County Board - workshop

Good afternoon, everyone. This is our last full sort of subject matter capital improvement plan work session. We're eager to get to it. We'll pass to Ms. Cunningham, but before we do, just a brief happy birthday to Mr. Spang. with an assist from the vice chair i am happy to do such a serenade but not out here so thank you miss cunningham to you thank you mr spain

all right great well we have a busy day ahead and we are going to try to abbreviate this just a little bit since we have some closed session items later on so I think 3 30s are drop dead but maybe we could even aim for three so I will hand it right over to staff and I think you have so much material here we'd like to kind of do the first two sections pause and then we'll carry on

Yes. Thank you, Ms. Cunningham. I'm going to turn it over to Adeel, who's going to start us off. And we have a rotating cast of people who will be coming in and making presentations. So without further ado, over to you.

Hi, Ms. Cunningham and the board members. My name is Adeel Chauhan. I'm the DES Deputy Director for Facilities and Engineering. I have today with me Adam Kulaue with Facilities Management Bureau, and he's going to be taking us through the facilities management portion of the presentation. On my right here is Michael McCarn, who's going to be taking us through the facilities design and construction portion of the presentation. And then lastly, Steven Burr, our energy program manager, who's going to be taking us through the energy management portion of the presentation. With that, if we can get the presentation up and start off with the next slide. So as we developed our CIP, we were guided by these three key priorities in our decision making. In this constrained CIP, we are faced with the challenge of keeping our facilities operational so other departments can focus on delivering their missions to serve the Arlington County community. This involves increasing the investment in maintenance to help work off a large deferred maintenance list. In the meantime, facility design and construction is focused on delivering facilities that continue to meet our user needs while right-sizing the building portfolio. Reducing our portfolio size is also part of our approach to addressing the large deferred maintenance list. While we're continuing to keep our buildings in good shape, we are also looking for cost-effective measures to advance the county's environmental goals. We are shifting to PPAs, which help advance the county's environmental goals while reducing upfront capital costs, as an example, and they also keep the maintenance budget down. We're all going to be talking about our multi-pronged approach to address these key priorities throughout our presentation, which involves increasing the investment in the maintenance, rightsizing our building portfolio, and making cost-effective investments in the environmental projects. Next slide. So facilities and engineering division manages 90 county owned facilities and five lease facilities that represents a 3.9 million square feet of portfolio under our belt. We support a large variety of missions throughout the county and some of these buildings such as fire stations, network operations centers and public safety functions are critical services. that the government provides, and it is our mission to keep them operating 24-7. We also support libraries, parks, human services, and transit so they can continue delivering their services to the community. Our building portfolio is not only diverse in its functions, but it is also diverse in age. We have buildings that range from two years old to 241 years old. The average life of our building is at 45 years currently, which means a lot of the systems that need maintenance are due for a major replacement at this time. I'll get into more details on this further down in the presentation, and Adam's gonna be talking about this extensively in his portion of the presentation. Next slide. Our multi-pronged approach to addressing the key priorities in the CIP I mentioned meant that we had to shift our focus in the CIP. As you can see, the FD&C program has been reduced by roughly 12 million, and the FMB program, which focuses on the maintenance, has been increased by 61 million in this proposed CIP. Furthermore, the 256 million that's shown under the FD&C portfolio also largely focuses on maintenance items as well. This represents a shift in focus to maintaining and renovating existing facilities to meet the user's need versus building new facilities. This approach has the added benefit of mitigating climate impacts by avoiding the embodied carbon inherent with new construction. energy management portion of the CIP remains flat, while managing to advance the county's environmental goals by utilizing PPAs and advancing cost effective energy projects through renovations and maintenance work that FD&C and FMB deliver. Next slide, oh yeah, that's the one. This slide shows overall the split of how funding is allocated in the CIP. Even though the FD&C portion still represents the largest portion of the CIP, a majority of that project also are focused on maintenance and renovation projects that get us closer to a state of good repair. As you can also see that the major portion of the facility's portfolio is funded through bonds. In future we are looking at exploring grant funding opportunities as well as exploring the use of energy service performance contracts or ESPCs. Next slide. I want to take a little bit of time on this slide. Our goals for the CIP were to get closer to state of good repair while right-sizing our building portfolio and continuing to advance the county's environmental goals. Our building portfolio is currently valued at approximately $2.1 billion, and the maintenance backlog, which represents $278 million, is roughly 13% of our building portfolio. While ideally we wouldn't have any deferred maintenance at all, the industry standard is to keep this number within the five to 10% range. Simultaneously, we're starting to have some underutilized space due to changes in how we work since the pandemic. These factors, if left unaddressed, can risk unplanned building closures, overspending on repairs if they're done on an emergency basis versus more proactively, and rushed non-strategic decisions. Having vacant space also means higher energy costs and higher environmental impacts versus if we consolidated our footprint. Our multi-pronged proposal in the CIP provides a pathway towards getting us closer to the industry standard while addressing the underutilized space. This approach involves making bigger investments in maintenance, looking for grant funding opportunities, alternate contracting mechanisms such as ESPCs that I mentioned earlier, and reducing our portfolio by optimizing space utilization. Again, reducing the portfolio helps us reduce deferred maintenance because it just comes off of our list, and then also reduces the energy usage as well. The reduced energy uses, of course, can help save money on the operating costs as well as reducing the environmental impacts. Next slide. So I've talked about the challenges that we are facing, but I do want to take a little bit of time to just help us understand what has led us up to this point. So as I mentioned earlier, changes in work pattern have led to some underutilized space, and Mike is going to talk about that in his portion of the presentation, and how we're going to address that by consolidating our footprint. On the maintenance side, the average age of our building is 45 years. This happens to be around the time in the building's life cycle where most major systems require a major maintenance. It's similar to most cars that need a major maintenance at 60,000 miles, if you can think about it that way. We're at a point where major maintenance is coming up and simultaneously we're going through a period of significant market volatility. For context, the regular consumer price index rose 22% since 2020 while building related costs have jumped 40% during that same period. The graph on the right shows some of the building components and how they've changed. It's worth noting that in addition to the significant increase patterns were a lot more predictable prior to 2020.

You can see that it's a lot less variable.

In addition to cost increases, we've seen a high demand for electrical components, and this has also led to material shortages, which has led to longer project timelines. Next slide. With all these challenges, we are still committed to making cost-effective investment to advance the county's environmental goals and are using the following guiding principles. In general, the best course of action is to perform preventative maintenance, which prolongs the useful life of a system. This not only reduces the costs, but also minimizes the environmental impact by preserving the embodied carbon associated with that system. It also reduces the need to produce another piece of equipment which further adds to the environmental impacts. The next best thing is to consolidate and reduce our square footage which will reduce energy usage and lower operating costs as well as the environmental impacts of having systems run inefficiently. The next item is the reusing space that we have available. If we can free up some of that underutilized space that can be used by others to meet their needs, preventing them from possibly building new, which carries a lot more environmental impacts. And finally, the last option is usually to tear down and rebuild, which is needed sometimes as mission needs evolve beyond the current use of the building. But this is the last resort. I will now turn it over to Adam so he can take us through the facilities management portion of the presentation.

Thank you, Adil. Good afternoon, everybody. So as mentioned, there is a significant maintenance need within the CIP, but that's not to say that work isn't already underway to address some of our key infrastructure. Previously funded facilities maintenance and infrastructure projects and efforts have yielded many great accomplishments that I just wanted to highlight a few up here. We've completed major electrical maintenance at Quartz Police Building and completed a necessary deep recommissioning of all the major electrical components, as well as replacement of the main switchboard at Quartz Core West to ensure its availability for its current critical use. We've performed many critical system infrastructure projects, including replacements of emergency generators, backup power or uninterruptible power supply, UPS replacements, and HVAC replacements at public CFG radio sites. We are improving program spaces with HVAC projects, including the 3700 South 4 Mile Run Cultural Affairs Building, as well as improving program spaces such as the Lubberlin Amphitheater re-benching for the summer programming. as well as efforts underway at the Head Start Program and Residential Program Center for elevator modernization. We are also improving county employee spaces with cooling tower replacements at the Department of Parks building and at the Trade Center, as well as ensuring safe access for the fire apparatuses at Fire Stations 1 and 2 for their trench trains. And we are also continuing to help advance climate goals, including the recently completed PPA, or sorry, solar array installation at Lover Run, as well as decarbonization efforts and electrification at Quincy II, as well as the Water Street Engine Shop. Next slide, please. So the current, the Facilities Management Program proposes investments significantly higher than previous CIPs due to the increased complexity of facility maintenance, as well as other trends impacting our existing equipment. Some of them, most notably, are newer equipment not lasting nearly as long as it used to, industry changes result in different operational tempos that directly impact service life, such as changes to refrigerant and HVAC systems or higher pressure, which caused systems to fail a little earlier, or at times as a double-edged sword, environmentally friendly plumbing fixtures at times help deteriorate some of our key infrastructure in our piping systems. We're also experiencing issues with proprietary components and forced obsolescence requiring us to obtain or replace costly parts off cycle and we're trying to address that through the use of open source components as well as sourcing multiple vendors to provide those pieces of equipment. Lastly, we are also seeing more runtime on high efficiency equipment through heat pumps. Rather than removing the typical seasonal shutdown that we would see either in the winter for chillers and the summer for boilers, this equipment is running throughout the year. The image on the right is just to illustrate the complexity of the number of systems that are within a typical facility. Now on there you'll see just eight small systems that talk about what is inside. However, I want to note that across our 90 building portfolio we have over 10,000 components that make up all the assets that we maintain on a daily basis. It's the course of either daily, weekly, monthly, or annual preventive maintenance. As you'll also note, a lot of the systems have different useful lives, so they all fail at different points in the life cycle, as well as depending on the building age. Now, the facilities management and maintenance team works diligently to get our systems to achieve and maximize their useful life through targeted preventive maintenance and corrective maintenance, but aging facilities and end of life is now overlapping more than we've seen before.

