FROM THE PRESIDENT A Message to Our Members & Neighbors John Halacy, President — Citizens for Great Falls

Dear Fellow Great Falls Residents,

Spring has arrived, and with it comes that familiar sense of renewal—neighbors out on the trails, gardens coming back to life, and our community gathering once again after the quieter winter months. It is a wonderful time to be part of a place as special as Great Falls, and a timely reminder of exactly why the work of Citizens for Great Falls matters so much.

This season, our engagement could not be more important. Fairfax County is moving quickly on decisions that will shape our neighborhoods, our budgets, and our quality of life for years to come—from major land transactions completed with minimal public notice, to sweeping zoning changes that could alter the character of our streets, to legislation that would bring a casino into our county. These are not abstract policy debates. They affect the roads we drive, the schools our children attend, the character of the community we cherish, and the tax bills we pay.

Your voice matters—and so does your presence. I encourage every member to review the articles in this issue, attend the upcoming public hearings listed at the end of this newsletter, and submit comments to county officials. Public participation is not just a right—it is our most powerful tool.

I also want to ask something of you that costs nothing but a moment of your time: please share this newsletter with your neighbors. Many residents who care deeply about Great Falls simply don’t know that an organization like ours exists, or that these issues are moving as fast as they are. When you forward this newsletter to a neighbor, a friend, or a fellow community member, you expand our circle and strengthen our collective voice. And if they want to stay informed and get involved, encourage them to visit www.citizensforGreatFalls.org to join our mailing list.

A community organization is only as strong as its membership—and Great Falls is fortunate to have residents who are thoughtful, engaged, and committed to getting things right. Let’s make this spring a season of civic action.

John Halacy

PRESIDENT, CITIZENS FOR GREAT FALLS

Public Assets, Private Timelines: Fairfax County’s Transparency Problem

In March, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors approved the sale of 41.7 acres of public land at 3721 Stonecroft Boulevard in Chantilly for $166.8 million to developer SCG Global Holdings, L.L.C. On its face, the deal is easy to defend—the County monetizes underutilized land, funds improved police training facilities, and taps into one of the region’s most lucrative industries. But that’s not the real issue. The issue is how the decision was made—and when the public was brought into the process.

A Deal That Started Behind Closed Doors

This was not the result of a long-range plan, a public solicitation, or a community-driven vision for the site. It began with an unsolicited offer from a private developer. Negotiations proceeded—largely out of public view—until the agreement was far enough along to be approved.

This Is Not an Isolated Case

Just months earlier, the Fairfax County School Board purchased the former King Abdullah Academy campus for approximately $245 million—again with no meaningful public notice or input before the decision was effectively made. Different agencies. Different properties. Same pattern:

And just like that, debate becomes compressed, options narrow, and scrutiny feels like obstruction.

When Process Becomes the Problem

There are reasonable arguments in favor of both decisions: the Stonecroft site sits in an industrial area near Dulles Airport, the data center use is economically attractive, and the school acquisition may address long-term capacity needs. But good outcomes do not excuse opaque processes. Public land is not a private asset. Taxpayer dollars are not private capital. Decisions involving either should be guided by open deliberation, competitive evaluation, and early and meaningful public input—not quiet negotiations followed by accelerated approvals.

The Shift No One Voted For

What we are seeing is a subtle but significant shift: from planning-led decision-making to opportunity-driven dealmaking. In this model, private actors identify opportunities, government responds in real time, and public engagement becomes secondary. It’s faster—it may even be profitable. But it raises a fundamental concern: Who is setting priorities—the public, or the proposals that happen to arrive?

The Risk Is Not One Decision—It’s the Precedent

One land sale won’t define Fairfax County. One school purchase won’t either. But a pattern will. If unsolicited offers and low-visibility negotiations become the norm, then transparency becomes optional, public input becomes reactive, and trust becomes fragile. And once that shift takes hold, it is very difficult to reverse.

A Simple Standard

Before public land is sold—or hundreds of millions in taxpayer funds are committed—the public should know what is being considered, understand the alternatives, and have a real opportunity to weigh in. Not after the deal is structured. Not when the vote is imminent. At the beginning.

Citizens for Great Falls Proposes $30 Million in Targeted Budget Reductions

A Community-Driven Approach to Restoring Fiscal Balance in Fairfax County

As Fairfax County continues to face rising costs and long-term budget pressures, Citizens for Great Falls (CFGF) submitted a detailed proposal to Dranesville Supervisor James Bierman and School Board Representative Robyn Lady outlining approximately $30 million in targeted budget reductions—aimed at improving fiscal discipline without reducing essential services.

CFGF submitted the proposal to spark conversation among county representatives, especially as residents prepare for upcoming budget hearings and weigh the impact of new spending priorities—including major infrastructure needs, school funding pressures, and the growing financial footprint of data center-related development.

A Targeted, Not Across-the-Board, Approach

CFGF’s proposal emphasizes precision cuts, not blanket reductions, focusing on:

Where the Proposed Reductions Come From

Together, these targeted adjustments total approximately $30 million—a meaningful reduction that CFGF argues can help stabilize the County’s long-term financial outlook.

Why This Matters for Great Falls

Great Falls residents have long advocated for responsible budgeting, especially as the County faces rising school system costs, infrastructure demands, increased public safety needs, long-term pension obligations, and the fiscal impacts of large-scale development including data centers. CFGF’s proposal reflects a belief that budget discipline today can prevent tax increases tomorrow.

Encouraging Community Engagement

CFGF encourages residents to review the County’s proposed budget, attend public hearings, submit written comments, and ask questions about spending growth and long-term obligations. The goal is to help develop a broader conversation about fiscal responsibility.

