro line.

The two counties are slated to help pay for the $2.8 billion construction costs ofthe remaining half of the 23-mile Dulles Rail line.

But in the longer term, they also are on the hook for a major portion of the annual operating costs of running it as part of the Metro system. That means additional costs every year.

Fairfax County's Board of Supervisors unanimously passed a motion Tuesday to seek how much the line will cost the county to run for the next 15 years-- both with and without Loudoun's involvement in case its neighbor pulls out. Last week, Loudoun County leaders asked for an estimate of the bill before they have to decide whether to fund construction of the second phase.

"It's important we have everything in front of us," said Fairfax County Supervisor Pat Herrity, RSpringfield. "Clearly you need to understand the long-term costs."

The jurisdictions that Metro serves subsidize the transit system's annual operating costs because riders' fares don't cover the full cost of running trains and buses. In the next budget cycle, taxpayers are being asked to pay $711 million, but the number will rise as the system grows.

Fairfax and Loudoun want to determine the Silver Line's costs before they make a decision on whether to build the second phase of the line, which would extend from Reston to Washington Dulles International Airport and beyond. That deadline could be as early as June.

But those numbers may be hard to come by so soon.

Metro has said it expects the initial ramp-up costs of hiring and training workers to be $20 million next year, before the line begins running. The first year of operation would cost about $43 million. Additional estimates haven't been made public.

And those numbers haven't been diwied up to show which jurisdictions would pay which portion of those costs. Overall, Virginia generally pays about 30 percent of the rail subsidy costs, but the formula for determining who pays what is based on ridership, population and the number of stations, among other factors, so the weight would shift when the line opened.

Metro spokesman Dan Stessel said officials have had to update the ridership and cost numbers because of the change to the location of the airport spot, but haven't received the new numbers that will help determine the costs from the Federal Transit Administration.

[email protected]

Page I of2

Board of Supervisors' Priorities

By engaging our residents and businesses in the process of addressing these challenging times, protecting Investment In our most critical priorities; and by maintaining strong responsible fiscal stewardship, we must ensure:

'""'~ d,, \,.

- ..,...,~-;;

Quality Educational System

Education is Fairfax County's highest priority. We will continue the investment needed to protect and enhance this community asset. Our children are our greatest resource. Because of our excellent schools, businesses are

ear•erto locate here and our children are able to find good jobs. A well-educated constituency is best able to put Into their community.

Safe Streets and Neighborhoods

Fairfax County Is the safest community of our size in the U.S. We will continue to invest in public safety to respond to emergency situations, as well as efforts to prevent and Intervene in destructive behaviors, such as gahg activity and substance abuse.

A Clean, Sustainable Environment

Fairfax County will continue to protect our drinking water, air quality, stream valleys and tree canopy through responsible environmental regulations and practices. We will continue to take a lead in Initiatives to address energy efficiency and sustalnability and to preserve and protect open space for our residents to enjoy.

Livable, Caring and Affordable Communities

As Fairfax County continues to grow we will do so in ways that address environmental and mobility challenges. We will encourage housing that Is affordable to our children, seniors and members of our workforce. We will provide compassionate and efficient services to members of our community who are in need. We will continue to protect and support our stable lower density neighborhoods. We will encourage and support partlcipallon In community

o~ganlzallons and other acllvlties that address community needs and opportunities.

Vibrant Economy

Fairfax County has a well-earned reputation as a business-friendly community. We will vigorously pursue economic development and revitalization opportunities. We will support the business community and encourage this healthy partnership. We will continue to be sensitive and responsive to the needs of our corporate neighbors In the areas of workfo•rce development and availability, affordable housing, regulation and taxation.

Efficient Transportation Network

County makes It a priority to connect people and places. We will continue to plan for and invest In tra1nsp·ort:•tlo•n improvements to Include comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian In illatives, bus and para transit, road

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/government/board/priorities/ 2/8/2012

Page '2 ot '2

and intersection improvements and expansion of Metrorail and VRE.

Recreational and Cultural Opportunities

A desirable community Is one where there Is a lot going on that residents can enjoy. Fairfax County will continue to provide for athletic, .artistic, intellectual and recreational activities, in our communities, parks, libraries and schools.

Taxes that are Affordable

~~ ~~~:;~=~::E1 tax is Fairfax County's primary source of revenue to provide services. We will ensure that taxes are

our residents and businesses, and we will seek ways to diversify County revenues In order to make more equitable. We will ensure that County programs and services are efflcient,-effecttve, cost effective

and well run.