Go to the next slide.

This one was one that we briefly talked about during the PAYGO, but to reiterate, as Adil had mentioned, the average life of our facilities is 45 years old, with the majority of that falling within that 30 to 49 range. Now the chart above is broken down by square footage, but from a quantity perspective, that's around 30 buildings out of our 90, so about a third of the actual number of buildings do fall within that range. So when we go back to the number of components, we're also talking significant number of components that are within that overall need that's overlapping all within, again, 30 to 49 years. And again, the chart below shows the average useful life and how it overlaps with that portfolio with many systems either now on their second or third time being replaced. And due to previous efforts, some of the useful lives have been extended. But we are now seeing well past 11 years and in need of critical replacement. So go to the next slide. So when we talk about maintaining a state of good repair, our goal is to ensure that systems are operating as originally intended, properly maintained, and replaced when needed to avoid or minimize any program disruption. A lot of routine renewals were able to keep pace with the end-of-life replacement that was experienced in the years past. However, as seen on the previous slide, we have reached an inflection point where the useful life and the age has overlapped. The chart on the right shows our current maintenance needs as compared to the general facility condition. And on the far right, when we talk about different percentages, we talk about the percent and risk of system failure. The higher the percent, the greater risk of failure. So pull this all together with what Adele mentioned regarding our 278 million deferred maintenance need. We are still within the good range as it sits today. However, if left unmitigated, you'll see it continues to go up. And in fiscal year 28, we will go into the fair range, which presents serious deterioration and initial risks of failure. And in FY 31, we'll go into the deficient range, which is where we move from high to critical, and we have to significantly make difficult decisions in how we address those components. But the proposed CIP looks to address and make significant impacts to that deferred maintenance need and that's highlighted on the solid line towards the bottom. And this is a combination of both the facilities management program and various programs within the facilities design and construction effort. So I know I've always been told every time I present this, it's a sad message. I make people very sad when they see that number go up and up and up. But I'm here to tell you that we have solutions, and we want to propose options on how do we address that. And our proposed CIP was developed using long-term planning efforts for other system-based programs or location and site-specific programs, depending on their needs. So the next slide. So the first one on there is the Critical Systems Infrastructure Program. This program has been expanded to address systems that provide safety of our users such as fire alarm, as well as security improvements across the site. We are also addressing resiliency needs with additional generator replacements and backup power replacements at public safety radio sites, as well as critical locations such as the Justice Center where we're looking to replace the generators there to ensure their long-term availability. And over the course of the 10 years, again, that's a $48 million program that addresses multiple sites and for multiple systems. The facilities maintenance program is $67.5 million over the 10 years. And it's intended to be an all-encompassing program to address systems that fail at different intervals based on our current facility inventory and their asset condition. Some of those systems can include elevators or industrial doors. that we don't have a significant number of them across the county, but when they do fail, we need to have the funds available to address those needs as they emerge. And some of those locations can include fire station bay doors to ensure they're able to respond to operations, as well as the trade center to support county employees. We evaluate our facility maintenance data to identify trends and identify increases in repair intervals to identify if a replacement is more logical than a basic repair. The HVAC program, which is 19.5 million over the 10 year, is considered one of our most vital programs because the HVAC system within a facility is considered most vital for its operation, ensures user comfort. Equally important though, it can impact program licensure and accreditation, such as Department of Human Service programs at the homeless shelter, RPC, as well as the detention center HVAC programs. This program does identify a number of specific locations that we're looking to address in the near term, including the Walter Reed Boiler as well as Sherlington Library for some of its program and theater spaces. We are also identifying Fairlington Community Center in need of replacement, as well as Fire Training Academy. The intent of this program is also to be flexible so that as needs emerge, we shift things around and address where it's most critical. Now go to the next slide. Yeah. The first one on this slide is our roof program. This is a new one for the CIP as we're looking to address one of the most key parts of a facility and its enclosure. The long-term program is planned to address roofs that are beyond their useful life and have experienced frequent repairs. We're also looking to make energy improvements through this program by increasing insulation to increase its energy efficiency, as well as evaluate any solar readiness sites. As mentioned before, our preferred path are power purchase agreements, or PPAs, which Stephen will touch upon a little bit later in his slide. This one program is designed to address a key system that is truly part of that 11 years past its useful life, because there's around 30 years, and the majority of hours are in that 40 to 45-year range. Now focusing on more location-specific requests this year, the first one is the Central Library Program for $11 million. As the main location within the library's program, we want to ensure that it is available for all of the variety of programming options offered there. and we're looking to ensure its long-term reliability and sustainability. We have multiple projects programmed for Central Library to address aging and deterioration across the facility, including the exterior plaza, fire safety systems, including the sprinkler system in the garage, as well as some structural repairs that were identified during various assessments. These are key steps to ensuring and maintaining its overall state of good repair for years to come. Next is the residential program center. And this aligns with our goals of our facility maintenance program. But because of this specific DHS location, it's worthy of note and identified separately from the rest of them. Again, this program, this project is specifically going to focus on addressing the elevator modernization, which has reached the end of its useful life. This facility has a single elevator, so ensuring it's available will continue to provide accessibility for the program. And next slide. And last day amongst the programs is we're going to focus on the Madison Community Center project. And this is a large maintenance and improvement project that's been programmed to accomplish many different tasks, starting from the left to right. First, we're going to electrify the HVAC system through combining the heating and cooling functions into a single system. That would be more efficient. and provide better control and comfort for its users. Again, a new roof to address any deterioration and leaking that has unfortunately caused a program closure in years past, as well as increase its overall energy efficiency. And coupled with that, we'll also have new windows Again, the ongoing theme is also to increase overall energy efficiency, but those are also secondary to the HVAC replacement, the window air conditioner units, as well as they will provide additional natural lighting in areas that are currently boarded up for the older HVAC system. also going to be replacing the ceiling and lighting system for a brighter more comfortable feel for their users as well as to lower our energy consumption and then based on some community feedback we are also providing additional lower level upgrades to the fitness center including creating a new multi-purpose room expanding wellness centers reflooring and combining spaces to improve the overall flow and modernizing and making the restrooms ada compliant as well as the current fitness center ADA compliant through the installation of an exterior ramp. This project is in the construction phase and the facility was officially closed for construction starting last Monday on June 15th to begin any construction preparation. and mobilization and larger efforts are expected to begin in July with improvements to take place over the fall and then eventually to reopen next in fall of 2027 for DPR programming. This project will reduce our overall greenhouse gas emissions by around just under 2,200 metric tons, as well as by performing a larger full-scale improvement, we were also avoiding 1,500 metric tons of embodied carbon that would be encountered during new construction. So this is just a summary of the proposed CIP request for the facility maintenance program. And as you can see, it's a mixture of both location-based requests that focus on targeted needs in very specific years. So one year here, one year there. Or we have system-based programs that span the full 10-year cycle to address those emerging needs as they arise with specific needs already identified within the first couple of years.

Next one.

And this is just a summary of the funding requests as it compares to the funding sources. As discussed, the CIP does represent a significant investment within our existing facility portfolio. And a majority of the funding is in the form of new bond issues over the course of the 10 years. That is the facility maintenance program.

All right. Next we'll dive into facilities.

We're going to take a break here, but I'm glad you're ready. We can only handle so much information at one time. So do I see any lights? Yes.

Mr. Spain. Thank you, Ms. Cunningham. I want to go back to slide four, if we can pull that up. So specifically when we think about facility design and construction, are we pulling it up? Here we go. We noticed that there's a $12 million reduction. And could we talk a little bit about what specific projects are we reducing, delaying, or removing from the facilities design maybe you kind of talked on a little bit, but I'm just curious, you know, what are we passing on for the $12 million? But more importantly, as we move below that to facilities maintenance, there's a significant increase here to the 61. And I'll get to this, but I want to understand what facilities are really at the poorest conditions and how are you prioritizing, right? You know, this initiative with a significant inquiry. So let's talk a little bit about the 12. What are we missing out on here? What are we taking away?

I can just kind of start off. Yeah. One comment I'd like to make, Mike is going to go through the facility design and construction portion of the presentation and he's going to talk in a lot of detail what's happened. Okay. But the overall trend is that we have shifted focus from building new to maintaining our existing facilities. And Mike's going to go into the details. There were several projects that were pushed out 10 plus years and he's going to briefly talk about those.