Fairfax County’s ALU Expansion Proposal: What Every Neighborhood Should Know

Fairfax County is on the verge of a major zoning change. Staff are advancing a plan to expand Accessory Living Units (ALUs)—what most places call accessory dwelling units—on most single-family lots across the county. That is not a minor tweak. It is a sweeping policy shift that could reshape neighborhoods from Great Falls to Burke.

Parking

Many Fairfax neighborhoods were built long before today’s density debates, with two-car driveways, narrow streets, and little curbside capacity. Add an ALU, and you add more cars. That means more congestion, more conflict with neighbors, and more streets clogged with parked vehicles that were never meant to carry the load. One required off-street space per unit is not enough.

Infrastructure

Roads, utilities, storm drains, schools, and emergency services were all built for the populations they were designed to serve. Packing in more households without new investment is not smart growth—it is deferred cost. The bills show up later, in traffic, in crowded classrooms, and in stormwater systems pushed beyond their limits.

Environmental and Sewer Risks

In stream valleys, wetlands, and the Potomac watershed, more rooftops and driveways mean more runoff and more pollution. In older neighborhoods, in-home—especially basement—sewer backups are a real concern. Private septic systems serving many Great Falls area homes may also be impacted by the addition of an extra living unit, especially where systems were not designed to handle a 50% or greater increase in flow. That is why the county should not casually remove the current two-acre minimum lot size for detached ALUs.

Affordability

Supporters call ALUs an affordable housing solution. In California and Oregon, similar policies mostly produced market-rate rentals. In Fairfax County, where building costs for a modest freestanding ALU can range from $180,000 to $200,000, affordable rents will not happen by wishful thinking. Without real affordability requirements, the benefits may flow more to property owners than to the families who need housing help.

CFGF Recommends the County:

Residents should speak now, before the decision is made for them. Good policy requires more than good intentions. It requires limits, accountability, and respect for the communities that will live with the consequences.

SB 756 Update: Where the Casino Bill Stands and What Comes Next

Community groups continue to monitor the Governor’s next move

The effort to authorize a casino in Fairfax County took another turn in Richmond this session, and local advocates—including the No Fairfax Casino Coalition—are keeping a close eye on what happens next. Senate Bill 756 (SB 756), which would allow a casino referendum in a designated area of Fairfax County, passed the General Assembly but has not yet become law. The bill now sits on the Governor’s desk, awaiting action.

Where SB 756 Stands Now

SB 756 cleared both chambers of the General Assembly in March. The bill would permit Fairfax County to hold a voter referendum on whether to allow a casino in a specific “economic development zone,” widely understood to include areas near Tysons and Reston. The No Fairfax Casino Coalition has argued that the bill was advanced without sufficient community engagement, that the proposed casino location would worsen traffic, strain infrastructure, and conflict with local planning, and that economic benefits have been overstated while social costs remain under-examined.

What the Governor Can Do

The Governor has not publicly committed to a position, but observers note that she has shown interest in economic development projects while also signaling caution about proposals lacking broad community support. Amendments are considered a real possibility. A full veto remains on the table.

The Oak Valley Rulings: Implications for Great Falls and Local Land Use Policy

What Prince William County’s Rezoning Case Means for Fairfax County’s Data Center Growth

On March 31, 2026, the Virginia Court of Appeals issued two important decisions involving rezoning disputes in Prince William County. While the Oak Valley decisions did not occur in Fairfax County, they carry real implications for communities like Great Falls, especially as the County continues to consider new data center development.

1. Counties Must Follow Public Notice Rules Exactly

The Court found that Prince William County failed to properly advertise public hearings for several rezonings—and those rezonings were declared void from the start. If Fairfax County ever rushes or mishandles public notices for data center hearings, residents have a clear legal basis to challenge those decisions. “Actual notice” or word of mouth is not enough—the law requires proper, accurate public advertising.

2. Data Center Projects Often Involve Multiple Rezonings

Large data center campuses typically require several coordinated approvals across different parcels. The Court made it clear that each rezoning must be treated individually, and residents can challenge them one by one. If Fairfax County approves a cluster of rezonings for data center expansion, residents don’t need to fight the entire package at once—each rezoning stands on its own and must follow the law.

3. The Decisions Slow Down “Momentum” Projects

Developers often rely on a chain of approvals to build large facilities. But if the first link in the chain is invalid, everything that follows may be affected. If early steps in a data center approval process were improperly advertised, later approvals—like substations, height increases, or noise waivers—may also be vulnerable.

4. Great Falls Is Already Feeling the Pressure of Data Center Expansion

Fairfax County is exploring data center opportunities in areas close to residential neighborhoods. These projects can bring noise from cooling equipment, generator testing and continuous operation, increased electrical infrastructure, taller buildings, and more traffic during construction. The Oak Valley decisions strengthen the community’s ability to insist on transparency and proper procedure before any major land use changes occur.

5. Courts Are Willing to Step In When Counties Cut Corners

The Court of Appeals sent a strong message: zoning procedures are not optional. If a county does not follow the rules, the courts will step in. Residents now have clearer protections if they believe Fairfax County is moving too quickly or without adequate public involvement on data center proposals.

Upcoming Meetings & Public Hearings

April – May 2026  ·  Mark Your Calendar

Citizens for Great Falls

Dedicated to preserving the character, quality of life, and community values of Great Falls, Virginia.

www.citizensforGreatFalls.org

You are receiving this newsletter as a member or subscriber of Citizens for Great Falls.
To unsubscribe, please manage your preferences through Club Express.