Skip to main content

Read the latest Blog Post by CFGF Board Member Peter Falcone on Resource Protection Areas (RPAs), the vital buffers that help safeguard waterways and stream beds in our community from the impacts of development, and the effects of the county's development approval process.  Click on BLOGS above to read the whole post.

Proposed 2027 County Budget — Administrative Savings Overview

On behalf of Citizens For Great Falls, the chart depicted below was submitted to Dranesville Supervisor James Bierman and Fairfax County School Board Representative Robin Lady, on March 22 2026, outlining a series of budget recommendations for their consideration. The chart illustrates approximately $30 million in potential administrative savings identified across Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) and general county operations.

 

Our recommendations emphasize FCPS central administration, contracted services, and internal operational efficiencies — and are specifically structured to avoid any impact on classroom instruction, school-based staffing, or countywide public safety services.

These figures represent constructive, community-oriented savings targets aimed at supporting responsible budgeting while preserving the services Fairfax County residents value most.

Citizens For Great Falls – FY 2027 Budget Reductions
Citizens For Great Falls

FY 2027 FCPS / County Budget
Targeted Reductions Justification Sheet

Proposed savings aligned with FY 2027 FCPS / County budget rationale
Item What We Propose How It Aligns with FY 2027 Budget Rationale
1. FCPS Vacant Central Office Positions $7M Freeze nonessential central office vacancies and permanently eliminate long-unfilled administrative positions; reassign duties within existing teams where feasible. Brings the budget in line with actual staffing levels and mirrors County and FCPS emphasis on "efforts toward greater efficiency" and limiting new resource requests, achieving savings without reducing current services or classroom staffing.
2. FCPS Nonessential Consultant Contracts $6M Scale back or cancel non-mandated consultant contracts in professional development, strategic planning, communications, curriculum consulting, and IT modernization; shift appropriate work to internal staff. Targets a known cost driver—contractual and professional services—while following the FY 2027 direction to implement agency-level savings that offset required increases, protect classroom instruction, and build internal capacity instead of relying on recurring consultant spend.
3. FCPS Software & Licensing Consolidation $4M Eliminate redundant or underutilized HR, analytics, workflow, and training platforms; consolidate licenses and negotiate enterprise pricing; delay noncritical upgrades 12–24 months. Responds to ongoing IT operating cost pressure by focusing on consolidation and smarter procurement, consistent with County and FCPS efforts to manage license and support costs while preserving essential instructional and information security systems.
4. FCPS Administrative Facilities & Leases $3M Reduce leased administrative office space through consolidation and expanded telework; pursue energy-efficiency improvements and right-size office footprints. Aligns with the County's broader push to rebalance facilities spending toward capital renewal and maintenance, shifting dollars from dispersed administrative overhead to higher-priority needs without affecting classroom space.
5. FCPS Training, Travel & Internal Programs $2M Limit central office travel and conferences; shift professional development to virtual or in-house formats; pause nonessential pilot initiatives. Uses the same first-line savings tools the County is applying (reductions in travel, training, and discretionary programs) to generate modest, targeted reductions that protect school-based training required by law or contract and maintain direct services to students.
6. Countywide Consultant Reductions (Non-FCPS) $5M Freeze new consultant contracts in non-public-safety agencies and reduce the scope of existing planning, analysis, and communications engagements; prioritize internal capacity. Supports the County Executive's strategy to implement a sizable reduction package while keeping the tax rate flat, by focusing cuts on back-office consulting rather than on core public safety or human services, and moderating overall budget growth.
7. County Administrative Overhead (Non-FCPS) $3M Reduce administrative travel, training, internal program budgets, and noncritical technology upgrades; freeze nonessential hiring in non-public-safety departments. Extends the County's documented approach of trimming administrative overhead (printing, equipment, training, personnel savings based on actuals) to realize savings with minimal service impact, helping balance the budget and prioritize high-impact programs.
8. Montessori Pilot at Great Falls ES – Transparency Request Transparency Seek clarity on site selection (including whether Title I schools were considered), long-term local funding after grant expiration, impacts on existing resources, and success metrics; request ongoing community input. Reflects FCPS and County commitments to transparency, equity, and data-driven decision-making by ensuring a partially grant-funded initiative is evaluated against clear criteria, equity goals, and budgetary tradeoffs in a year when both FCPS and the County face structural pressures.
Total Proposed Reductions (Items 1–7) $30,000,000
Citizens For Great Falls  |  FY 2027 Budget Advocacy  |  Great Falls, Virginia

Citizens For Great Falls is actively engaged on the issues that matter most to our community.