Okay.

On the maintenance side of things, we are making a more major investment as Adam and I have talked about in our portion of the presentation. And the focus really is making sure that when it's a funded program that the county has decided is a service that the community needs, that we're doing everything we can to make sure that that building is up and running and is operating. And so it represents a major investment across the board for the county, including into several programs that we've shifted to. We shifted to more of a program approach, including the CSI, which was an existing program, but the roof program is new this year. And then the, I believe a couple of other programs are new as well. So I'll turn it over to Adam to talk in a little bit more detail.

Yeah, I think a majority of the increase within the FM program is scattered across multiple programs I mentioned on slide 17. It kind of summarizes it. I think there you'll see that the facility maintenance program is expanded and increased across the entire portfolio to address the significant backlog that we know that we are experiencing now and we are projecting to experience over the 10 year. So, again, in the near term, the largest increases are within central libraries, again, more location-specific. And then within the critical system infrastructure program, we're seeing a lot of focus on, again, that resiliency and continuity of operations at critical locations, be it the Justice Center, either, I think, within FY27, it's specifically the detention center. as well as a lot of our public safety radio sites. We've been working hand-in-hand with our counterparts within the fire department as well as the public safety communications and emergency management groups to prioritize what's their greatest need to ensure their availability to respond to emergencies.

Okay. My last question on this segment, Ms. Cunningham, and I think we can move to slide 15. As you talked about, huh?

Mr. Spain, I think Ms. Cowan may have some clarification.

Just a little bit. That might be helpful. You may, when you get a minute, want to look at like C88, the page number in the CIP. It's kind of weird. C88? Yeah, yeah. Well, through 90, because they do a really good job of listing for 27 and 28, the specific facilities and the rationale. So you will see. and library roof for HVAC, or the specific assets that I've hid exactly what that says. So it'll give you a real sense of public facilities that are being cut, not cut, excuse me, prioritized near term and why. The other thing I would add is that, and Adam just began to talk about this, during the last CIP, we had said, we are gonna do a full-blown evaluation of the detention facility. We're gonna do a full-blown evaluation of Ballston Garage, those projects, those two alone. So you do the study, you get the engineering analysis, and now they're putting it in. And so that's part of, then you, and when you see that the condition, and I see the sheriff's office is here, they met collaboratively with the sheriff and, you know, like, here's what we need to do to keep those elevators running. So it's like, very often in CIPs, you do the plan, you do the study, and then two years later, you rack and stack again, if that makes sense.

So I think, yeah, the timing of when we got those results fit well into this CIP cycle.

Great. And again, appreciate that, Ms. Cowan, and I'll move the C-28 at some point in time. I'll hold off. I know we have board members that want to ask questions, so thanks, Ms. Cunningham.

Our chair.

Thank you, Ms. Cunningham. So my question is, it could be for the manager. It could be for all staff. long, long ago in 2022, we did some super detailed guidance on HVAC and and alternative electrification of those systems. And I had a sliver of knowledge and we're still working my way up the curve. But we sort of said that we would try to do an annual March report. And I would say, you know, I have not been attuned to this on a monthly basis or every year. And I'm just sort of wondering the default policies would be to use and I think that we're it was aspirational language rather than as operational as we want to be but electric heating ventilation and air conditioning systems and now we're kind of there's a number of projects and I'm just wondering if that guidance has it's totally fine if it's not been top of mind but I do feel as though probably me and all of us on the board side could use greater understanding and education of when you can do electrical systems and when you can't we just had a site plan where the building was tall enough that I took it as okay that we couldn't in that case and I think c2e2

We're going to, you know, we're going to... Do we have a backup slide? Yeah. Fulfill your desires by going to slide 51. You got the first backup slide.

First backup slide, five minutes in.

Bingo. Yeah, I'm excited. Chair, we're going to get that first honor, yes. So this, we provide this, a version of this each year during either CIP or the PAYGO cycle. And these are the current efforts that were underway in various stages. And I think the... I think the short answer to your initial part of the question is so we do make reasonable efforts as we are performing various HVAC replacements. There's a number of notes on the top of that slide, and that top one is probably the most critical. We're trying to find the right system for the right application. So a couple of the ones I previously mentioned regarding the 3700 South 4-mile run, that boiler electrification is currently underway as a pilot effort to electrify and decarbonize that site. Madison Community Center was a mixture of both, again, separate systems, one for cooling and gas boiler for heating, and now that's going to be combined into an all-electric system. And similarly with the water sewer streets engine shop as well as Quincy too. And then there are others where we look at the options and we evaluate the criticality of its system replacement and we try to determine what is its operational impact and how feasible is electrification and we have to decide whether or not it's the right choice at this time. And some of those is where we make the decision that's counter to guidance and move forward with non-electric at the moment, but there are others where we look forward to. For the HVAC program within the overall facility maintenance program, some of those efforts will result in HVAC electrification, but the actual solution will be determined once we're in the full design phase for it.

Great. Thank you so much.

This is sort of a gotcha. You guys got me. I'm sorry this has been happening.

This sort of is a gotcha backup slide that's awesome. I do want to, and this will be my last, operationalize this. So when I look at Madison, the facilities above the roof make me think somehow that it's implausible to do solar on the top of that roof around those facilities. And I guess slide four has our dollar amount the same, $42 different on what we're doing. And we have, I believe, over a million dollars in our climate energy plan. And so, you know, this, the backup slide convinces me that we are doing some of the analysis. Perhaps we have not gotten the harvest of the learning from 3700 and other that we might have within Arlington. sort of similar to the electric buses. But I guess what I'm asking is, maybe it's for Mr. Burr, is it right we can't put solar on the top of Madison? And I can be for cost benefit telling us electric systems aren't easy for a seven, nine, 15 story building. But I also can be for like, in addition, putting money separately into energy management. So we learn the stuff that we need to learn eventually. And so I don't know if that's for Mr. Burr, you, Adam, or, you know,

I think we'll probably tag team on this one. So for part of it, that, again, if we go back to 51 one more time, I guess I'm going to go to that last bullet, is that EM and V, the evaluation, measurement, and verification. So that's where we will learn from some of these projects. So again, I use the word pilot for 3700, specifically because it is a pilot project for us to try this effort. Regarding solar, that does vary site to site, and that's where, as Adil mentioned, I mentioned, and I'm sure Steve will mention in his slides, our preferred approach are power purchase agreements, or PPAs, where there is no upfront capital required for those efforts, and we evaluate sites as they come up.

Yeah, I'll just add a few more details to that. So I think that, yep, so this is, you know, what is in design and process and installed. And so I think that, you know, the EM&V work, you know, looking at when it's actually installed and how it's performing versus how, and one of the energy performance sides, we talk about sort of the metrics we look at and, you know, for operating costs, first costs and GHG impact. And so we're looking to Really take a deep dive and sort of you know, it's when it's in the system how it's how it's working And so that was a project that was funded in FY 26 or FY 27 pago funding So we're excited to that and as I believe Quincy 2 is the first facility that's been completed in his operational and we have like a three months of data and so not the full picture not you know sort of the full sort of one year sort of post installation that piece but we're really looking at sort of lessons learned from a technology standpoint how it impacts the facility users and and all of those to inform and sort of have that feedback loop to the planning process and sort of the front end decart pool where we really tried to build out the metrics for different electrification options. And then I think for the solar piece, one other thing that I'll note about the PPAs is that, you know, as Adam and sort of the FMB team works through roof replacements, we're sort of looking and refining our solar screening process to go back and say, hey, this roof now has more useful life, and is it acceptable for, you know, hopefully a PPA installation with, you know, to reduce those capital costs, to have the maintenance, and so that's sort of another feedback loop that we have in sort of connecting the energy with the facility's work.

Thank you. Thanks very much. I'll yield, and I might have one last question.

Mr. Cantone.

Thank you, Ms. Cantone. This is an interesting conversation for me. I mean, for example, take Walter Reed. You say that the boiler needs to be replaced by the same gas-powered, gas-fueled boiler right now. Walter Reed is a, is not a very, I don't, I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that it's a very big consumer of heated work as a kitchen. We had some thinking here of sizing it in a way that maybe tomorrow it serves a, you know, a... a resilience hub that has facility capacity that is bigger and more potent and more resilient than anybody else. Can you explain to me two things? I could easily see that in a place where the HVAC has had to be replaced, where we could, you know, I would imagine that we would use the heat exchangers of the HVAC, for example, to heat also water because, you know, why not? This is available technology today. Heat pumps do that. And Can you explain to me how we end up saying, no, it's not feasible, it's too expensive? And that's question number one. Sub-question is, when we plan for resilience hubs or for a an enhanced usability of certain facilities, do we also include here in the CIP additional stuff like, for example, battery storage and things that are, you know, mechanicals that are needed for this enhanced usability?

Backup slide? Yeah, I think you've triggered another backup slide. Oh my God. Number 55. It's one-to-one. So before we go through, we have a couple of them that we can definitely tackle the greater first part of the question. So just to explain a little bit more about Walter Reed specifically and its system. So its boilers do more than just provide hot water for consumption. It also provides it for the actual heating as well. When we are heating that much water, we want to ensure we have the right quantity available. And there are different technologies out there. And for the current configuration of the site, the current technology is not quite there yet. And I say that because things can change. And any approach to a different technology would likely require a significant reconfiguration of the entire facility. Now, we can go into this one.