ADA Accessibility I Website Accessibility ~ 1 EQJA 1 Mobile 1 Using this Site I Web Disclaimer & Privacy Poljcy I Get Adobe Reader Official site of the Count of Fairfax, Virginia,© Copyright 2011

i' 5- I ~~~~~~.E

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/governmentlboard/priorities/ ?/R/?01?

t amax 11mes.com: Prmt Article Page I of I

f lj< ,. amrax Fairfax, Virginia

Published: Wednesday, February 1, 2012 Dulles Rail needs a realistic financing plan

The recent Dulles Toll Road fee increase to $2.25 one way is just the latest in a series of expected toll increases during the next several years. Rather than just pay for maintaining the Toll Road, tolls also are being directed to pay off debt and interest used to build Dulles Rail. So far, $1.2 billion in debt already has been issued by the Washington Metropolitan Airports Authority to help pay for the $2.8 billion cost of Phase 1 of the rail project, which extends from the Orange Line near West Falls Church through Tysons Corner to the Wiehle Avenue station in Reston. MWAA is responsible for building the rail project. Tolls are expected to reach $5 each way in the next decade, and continue to increase for more than two decades afterward just to pay off debt that already has been financed. A recent constituent survey that I conducted within the past few weeks- in which more than 600 citizens responded -found more than half of those who use the Toll Road already have reduced their use of the road because of the $2.25 toll. Forecasts prepared for MWAA agree that use of the Toll Road will go down as tolls go up. Incredibly, an additional $1 to $1.5 billion in debt- to be paid by accelerating planned toll increases- is under serious consideration to complete Phase 2 to the airport and Loudoun County, because the federal government is unlikely to provide additional financing. The governor and some members of the General Assembly want to help the project by providing $150 million in state money for Phase 2, with a few members requesting considerably more to "buy down" the tolls. Although the state contribution is well intended, it still would allow tolls to double from the current forecasts by allowing additional debt financing to go forward. We shouldn't need examples such as Greece, Italy and the U.S.'s $15 trillion debt to realize using too much debt intended for some public good usually results in something bad. Here's what too much Dulles Rail debt already is doing: 'i"lt has reduced use of the Toll Road by customers and employees of Dulles Corridor businesses, harming economic activity. Ironically, Dulles Rail was intended to improve economic activity along the Dulles Corridor; 'i" As my survey indicates, high tolls are chasing cars off the Toll Road and making other roads more congestedlike Interstate 66, Route 7, the Capital Beltway, Route 28 and secondary roads. Major transportation improvements should make substantial reductions in traffic congestion in Northern Virginia, not just re-arrange the problem; ?Serious inequities arise with too much debt. The state government recently issued $3 billion in debt to fund other transportation projects statewide for the benefit of 8 million Virginians. Dulles Rail debt, of nearly the same amount for Phases 1 and 2, will be shouldered in the form of tolls by fewer than 100,000 daily Northern Virginia motorists on the Toll Road- about 1 to 2 percent of the state's population- for the next four decades. By definition, these motorists won't be riding Metro rail and enjoying its benefit. Using too much borrowed money backed by tolls to pay tor most of the remaining cost of Dulles Rail creates as many problems as the project solves. Alternatives include financing the project with fees paid by future Metrorail riders, especially those who use the airport, or other airport fees. · Dulles Rail needs a realistic financing plan - including a substantial federal component- before Phase 2 is started and saddles us with excessive debt, high tolls and little congestion relief for decades to come. Jim LeMunyon (R-Dist. 67) represents portions of Western Fairfax and Eastern Loudoun Counties in the Virginia House of Delegates.

© 2012 Post-Newsweek Media, lnc./FairfaxTimes.com

http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article? AID=/20 12020 I /OPINION/7020 19360/1... 2/3/2012

Update: Got a new smartphone? Get the Patch App! »

1-11:48 L0:32

. Ashburn Patch~ Patch Newsletter Nearby J.Q1n Sign In

Ill Editor pustv Smith: Heard some news you want Ull to check out? Let me know. dusty®patch.com

Traffic & Gas Search

LOCAL CONNECTIONS Add your own announcement

NOVA Chamber Partnership Pushes Richmond to Keep Dulles Corridor Metro Project on Track January 31,2012

The Northern VIrginia Chamber Partnership- which includes the Duffes Regional, Greater Reston and loudoun County chambers of commerce - recently announced that 1t Is urging legislators In Richmond to support two critical Initiatives to help keep the Duffes Corridor Metrorall P_roject moving forward.

The Partnership Is actively supporting budget amendments introduced by Sens. Mark Herring {D-33) and Janet Howell (0-32) In the Senate and Oels. Ken Plum (0-36) and Tom Rust (R-86) ·in the House that would Increase the state's contribution to the Silver Line, which will extend rail through the Dulles Corridor and on to Ashburn. The amendments would Increase the state's contribution to as much aS $500 million, which will directly reduce the amount of the project that will be paid for by users of the Duffes Toll Road.