See some of our latest actions below:

CFGF Testimony and Correspondence
Citizens For Great Falls

Testimony & Correspondence

Citizens For Great Falls is working on your behalf — engaging leaders and officials on the issues that shape life in Great Falls. Read about our recent efforts below.
Public Testimony
Dec. 3, 2025
TestimonySupport for Lift Me Up! Special Permit application.
Jan. 7, 2026
TestimonyChallenging a zoning determination on pickleball in a front yard.
Correspondence & Letters
Jul. 15, 2025
CorrespondenceTo County Planning Commission — six specific requests to amend the proposed Zoning Ordinance on Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) to improve safety and protect adjacent residential property owners from insurance rate impacts.
Oct. 15, 2025
CorrespondenceTo County Planning Commission — objecting to a draft Zoning Ordinance Amendment on Electrical Substations, citing noise, visual impact, and safety concerns for nearby residential areas.
Oct. 30, 2025
CorrespondenceTo School Board Rep. Robyn Lady — concerns and recommendations regarding the ongoing school boundary review process.
Jan. 12, 2026
CorrespondencePreliminary endorsement of the residential development plan for Castleton Hills (former site of Wolftrap Nursery).
Regulatory & Agency Outreach
Apr. 3, 2025
CorrespondenceTo Supervisor Bierman — documenting the overnight tanker truck accident in which more than 2,000 gallons of hazardous material were discharged on Leigh Mill Road, and urging action on the safety risks posed by tractor trailers hauling hazardous cargo through Great Falls.
Apr. 10, 2025
EmailTo Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality — requesting a formal investigation of the April 3 HazMat incident on Leigh Mill Road and assistance for homeowners in testing private wells that may have been placed at risk.
Citizens For Great Falls  |  Advocacy & Community Engagement  |  Great Falls, Virginia

News / Articles

CFGF Submits Comments on Proposed Zoning Amendment

Peter Falcone | Published on 7/15/2025

July 15, 2025 (Great Falls) As our community has commercial and Industrial districts in proximity to residential districts, CFGF has significant concerns regarding the anticipated expansion of BESS in Fairfax County, particularly due to the increasing preference for Lithium-Ion batteries, which are valued for their power density, operational performance, and economic advantages. These batteries present well-documented risks of fire and explosion, with certain incidents demonstrating that such fires can be difficult to control or extinguish promptly. Allowing BESS installations in densely populated areas may introduce unnecessary risk to local communities, particularly if By-right.

 

The CFGF is especially concerned that, in addition to potential noise and environmental impacts associated with future BESS facilities, Fairfax County should be evaluating stronger regulatory measures, including additional possible restrictions within specific zoning districts.

 

According to the staff’s preliminary discussion draft, DE has set a goal to develop or acquire 2,700 MW of energy storage capacity by 2035, with an additional requirement that at least 35% of this capacity be purchased. Moreover, many of DEs substations (potential sites for BESS) in Fairfax County are located near or within both commercial and residential areas. As a result, it is prudent to consider the potential community concerns that would arise regarding noise, pollution, and the documented fire and explosion risks associated with BESS using Lithium-Ion batteries. 

Market indications confirm that BESS constitutes a rapidly growing sector, not unlike our experiences in Fairfax County regarding the emergence of data centers in Northern Virginia. 

CFGF believes that the impending fast-paced development of BESS necessitates that this land use category requires a comprehensive understanding of the associated risks and the potential impacts on communities resulting from BESS deployment and more specificity in the zoning regulations.

 

Finally, at a minimum, we are opposed to By-right approval of BESS in residential or commercial areas and recommend that all BESS undergo the Special Exception application process. 

The complete comments are filed on the CFGF website Documents Menu Page.

Return to Previous Page