News Release:
Doubts About Fairfax Schools’ $100 Million Administrative Building Continue to Grow
| Contact: | Jennifer Kyle Herd |
| 703-715-8333 |
| jkyleherd@verizon.net |
February 23, 2009, Fairfax County, Virginia — The more that Fairfax County school officials attempt to
justify their backroom deal to spend nearly $100 million on a second headquarters building, the more that doubts
and questions in the community continue to grow, according to FairfaxCAPS.
“After the initial community backlash, Superintendent Dale and the School Board are creating new reasons to
justify the purchase of a second headquarters building,” said Scott Chronister, President of FairfaxCAPS.
Chronister refuted claims in a recent FCPS news release in which Superintendent Dale repeated the now discredited
claims that Gatehouse II would not impact other school construction or renovations.
“Using bond funding to renovate a second administrative building with a floor-to-ceiling granite lobby, a
state-of-the-art fitness center, and an on-site cafeteria with outdoor seating instead of building and renovating
schools is the very definition of a negative impact,” said Chronister. “This is a game of
semantics to cover up misplaced priorities.”
FairfaxCAPS is asking citizens to contact their Supervisors and urge them to oppose this proposal, or, at a
minimum, hold a public hearing before a final vote. For information about how to contact the
Board of Supervisors Chairman and your Supervisor, go to
www.fairfaxcounty.gov/government/board.
“Public review and feedback are essential when committing taxpayers to this level of spending,” said
Chronister, “but the public has been given scant information and no opportunity to comment.”
FairfaxCAPS has documented new doubts about the Gatehouse II purchase, and has posted financial analyses and other
significant information about Gatehouse II at
www.FairfaxCAPS.org.
Capital Funding for School Construction
FCPS claims that bond money for Gatehouse II does not compete for school construction money, but ignores the fact
that Economic Development Authority (EDA) bonds like those that would be used to fund the purchase of Gatehouse II
have been used in the past for school construction. The question is not whether the Gatehouse II would
supplant existing funding, but where FCPS and the School Board places its priorities — students and teachers
or administrators. The School Board’s repeated attempts to advance the Gatehouse II proposal make its
priorities clear. The vast majority of Fairfax citizens hope the Board of Supervisors will take this unique
opportunity to express a clear choice for students and teachers.
Building Purchase Price
FCPS claims it is paying the same price - $45 million - as the building, known as Gatehouse II, sold for in 2006.
Fairfax County real state records show the actual price was $43.5 million, a misstatement of $1.5 million.
FCPS has not corrected this misstatement, nor can it explain why this particular building has not declined in value
since 2006 along with the rest of the real estate market.
FCPS Business Model and Projected Savings
Most of the savings projected for the original Gatehouse I never materialized, and FCPS has never documented
others. Claims of savings should be treated skeptically until FCPS documents staff reductions. There
are gaping holes in the business model. Even costs FCPS projects for Gatehouse II (i.e., traffic flow
improvements) are not captured by the business model. A fair business model would not overstate savings or
present savings without reasonable justification. Likewise, a properly constructed business model would make
a fair representation of all costs associated with a project.
Leasing as an Alternative
FCPS claims it is a good time to buy real estate, but has never checked whether it is a good time to lease office
space. Gatehouse II is currently unleased. FCPS has not revealed how much it would cost to lease
Gatehouse II or other nearby office space. Nor has FCPS ever estimated how much it could save as old leases
come up for renewal. A good business case should cover this and other options.
Costs of Excess Property
FCPS claims it will save money by turning over unneeded properties back to the County. That might help FCPS,
but County taxpayers will still be responsible for these properties and their costs.