"It Is critical that we get as much state funding for Dulles Rail as possible to reduce the impact this project will have on our members and their employees who use the Dulles Toll Road on a dally bilsis,~ Tony Howard, President and CEO of the Loudoun County Chamber, stated in a release from the Partnership.

The Partnership also has taken a leadership role In ~The Fair and Open Competition In Government Co~tracting Act. n (HB 33158 242). That legislation would ensure fair and open competition on VIrginia and Vlrginla·asslsted construction projects by prohibiting anti-competitive and costly government-mandated project labor agreements. The organizatldns within the Partnership oppose a mandated PLA for Phase 2 Dulles Rail project.

~These bill will help taxpayers get the best possible construction project at the best possible price by increasing competlt!on, reducing waste and eliminating favoritism in public contracting. This Is particularly Important With the Dulles ·Rail project, p Howard said.

This legislation does not-prohibit PLAs- It simply prohibits government-mandated PLAs on the front end of the bidding process, enabling the contractor to determine what Is best for each specific project.

HB 33 and SB 242 were both passed In committee this week, with strong Partnership support. Each will be considered on the floors of their respective bodies In the coming week. The budget amendments will be debated as part of the budget negotiating process.

The Northern Virginia Chamber Partnership represents more than 2,800 businesses and 100,000 jobs, and Is focused on protecting a strong pro-business climate In Northern Virginia and the Commonwealth.

Upload Photos and Videos

Follow comments Submit tip Comment

•

http://ashburn.patch.com/announcements/nova-chamber-partnership-pushes-richmond-to-ke... 2/3/2012

)

Page I of2

• Rewards Sign Up l • Current Deals l • Email Sign Up l • Advertise l • Contribute

CltyBizllst

JBG Secures $58.75M for Summit I & II in Reston, VA Posted February 14, 2012

We Recommend ...

• Avlson Young Snags Eight-Person Team from Grubb & Ellis In DC • Mid-Atlantic. Northeast Expansion Planned for Zlnburger Concept • LEED Gold Certification for The Farragut Building In DC • Edge Fund Begins Renovating 1350 I St. NW • Equlnlx Spendjng $109M to Expand DC~Metro Data Center Campus • Norville Resigns as EVp. COO at Boston Properties

JBG Companies has secured a $58.75 million non-recourse loan for the acquisition and renovation of Summit I & II In Reston, VA.

CBRE Capital Markets arranged the five-year non-recourse loan through KBS REIT II to finance the acquisition and renovation. Joe Donato and Jamie Leachman led CBRE's Washington, DC Debt & Equity Finance team who represented JBG.

Originally developed In 1986/1987, the adjacent office buildings contain approximately 288,000 rentable square feet and feature six stories, one below grade level. The buildings are LEED and Energy Star certified.

Summit I, located at 2002 Edmund Halley Drive, contains 141,000 RSF and Summit II, located at 2000 Edmund Halley Drive, contains 147,000 RSF. The Property Is scheduled to undergo significant renovations In 2012 which include upgrades to HVAC, lobby, and bathrooms.

The Property Is located on the Dulles Toll Road and Is directly south of Reston Town Center. In addition to frontage along the Dulles Toll Road, the Property Is adjacent to the future home of the Reston Town Center Metrorall station on Metro rail's Silver Line extension.

Like

Add New Comment

illtC ...:.. , •.... ~---~- .............. ·--··-------~··· -··· ... ····--··---~----- .. ···-- ~--· . . ... ··-· - ............... ·-· .... ··--····-· .

Type your comment here.

) Showing 0 comments Sort by popular now !Jc1!!

http:/ I dcrealestate.citybizlist.com/5/20 12/2/ 14/JBG-Secures-5 8. 7 5M-for-Summit-I--II-in-R... 2/16/20 12

LEGEND .... Existing Orange Une

Track and Station

• Transfer Station

~ Park;ng

e New Station

~ Underground Station

== Surface Track

;a;:: Elevated Track

Underground Track

~ Partially .Below Surface Station

~ ~LL~S CORRIDOR ~TRORAILPROJ~CT

"""" :::Gt.:'ii.t:ibl;c;_~~v!<t ~ ----.... / ,.

/ '' ..... ""' ..

' /

Virginia

N

0 0 2 3 MILES

/ I>

t

\ I ;..

""' r ..

' \. "·' . "-·-... - ···--...:.>-·-

moNS CORNER

Maryland

' ' Washington DC

-'1

--+ hcontinul!$to """'m-Ann«r Metro Strtion

... ""1%;,.

~~;o~Q. "'""~''¢ ;:...,~··z