Just briefly, if I could just make a comment on that. As far as the resilience hub goes, we were thinking the Lubber Run is the resilience hub and the Walter Reed is, we weren't thinking about it that way for Walter Reed. So I just wanted to make that comment before we kind of jump into this. And I don't know, is Steven gonna take us through the?

Yeah, let's start with Walter Reed and then we'll circle back to resilience. Yeah, yeah.

yeah i can i can sort of uh start and sort of walk through this slide and so the um the uh graphic really just shows more of a process level and sort of all of the analysis that you know that we look at when electrifying um facilities and so um i think i've mentioned the decarb tool um pretty often about sort of the pre-planning sort of looking at what types of uh what we build energy models and what type of um systems could support the electrified options. We sort of have this continuous feedback loop of GHG impact with different grid emission scenarios as well as cost both from sort of a upfront capital cost and then an ongoing operational cost for utility savings or increases and then the additional sort of feasibility considerations with facilities and sort of working through those elements, including things like the distribution system, building envelope upgrades, what's the age of other different pieces of building components that could potentially be something like a more of a bundled measure approach. And so these are some of the findings in particular for Walter Reed with the anticipated incremental first cost. operating costs and then the potential GHG impacts from that. So this was just providing sort of the thought process that we did to identify those. And then we actually have two backup slides for this one. So this is a two for one. And so this is really where we lay these side by side with the upfront cost for the electric resistance boiler plus the high efficiency gas boiler. And we can see the different sort of difference in what the first cost would be, the utility cost over the 20 year life cycle of that, and then the total cost difference. We also did two different emissions scenarios for what the grid could do. The first one is the VCA compliance. And so that's so that is getting to the carbon neutral carbon free grid by 2045. And the next one is a scenario that Dominion developed in their IRP looking at high load growth on the grid. And you can see that just difference and sort of carbon content of the grid as you know what those would look like and then the difference in range of the dollars per lifetime GHG. And so that's looking at how much of a lifetime greenhouse gas emission for each of the dollars. So you can see sort of the range that we have. And so this is really sort of the side by side that we tried to do and sort of pull in some of those additional facility characteristics at a site by site level.

Thank you. I will have to, you know, digest the backup slides. For that I would, you know, appreciate if you could send them to me. There is one thing that I want to remark on that. There is also something like solar water heating. So Walter Reed has a fantastic green roof. I don't want to mess up with this, but I wonder whether, I mean, the slide that you gave us where you show the inflation of of the building material costs. What I see here is a dramatic increase of anything electrical, right? So basically this is what you say. And then in addition to that, we have this colliding with, you know, thinning PAYGO appropriation towards a a convergence into a point where the building maintenance, where the building structure maintenance needs meet the electric, the maintenance needs of the facilities equipment. This seems to me a very dangerous point to be. And what I mean, it's a point that can trigger decisions, bifurcates decisions in a very radical way. I mean, you have to make, sometimes it's not a straightforward decision to say, yes, we will maintain that, we will replace, or we will just muddle down the road. But this triggers decisions like, is it a better idea to actually replace an entire building, or replace an entire facility, et cetera. I want to understand a little bit your philosophy, and that's for the county manager, of how do you calibrate pay-go expenses towards these tipping points? Is it too much? We can discuss it also offline. Does he get four backup slides?

I don't know. The pay-go part I definitely can't speak to, but maybe that's a question for Mark. But just overall comment on this particular slide. This is just meant to show the challenges that we're kind of facing as we're doing capital projects. Just the overall point of this is that, yes, there is a higher demand for electrical, just overall. But just not electrical if you look at the roofing to you know I know that transformer kind of overshadows everything, but if we didn't have that. The other two by themselves would be way beating inflation so that's the basic story here is that we've seen just increases in costs across the board, we had another. slide that we presented in PAYGO that kind of showed the average of the building costs. And that basically has gone up 20% while the consumer price index has gone up 22%. So our projects just across the board are facing challenges in terms of cost. That was kind of the point here.

Go ahead.

Sorry, we do include an inflation factor and we do have contingencies built into the programs as well to try and mitigate for some of these effects.

On the broader question of yeah, all these systems are really expensive and PAYGO and the age of a building. I would say every time we're talking about during CIP and PAYGO is, well, wouldn't it just be cheaper? Like think about the Coarse Police Building, like just tear it down and start new. But I would also then say to you, we are a fully built out, right, environment. We have no swing space, especially for specialized facilities, right? There's no, I can't relocate the Coarse Police Building. I can't relocate the detention facility. We also struggle with even temporary closures of buildings in order to make maintenance, right? You know, the community struggles with that, and we don't have swing space. So it just, it becomes really complicated. But I want you to know, we asked that question to ourselves. Do we have other options? Can we close a part of the building? What can we do? Can we bundle things at the same time so we're avoiding disruption? I think it's a great conversation to have with you all about our willingness, you know, and what the true options are that could be implemented, right? Especially during, you know, what could be a three or four year closure of a facility. You know what I mean?

Yes, I absolutely understand that. And this is exactly why I'm asking that. The reason is, there is a narrow pathway to actually wiggle room to work with that, right? If we have to make a more, radical decision here and say, oh, the central library, we need to replace that. What do we do in the interim, number one? And number two, the other decision is to say, are we investing in a way that get us the maximum usability of, and sometimes these decisions are not the cheapest ones. because you have to say, okay, I'm going to get what I'm paying for, but I'm going to be guided by maximum return here. I see that struggle in your slides for the next two years, not so much, but after 29 or 30, it begins to be... pretty critical and i need to understand that this year we have reduced our contribution to pay go for good reasons uh but this i i just want to leave on the table that this cannot be a trend and that's an additional stressor to our budgets further down thank you and i'm done thank you for your adoption

Sure. Great. I think I have a couple questions to close us out on and then we'll shift on to the next section. I think the overall arching one and the headline here is the deferred maintenance. And I looked back at last CIP and we didn't talk about deferred maintenance anywhere except for schools and the water systems so I'm curious what changed to have us have a 60 increase in the spending on maintenance and how confident are we that we don't have other surprises to that effect going forward

So I'll answer the second part. I mean, surprises happen. Unforeseen conditions occur all the time. So I think that's where the long-term programs that we have developed are meant to address that. So there's flexibility there. So when a need arises, we can then pivot and tackle that need. For the overall increase and what has changed, one is that time. It's that inflection point I mentioned on the slide that talked about facility age and system age. They're all coming together at this time. I think also just previously I'm sure as we're gonna go deal with budget constraints and funding constraints, we're gonna work with them and trying to address what we need.

Yeah, if we go to slide 13, Allison, just that Adam is talking about, so I think we are still within that good range. You know, let me just kind of say that right off the bat. It's not like, if we put up the slide, 13. So we're still within that 10 to 30% range, which is still good. And it's a combination of multiple factors. Basically, you know, the age of our buildings, that other slide that showed the age of our buildings at 45, that's where basically most of the systems need a major maintenance similar to that 60,000 mile example I gave on regular vehicles. So that is happening and that we're kind of at the same point experiencing all these increase in costs. So I think that those are some of the factors that are leading to this. Most organizations have deferred maintenance lists. There is no organization that has zero. So I also wanna say that. It would be just, having zero would mean you get to an equipment life, whatever the manufacturer says, and you replace it right there and then. That's not environmentally responsible in my view as well. So having zero is not a realistic thing. So it is normal to have it. Usually you wanna be within that five to 10% range. And we're not terribly far above that. So this is kind of the inflection point for us to make a change going forward.

And I guess, again, back to two years ago, we talked about the facility condition index. And we were addressing all the ones that were really looking terrible. But courts and detention center, for instance, were still at a 71 or 69 or something like that. So they were still in the better than average kind of tier. Did we just get unlucky and have surprises on both of them, or is there more we could have known to anticipate that those were going to be big ticket items?

I think we did have a project plan at the detention facility. The study was just a placeholder, you know, and it is, if you look at the chart again, it's projecting long-term, the dotted line projects long-term maintenance needs. And you can see that it's continuing to go up. So a higher level of investment is needed regardless of what it is, right? And then there have been increases in costs. You know, just roughly 40% jump since 2020. And again, that other slide that showed the various components in the buildings that are increasing. So generally, we know that these facilities need a higher level of maintenance as they're going forward. Another industry metric that I'd like to just briefly quote is that The recommendation is you spend 3% to 5% of your portfolio's replacement value every year on maintenance. So if our portfolio is $2.1 billion, 3% to 5%, that's just another rule of thumb. So once you, the other point also is when you build a new building, we need to be thinking about maintenance. 3 to 5% of that new building's value should be set aside for maintenance. And I think those are some good practices that we need to continue carrying forward.

And do we have that built into the CIP going forward? So, for instance, the green line here, if we accept the proposed CIP, it still shows that we're going to be worse off after 10 years. So, you know, are we, the CIP is only 10 and years 3 through 10 are a little fictional because we always change them. Do we keep track of like the deferred stuff that's going to get us in another 10 years? Because I feel like it was a surprise to me this year, given the conversations two years ago.

Well, I think this graph doesn't have it, but if we were to back project the previous years, it is relatively flat. We are just seeing spikes. And that's why 30 and 31, it significantly increases. The slope on those on the dotted line is much, much higher than previous years. to answer the other part of your question. So we do have data, and through the renewed facility condition assessment that we'll hopefully get in the next year or so, we'll be able to then refresh that data. But we do have that for all the way through 2046, I believe, actually. Since it's only a 10-year CIP, we're only showing those first 10 years.

Great. And I think this is a theme across the CIP in general, that having some number on the page that says things we think we know about beyond 10 years would be helpful, I think, to future boards and also to the community. Last thing on deferred maintenance. It mentioned that we have predictive analytics in place for our roofing program on, I think it's page 15. Are we using predictive analytics across all systems? And do we do that internally, or do we have external partners?

So for the first part, we do that across all systems. Roofs are the most simple of the ones because, as I mentioned, with the number of components per system, it's one. It's the roof. I'm not worried about multiple subcomponents in a layer. So that's why that one's specifically called out because it's the easiest to trend between the age of its useful life as well as our maintenance data. But we do it across others, but it's more complicated because we're looking at, again, using HVAC for a system that could be the cooling tower on the roof or the air handler. Very different components, different useful lives, different data. So it's, we are doing and in terms of the question about third party, the FCA is accomplished through a third party consultant. So that's that one part of it. Another half is in-house efforts using our robust work order management and asset management software.

Great, thank you. The last question's around space utilization. So the cheapest building to maintain is the one that you don't need. So I'm curious how you're feeling about our overall efforts, and particularly for Court Square West, what could we do to move faster in the decommissioning?

So Mike is going to be talking about that in his portion of the presentation. But just a brief preview, we agree with you that consolidating space is the right move. And yeah, the best thing, best type of infrastructure is no infrastructure because you don't have to maintain it. So if it's okay to wait until Mike's portion of the presentation? Sure. Yeah. We can.

All right. Going once, going twice. Mr. Spain?

I highlighted this earlier, but you brought it up. I want to go back to slide 15 because maybe it just feels vague to me. Predictive analytics, yes, can be used, but concretely when I think about $11.9 million, what does that look like in the 10 years? I mean, we're talking about renewable energy assessment, solar installation, What is that 11.9? I just need a hard line. What does that mean? What does that give us? Not just assessments, I assume. It's actually physical.

Correct. So it's a number of direct roof replacements as well as improvements for solar readiness. So it is a combination of both.

Do we have an idea over the next 10 years or have identified what those roof replacements are using predictive analytics already? Like we have an idea where this is going to be spent?

Yes, for the first few years. And again, as I mentioned, the intent of these programs is to provide some of the flexibility, but the ones we've currently identified, I can... Okay, you can do it to me. Yeah, I'll give it to you later.

But we do have... Yes. Great, thanks. That's all I have.

Yeah. Okay, I think we're ready for chapter two.

All right, wait for the slides to come up. All right. So once again, I'm Mike McCarn. I'm the new Facility Design Construction Bureau Chief. I look forward to having a fruitful conversation on the program that we have proposed. As you have heard from Adam and Adil, there is a significant backlog of deferred maintenance and insufficient funding for everything we would like to do. this ultimately resulted in a decrease of 12 million dollars in the fdnc proposed cap as we focused on right sizing our portfolio consolidating spaces and increasing the utilization of the county's existing spaces next slide please Before diving into the proposed program, I would like to highlight several projects and planning actions that we did complete recently. The top left two pictures, you'll see the 2700 art space and Arlington Arts Studio renovation. The top right picture is the bus charging infrastructure at the Art Operations and Maintenance Facility with a picture of a bus actually there and charging on the top right. Also, I'd like to call out the police warehouse phase one at Oakland Street. We completed the first phase, which included the roll-up doors and some access improvements. We are actively under construction now for phase two, which would go to replace the roof, HVAC, and some interior updates, which we are anticipating to be complete later this calendar year. As we mentioned a little bit earlier, we did complete several key studies, and the findings of those studies informed this CIP. In particular, the Boston Garage Study, Bosman Government Center Utilization Study, and the Detention Center Feasibility Study, which informed this CIP. Next slide, please. Now, as we work to right-size our portfolio, there are three key challenges that we wanted to address. Those challenges being excess square footage, increased space efficiencies at multiple sites to include the Trade Center, and then, as you have heard many times, a large deferred maintenance backlog. Our strategy was to evaluate vacancies and relocate programs to other available facilities. And sites were selected for their available space, location, and other relevant characteristics. the areas we identified you can see on the right top left court square west is the one that we are looking the most significant one we are looking to vacate our proposal is to do that across seven years we would do that in part by increasing the utilization of 2020 courthouse complex We are continuing to optimize the utilization of our space in this building in Bosman as we look to continue to consolidate areas as we pursue hotelling in the county, looking at opportunities for modernizing and building out Quincy IV to allow for flexibility for more programs, and then looking at what the right sizing will be of the Trade Center and NOC when we ultimately go to relocate those. And, well, when the slide comes up, as mentioned earlier, from an environmental perspective, the benefit here is by utilizing these existing spaces, we're able to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions when you compare what that would look like if we were to actually build new construction. Now, as we look to right sides of our portfolio, we have identified seven buildings that we plan to decommission. And when we say we are going to decommission a building, what that means is the building will be taken out of service and maintained at the minimal cost slash effort necessary to prevent any further deterioration while preserving the buildings for future use. Case in point, you can't just shut the HVAC off on a building and walk away, because if you do, the building will essentially destroy itself. You can see the building's cost for decommissioning on the slide for each respective building. We have also identified the value of the deferred maintenance savings for each building, but something we would like to note is that we would only be able to actually realize those savings if the buildings are ultimately taken off of the county's list of assets. If we were to recommission those buildings and put them back in place, we would still need to address those deferred maintenance items. Next slide, please. So moving on now, we will shift our focus to several key programs that will modernize existing county spaces and a continued effort to optimize our space utilization. The first program I will speak to is the Quincy complex program with several key initiatives. The first being the construction at Quincy 1 to relocate fire logistics from old fire station 5. This project will significantly enhance the fire department's logistical operations by centralizing functions into a single county facility, improving efficiency and strengthening the department's ability to deliver services. The plan and design and construction of a walkway along the border of the site and the adjacent community, as well as ongoing evaluation and additional mitigation measures, such as the construction of a wall. And then improvements to Quincy IV to include the roof and HVAC. And for that HVAC system, we are exploring the utilization of geothermal at this site and looking at how we could possibly leverage tax credits that would credit up to 30% of the cost of the geothermal portion of the project. The next project we have here is the 2020 renovation. This ties back in to our ability to get out of Court Square West. We are planning the expansion of the homeless center to the fourth and fifth floors and then renovating floors one, six, and seven to once again relocate tenants from Court Square West prior to the planned decommissioning in FY34. And the last thing here would be the office space utilization and systems furniture and facilities finishes furnishings and equipment. This is the continued reconfiguration of workspaces in support of the county's flexible hoteling model allowing for increased efficiency and space utilization as well as replacing aged systems furniture to allow for increased utilization of those spaces. Next slide please. Shifting now to the detention facility, as stated earlier, we did complete a comprehensive study that was coordinated closely with the Sheriff's Office, looking to identify critical maintenance issues impacting their current mission while making sure we adhere to Virginia code, particularly Title VI, Agency 15, Chapter 40. A critical item from that code that helped inform the prioritized maintenance needs was, and from the code, heat shall be evenly distributed in all rooms so that a temperature no less than 65 degrees Fahrenheit is maintained. Air conditioning or mechanical ventilation systems such as electric fans shall be provided when temperature exceeds 85 degrees Fahrenheit. We also looked at how the supported population's needs have changed and what space reprogramming improvements could be made considering the growing need for mental health spaces. Based on that study, we identified prioritized maintenance needs, highlighted at the bottom left, so replacement of critical HVAC components, roof, garage door, fire alarm systems, as well as including operational efficiencies to address the sheriff's key priority of safety for staff, residents, and visitors. We are also expanding on the study to identify what other opportunities there may be to reduce CO2 emissions for the facility. Next slide, please. All right. The next program is the court's police building improvements. This program does include building maintenance, elevators, security modernization, courtroom technology updates, and ADA accessibility. A change from the previous CIP is that we adjusted our plan from renovating two courtrooms a year to only renovating one courtroom per court in this CIP. Once again, trying to keep within the tight constraints we found ourselves in. From a similar perspective, Fire Station 4 replacement, we shifted that project out so that way the planning and design is now in FY35 and FY36. So the construction moved out for Fire Station 4. And then lastly, we have the Lee Community Center. We had a 2025 study that evaluated three options with renovations and small additions selected for planning purposes. And design construction placeholder for the Lee Community Center has been put in for FY35 and FY36, noting that no future programming has currently been determined for the Lee Community Center. Next slide, please. These are the remaining projects or programs, excuse me, that make up the FD&C portfolio, which we'll come back in a second. Several projects to highlight here. The AECC, the goal is to be co-located with WMATA and Alexandria. We are still identifying where we might be able to best centralize that function. As mentioned earlier, we did complete the Boston garage study, and so the findings from that study identified several critical structural items to include structural concrete, expansion joint repairs, including post-tension slab repairs, and other garage infrastructure needs, which are part of the CIP. We also have the Situational Awareness Intelligence Unit, Emergency Operations Center, and DIPSOM consolidation. That project is actually currently underway in construction on the sixth floor of this building, and we are anticipating a pan-completion in calendar year 27. We have a placeholder for the Thomas Jefferson Community Center. This placeholder is funding that will coincide with the Arlington County Public Schools project to renovate the middle school. And then as Adam mentioned a little bit earlier, we have the facility condition assessments and planning studies, in addition to several studies that look at how we can better utilize and optimize our existing space. This will also go to update the facility condition assessment that was last completed in 2020. Next slide, please. On this slide, we have the program summary for FD&C. And then next slide, please. We have the proposed funding request with the point being that the primary source of new funding is predominantly bonds.

Thank you. Can we take a pause at this point?

All right. Any questions brewing? Mr. DeFronte.

Thank you very much, Ms. Cunningham. Thank you for the presentation. I have a couple of questions. I'm trying to focus them on 19 to 28. It's okay if it spills over. Okay. So, sorry.

Go ahead.

We got two weeks before amendments are due on the CIP. And I, you know, as is typical, we just got a resident satisfaction survey, I'd say, without magical precision, we got an 88 or 92. You know, and the CIPs generally, as with the budgets, I feel like they come in at 90%. And then maybe that's overconfident of what we can add, but that last 5% or 10%. I'm curious, one question is about the HVAC fund. Our environmental advocates kind of weighed in, and you guys had backup slides to cover it. There's some millions that is involved, one million to three, I think, over the coming years. Do I have it right conceptually that that money is sort of positioned, should Stephen, or should our environmental say, we gotta invest a little more upfront to work on this? Or is it more the contingency should our HVAC systems fail? You know, there's sort of an environmental approach. And then there's a, you know, make sure we have air and heat in general. And I don't know that I could point you to a page on HVAC fund, but I believe it is in there. So I just wanted, I don't know who can answer that.

Can I just ask, are you asking about the Climate Action Fund or the HVAC?

I believe that the HVAC fund is separate, and that's the question, not the Climate Action Fund. I think it's a good question, but maybe you can help.

Yeah, I'm trying to formulate a response. So I think the overall intent is to address systems that require replacement. How we achieve that replacement will vary depending on the site. So it is very possible that some of that funds will get used for planning and design for decarbonization efforts. So it's a combination of both.

Great, that's fine. And I'll yield, I do have one more specific question, which is about the $3 million placeholder for TJ. Based on the new number that's come out, do we anticipate that there'd be any updated analysis or staff briefing that would address how much money we might put in under the circumstances or no?

No. I mean, we will, not now, exactly. We've already been engaging with APS before their CIP, during their CIP to understand what their plans are, and as is typical for these projects, I can guarantee you that between DES facilities, parks, and transportation, we will be meeting with APS on a And CPHD, right, because they will go through the BLP-PFRC process, but we'll be doing deep dives on what their plans are, how it impacts community center, shared costs, you know, everything.

One thing I wanted to emphasize on that, because it was called out specifically by the school board, is they set aside $11 million for geothermal. And I've already talked to the superintendent. That is most likely, though it's not certain, going to have to be done on our property. When I said to the superintendent, our property means lots of different things, and there'll be a lot of people in the community paying attention to what our property is. So we're going to have conversations on that. So people shouldn't be

thinking that we're not paying attention to that because that's going to be something we'll have to work through so we'll be back to the next cip well with you before and the number will be yeah bigger great updated sense of cost program all of that i think we're going to need six to nine months to kind of get to a you know first sketch of a placeholder an updated placeholder number um but i promise we'll be talking to you all through this

So that helps. That's really appreciated. I'll just close my sort of bucket of questions. I feel like I'm wishing for a sticky investment in sustainability and equity. We had Lover Run and Resilience Center. We pulled back from that, I believe, wisely. And we should be cost efficient, but I'd just love to have one in each of those two areas that is sort of, you know, like, if some amount of money, less than a million dollars, could unstick PP, public power purchasing agreements, which seem to this board member to have taken a long time, not anyone's fault, just have taken a long time. It's that, and then I'll follow up on the RPC, but one sticky investment that's not gonna break the bank in those two areas, because those seem to me to be our defining areas in addition to being fiscally sustainable, thank you.

On the PPAs, I think we did have some initial challenges once we were getting started. But I think since we've worked out, yeah, go ahead.

Yeah, I can speak a little bit to that. I think that the original PPA was signed during COVID and there were extreme sort of, supply chain delays and then um and then sort of the the partner seeking to um increase the um the rate and so and so we went back and we did a competitive rfp and then we have the successful sort of proof of concept with um a rubber run where we went through the process and um and it's installed and operating as as we anticipated and then we have the four additional sites that i believe the board um approved this um this spring in march for the first sort of the four for next building so i think the ppa is sort of off and running

Great. Another way Ms. Cunningham might frame it, I believe, is what's the last two projects out on sustainability and equity that you, Mr. Manager, said, nope, we got to leave them on the floor? That would be the question, not for today, but for follow-up. Thank you.

Ms. Coffey, would you like to keep that microphone hot?

Absolutely. On the decommissioning building, so slide 22, I know that we've been engaged by the community on the Culpeper Street property. I've engaged with the Fairlington Civic Association on Fire Station 7. I think there is a desire from community members to see movement on what is going on. And I wonder if there is anything we can say in terms of what they can expect from the process, especially I think there is a desire for their opinions to be heard as usual. And I just, you know, since we have it on the slide, want to give us a chance to speak to what that looks like and what they can expect.

So I think each of those sites is really unique in terms of size, zoning, topography, neighborhood context, I mean, everything. And so there's not one-size-fits-all approach for any of those particular sites. We have done analysis over time on what potential could be there, what's really feasible, what's not feasible, or options to be discussed with you all in the community. I think there's also a threshold question of... When you look at other options, as the county, as I think Mike started to mention, are you raising the quality of that facility to a different level before, you know, considering a public-private partnership and other use, and we need to engage in all those conversations with you before we, you know, go to the community and lock in on anything. So I think that is our intent, to walk through with you all what those look like, and then fully transparent with the community and get, once we sort of define the box of the three or four options for those sites, then how we get their input and then how we execute on a future partnership or approach. But it would be site by site, I think, is what we've been talking about. And, you know, I view that then as once we have that, then those conversations can factor into future CIPs. I am mindful that we are, TJ is a placeholder, and that is going to come up. And so we're, and it will be a higher number than that 3 million. So that's a little bit why we are, you know, just try not to bite off more than we can chew or lock you all in or not meet expectations from the community about promises and that we may not be able to, fully execute on in a timeframe that we would all like. Do you guys know what I mean? It's really trying to be transparent about those constraints too.

Yeah, no, I think that's great. And I think that's really helpful. And I think just one of the other questions that has kind of come in is as some of those decisions are being made, what is, you know, what level of maintenance, what is occurring? How are the sites taken care of in the interim?

If I could add on that and I know deals had conversations, for example, on the lease center, we've had active conversations with the community or I should say row three of the about that. And on Clarendon House, there's been a bit of change because we, in the last CIP, we did not talk about Fire Station 4, but since we are now talking about Fire Station 4, when we get to that point, and I know there's questions about what will actually be on that site, we'll actually need either lay down space or place for an interim fire station. So before when we had different designs on that, we're actually that space needs to stay pretty much as is between now and when we're able to do it. And then I'm see if there's anything else on the list there. I think we covered all the... Oh, Hudson Street is actually essentially a piece of Fire Station 4. That's the part that's closest to Hudson Street where the fire marshal office used to be. It's an appendage there, and that actually is currently empty. And so there's some questions. We don't have people in there, but I don't know about the systems being connected to the fire station. I'll let other people talk about that. But just so everybody sees what's going on on that list.

I think to answer the question about, you know, when a building is vacated, we typically keep it, you know, I don't like calling it a cold dark shell because cold is not temperate. I call it temperate dark shell. That it is safe, it is maintained within our building maintenance code, and it is kept in a state that avoids any public health or hazards. So that's how we keep them. And we do routine checks on them to make sure there's nothing major going on there. And we catch things when they do happen and try to address them and perform minor repairs to ensure that they are still in a safe state.

Great. Thank you. And then I think that's it for this section for me. Okay. Mr. Spain.

Thank you, Ms. Cunningham. So I think I'm going to have like three questions, kind of roll them all together. And someone's going to point me in the right direction on slide 21, which may not be the correct one, but I see that our director, Greg Emanuels here, and the county manager, can you orientate me to, I notice a building down at Trades. and I need some help, that we're thinking about or have considered building or, you know, I can't place it, Greg, you may know it, a county manager, and I'm trying to understand, and the public may not even be aware, but how does that fit into this CIP? We talked about it offline before. It's a building, can we, can 20? Yeah. You probably know exactly what I'm talking about.

I'm going to turn.

Yeah. Is that somewhere in the CIP?

Yes, it is.

Yeah, direct me to that.

Sure. So we have a placeholder, not a placeholder, I should say, but... What's the name of that building? The exact name of the building, I am not...

The Trade Center building, I know what you're talking about with the water sewer street staff that were in the trailer. Yeah, go ahead, Mike.

So we do have the trailer in place as we're looking at the space utilization across the portfolio in conjunction with some other initiatives that we have. We are going to, as part of that, identify where we might be able to, within the CIP, relocate them. So we do have funding into the CIP now for that potential relocation once we've identified the best utilization of the spaces that we have in conjunction with some of the other programs and studies that we're currently working on.

Yeah. Do we have some designs on potential construct of a building that could be put in that space?

I think I'd like to, we just went ahead and replaced the trailer. We view that as an interim solution. And I think keeping with the theme of our presentation, we'd like to avoid building new and like to utilize our existing building portfolio. I think we're going to be looking at that very closely. And we think we have space within our existing portfolio that's a more proper space and will be a proper space for people. So, yeah.

News to me. I would like to talk sidebar about that particular area. You said avoid building new, but I know we have put money towards planning on that particular area. So if that just seems like it's a change. Let's move to number 24, and I know we have our sheriff here. To me, we're spending $43.5 million Comprehensive programming. And I guess for me it's more about I would love to hear how this, let me put some context on it. We're putting a lot of money in the detention facility. We're putting a lot of money in the courts and police buildings, almost $100 million. Now I'm going to juxtapose that against programming for people and what they need. So as we think about HVAC systems, roofs, garage doors, we also have here that the sheriff priorities are safety for staff, residents, visitors, reprogramming options to address operation expanding mental health needs. Can I hear a little bit more about what that really means as it relates to the CIP?

Yeah, I think I can expand on that a little bit. Sure, thank you. Or are you?

Yeah, go ahead. I'm not sure.

Okay.

And then, yeah, we can let him.

Yeah, so once again. That's my classmate coming from leadership, Arlington. Yeah, he's welcome. Come on up.

So we did work with the sheriff's office, and what we tried to do as part of those operational efficiency improvements was look at things we could do to the existing spaces in the detention facility to allow them to be more flexible, to agilely respond to the situations that they're encountering more so than what that building was originally designed for. In addition to that, kind of the prevailing theme across our brief, the building is hitting an age where some of the critical building systems are reaching their end of life and need to be updated, modernized, and replaced in order for the continued mission support in that facility. Great.

Can you talk a little bit, Deputy, about what those expanding medical health needs may look like? I know we're a CAIP. I know we're talking facilities, structure, but one thing on my mind is I'm very conscientious about building a police state and sense of detention and all these things. But at the same time, squaring that against the actual necessities that we need for humans and folks in the facility. So how is what we're doing here really going to help with that area of expanding mental health?

Oh, first focused on the front lobby, which that project says FY32. That's really going to reconfigure just safety in general. We got a lot of traffic into that building now. And so the layout will be more improved for a line of sight. There's a lot of vulnerabilities in that portion of the building. to include also trauma-informed just environment for a Jew. And so that's where a lot of that focus and investment will be placed into. Obviously, we know the population and the majority of the population do suffer from mental health, mental illness, and that will be focused on just kind of rearranging and making things more efficient operationally for us. But that specific front lobby, a lot of it will be just focused on securing the initial entry of the detention facility.

Thank you very much. You're welcome. Appreciate that. Anything else you want to add on that? We're good? Thank you. And lastly, I think the county manager kind of on slide 25, and it would be almost uncivilized if I didn't bring this up as liaison to Langston Boulevard Alliance and our good friend. We have noted that it's gonna be about eight years down the road, basically, before any future programming. That's my take from what I'm seeing here in $19.5 million, which I think by the time we get to eight years, it's gonna be more than $19.5 million. Can we talk a little bit about what it may take, Mr. County Manager, anyone to kind of move that timeline up What actions would have to occur in the art of the possible? Go ahead.

Sure. I'm going to defer to the team to my right to talk a little bit about, you know, capacity of making those decisions. So a couple of things would have to happen. One is that we need to we would if the board needs to determine what level of debt service they're comfortable with and what level of bond funding they want to do. So you could move it up earlier if you wanted to increase the level of debt service or if you wanted to switch it out with something else. I'm not going to urge you switch it out with something else. In addition, we have never, and I think it's premature at this point, received a charge from the board about what it is you want to have happen to the site.

Okay.

And I've talked with Ms. Hemsroth about that and other people, which is that when we did the analysis the that looked at the various potential configurations of the community center there was some discussion but no decision made at all about what other kinds of things might come to that site too so we would need some clarity on that and I'm going to let as far as capacity for doing the work I'm going to defer to anybody down here deal you want to start

Yeah, I think if we were asked, we could move things around. But I don't really have a whole lot to add, Mark, there. Okay.

Yeah, and I think running the process, you know, guidance would take a little bit of time on RFIs or things like that. So we'd want to make sure that's really clear, transparent after we get guidance from you. And then on that operating cost impact, it's not just debt service. So when you're thinking about, you know, those tradeoffs.

So between debt service, tradeoffs, guidance from the board, that's what you need?

Yeah, and the last point, again, which was that when Gene cuts the ribbon on the building, there will be programs inside, which right now there aren't. So those will be operational costs that you have to figure out.

Yeah. So, yeah, I think you've heard these concerns not only from the Langston Boulevard Alliance, but many stakeholders in and around that region. I appreciate that context and background. Thank you. Ms. Cunningham, back over to you.

Okay, Mr. Karantonis. Thank you. I will be very brief. I just want to leave it unmentioned because my neighbors are asking all the time about that, what happened to the Columbia Pike Library, which was beyond mothballed as a project. I mean, it is beyond that. And I guess the The discussion we just had on how to space these kind of projects based on their impact both on the capital side as well as the operational side needs some better calibration of our future.

You and I have talked a little bit about the Columbia Pike Library. So one of the things that we did, we have the parcel we've acquired. And there's some question about what should be the use over the next 10 years since we haven't had anything in there. And I think that it might be useful to have conversations with our colleagues at schools about potentially making that available in the interim. We did move up the Penrose project to make sure that we were continuing to show care and attention to the pike. The other thing is that the Columbia Pike Library that we currently have is not in a state of deterioration. So we felt like it had a refresh probably five years ago, I think was approximately five or six years ago, and that we got clarity from the schools that they weren't going to need that space. So we felt like that was something that we could push out. I want to be clear that if we do this page, which I think has been suggested, you know, what's beyond the 10 years? I mean, the Columbia Pike Library is still on our list of things to do. And again, getting guidance from you all as to what would be included with that would be important.

Thank you, Mr. Manager. I'm also very interested to see whether with the efficient use of this lot that we have, that we are now providing ancillary parking for during the construction time of the Grace Hopper Center, after the completion of the center, there is an opportunity to use that lot still for the parking needs of the facility and maybe You know, that was swirling in my mind to economize on an additional capital cost for APS. It's of course up to APS to decide, but we could just make the offer so that they don't have to build immediately the structural parking that they want to build and use that money maybe to promote or to accelerate or to pay for the next CIP projects that they have on the table right now, whether it is the EPSA or TJ that's coming up.

Great. Thank you all. I will pick up a couple of those themes. I think in the question of the libraries and our recreation centers and really third spaces in general, we've heard a lot from the Langston Boulevard community, from Columbia Pike community, and from Crystal City National Landing community. And I'm looking back at last year's CIP guidance. It was pretty specific about we need to focus on long-range planning libraries, recreation centers, and those uses in addition to trades. And so where do I find that in the CIP? How do we pull something forward so that we are not just doing police courts and detention center, but really investing in the resources that keep us all from needing all of those as often?

So I think that, you know, we have proposed beginning in 2030, you know, an evaluation of Quincy Park and Central Library, right? We know all those assets are aging. And I think we, you know, that is one component of it. I think we have more, and when I say that, after we go through that planning process that would be a significant amount of investment right you know once we do a comprehensive analysis of that site and so when that could be implemented could be some time from now but i think that is the the biggest nod towards what we need to do and where we know we don't have like The extensive facilities that we might have in other areas of the county. I think our focus on We did the analysis of Lee. We're having that conversation about the utilization of that site and how we might approach it We have been in conversations as you know with Madison being closed and we'll begin a planning process for that in 2829 once it all gets through and in the intervening period as you know we are beginning to have conversations with APS about the use of Langston now that they've moved some of those programs down to Grace Hopper and what that looks like so it may seem a little hodgepodge but that is the nature in some ways of right do you know what I mean when you have existing sites and different projects going on with that that is what I would what i would say um and we were and yes we were focused on balsam garage and detention facility given some of the just the risks to the county in terms of facility system failure or serving i i do want to say you know when you look at both of course police and the detention facility i mean those are like 700 000 square feet right there's 300 000 each They are almost 30 years old. We have made a lot of investment, but there are real issues if we don't invest in those when it's actually, they're not as in good shape as central, believe it or not, and some other things. So there are risks to us operationally that aren't like any of,

it would be unacceptable to not to to not address I think so I hope that's helpful Susan I'm not sure it's fully there and fully baked but we know where you all want to go we do yeah and I it's I definitely recognize it's complicated there's a lot of moving parts and the risk-based analysis makes a lot of sense and we've we've been punting on libraries for quite some time so I will be interested in finding some way to get a little bit of purchase on library planning. You know, we did a strategic vision. We then defunded. We didn't close a branch and have not invested in other things. And we're, as you know, very personally trying to do all the emergency maintenance at Central. It's a bit of a money pit, like the movie. I would be interested in thinking about that and giving some space and planning dollars to begin thinking about that, including the Swing Spice question. If and when we do get to Central, do we relocate those programs elsewhere, or could we do some of that in the near term? Tag that for more conversation.

Sometimes I think we get really focused on some facilities when we should we had that great conversation with Diane, but parks is the same way, DHS is the same way. Some of this is not just about, it's getting out there, right, you know, versus just rebuilding, you know?

Exactly, yeah, and that might enable you to have less footprint long term or a different footprint that's more flexible. So thank you for continuing to pursue that and entertain that. Secondly is on space utilization. So we've done a great job on our kind of office spaces and thinking about how to shrink those. How about on the detention center and courts? Like have we looked at do we need all that space or can we renovate less of it for the specific use and have some general space or even temperate dark shell space that is lower carbon and lower cost?

Yeah, I'm actually probably turn it over to a deal, but we did look when we work with the sheriff because there is an empty floor over at the jail, looked at multiple reconfigurations of moving things. My takeaway from it was that they cost a lot of money, but I'm going to turn that over to a deal.

Yeah, I think that's exactly right. We did look at the, as part of the detention facility study, we did look at the utilization and all of those trends and took that into account. And what's proposed is not an increase to any space there. It's basically, you know, and then we'll continue evaluating and do another study on how we can address some of the mental health needs. And so the proposal doesn't increase any. There are two vacant floors in that building.

Got it. And I guess the number of residents in our detention center has come down a lot, which is a testament to the broader work of diversion and investment in human resources and human side of things. So again, the cheapest space is the one you don't have at all. The next cheapest is the one that's in a temperate dark shell. Is there anything more we can do on detention center in particular to have three empty floors potentially? Because it also kind of translates to some of the staffing questions. If that building was built for 450 or 500 and we have, help me, 150 or so, it seems like there should be more than two floors available.

I think the things are shifting. Yeah, I don't know if Deputy Sheriff Guilford wants to come up. I think what we've heard from the sheriff's office is that it's shifting towards more mental health type of needs. So I'll let Deputy Sheriff Guilford talk about that.

Thank you. I would just add that although our count is low, the inmates we currently have do have high demand for resources, and that includes mental health, that includes medical. A lot of times based off their criminal history or their behavior, they have to be isolated to a specific cell or cannot room with others. We have custody levels that we have to take into account. That way we can't have, you know, we basically have to classify them a specific way to ensure their safety. And that just has to do with classification, housing, and that's always complex. So even though our count is lower, the resources that it takes to secure, manage is still significant.

And so from a space utilization perspective, it sounds like the biggest change is needing more single occupancy spaces rather than shared. That would be significant.

And we're still doing a good job of managing that. But sometimes the lower count can be a little deceiving in the sense of the impact on operations.

Yeah, absolutely. From an operational perspective, I totally understand. I'm just trying to link it back to space. So thank you. All right, and I think I had one last question. So Trade Center and Quincy site are two of our three places that we have some of the more challenging uses to buffer. And so I know there was a line in here for Quincy site for some mitigation and buffering, and I would like to lift that up and hear what the process is there. And then likewise on Trade Center, is there anything near term that's needed there aside from that NOC relocation?

Let me start on the mitigation at the Quincy site, because I think Mr. McCarran talked about the options that we had worked. We'd spent a lot of time working with the community on this idea of creating a wall. But that money could be used for an alternative, which I know at one point we've talked about. I'm not advocating for one particular approach here, whether it's a wall or a potential purchase of properties nearby. But it was, I think we're going to look to the board for some direction there about how to get to consensus on what has to happen. And I think that's money is available for that. Did you want to add anything on that? You don't have to.

Okay.

And then trades. Trades. About next steps at trades or?

Just is there anything in this CIP range to continue the planning? I know part is like pulling out some things that are there.

on the network operations center i mean you know i've said for a while we need to start pulling pieces at least one piece out so things can start moving around and it's a very different conversation than we were having before because it was about schools and the potential for the electrification of their bus fleet which i think has become a separate delayed conversation got it was there more you wanted to say on quincy that i cut you off about process okay

Miss Cunningham, thank you. Yeah, I just wanted to flag that Seems to me right. I really appreciate your questions on the detention facility this is one where I guess my instincts is that maybe in guidance or maybe going forward over the next six months to year and it might be useful to have one or two board members take point on getting into a little bit of detail not micromanaging but getting into a little detail on the facilities because I think the answers stand for themselves but I probably at least being honest for myself I want to get into little details so I understand we show our math on that because 388 was the last, or 350 is the last count, and I do think we had 550 at other times, so hope that's okay, and now I'm not really blue.

Now I have a related.

It's okay, you saved a couple from earlier.

Great, yeah, I banked them for this. On the detention facility, given that it is a facility necessary to the operations of a constitutional officer, are there any state capital dollars? Like, how does the state support the facility is required for our constitutional officers.

Is it a yes or no question?

I think I know the answer.

I don't think they do anything now. They used to have this really old program where for regional jails, they would pay 50% of debt service, but they don't do that program anymore, right? They don't. I mean, I don't think there is...

We used to, in New Manson Creek, we used to actually have, we paid some money there towards capacity. I think the short answer is they, I don't want to say they do nothing because that may not prove to be accurate, but they do not provide any capital dollars to offset Arlington County's costs for construction or maintenance of the county jail.

Yeah, I did notice in slide 28 that the federal funding and state funding numbers are zero. Yeah. So.

There is an opportunity for us to apply for grant funding with the state, but it's not guaranteed. Yeah. And as we kind of continue to develop some of those projects, we will try and take advantage of that as much as possible, but it's not guaranteed.

Yeah, absolutely. No, I think that makes sense. I just think about as we kind of evolve our vision of community justice and everything. And I think we want to be the leaders that the Commonwealth would like us to be just things to think about.

And if I could mention one other thing, and I think that, you know, I'm going to give you all an assignment to talk to your colleagues in Alexandria who are also going through this similar conversation. And I'm not advocating for anything. I'm just saying that the way the Code of Virginia is written, they do specifically talk about regional jail facilities as a state responsibility. And so I think that when we talk to them about an Arlington County facilities, sometimes I think they view that as, oh, well, that's not anything that we have to worry about, so.

That was always the problem, the difference between ours and Alexander's jail is absurd.

Ms. Kanuga? Yes, Mr. Spain. May I ducktail on the question just to get some level of, so you, Yeah, you mentioned that there may be or has been opportunity for us to apply for some grants. I'll be very curious as well, can we find out what those grants are that we can apply for? can you get that not probably not but i would definitely has this been some long-standing process that we've attempted to apply for or yeah the consultant identified a particular grant with references to the retention facility go ahead so this gets back into the grant to potentially offset the cost of alternative

Carbon saving measures. So we mentioned that Quincy so it'd be the geothermal, right? So there would be an opportunity depending on what? Additional carbon saving measures we can identify for the detention facility that we would be able to possibly get a tax credit So we would actually pay up front and get a credit guy act via grant Gotcha.

Okay. Thanks

All right, any last questions?

I have only one thing. It's not just a remark. I want to really say- We have two minutes to stay on schedule, so you can do it. No, not two seconds. I want to really express gratitude for the amazing work done down at the Arts Facility. The first slide that you had, and something that most people don't see, but had the opportunity to visit, which is the new Arlington Art Studio, the renovation down at 37 for my run. This is an amazing upgrade. of the facility, and you should know that it is really very much appreciated by everybody who ever was involved with these facilities when they were up in Langston before. We had a lot of questions and doubts about these, and I find myself, you know, very satisfied about the result. Thank you very much.

Okay.

On to energy.

All right. Well, thank you, board members. I'm Steve Burr. I'm on the county's air team. And so we can pick up on slide 30. Next slide. And so this slide is an overview of the energy management section, and the associated programs are on the graphic. These show the variety of energy management programs and how they relate to county facilities, including energy performance within the county buildings, energy resilience planning to ensure operations of facilities and community needs are met during times of disruption, renewable energy installations through the solar panels on the roof, and EV chargers for both county fleet and community to support electric vehicle adoptions. All of these programs work together. to support CEP goals and carbon roadmap strategies. They also directly impact the county operations greenhouse gas inventory, provide community-wide greenhouse gas benefits through the public charging program, and seek to provide resiliency hubs for the community in the future. These programs are interrelated to each other as well as the other facility upgrades and maintenance projects that have been discussed by my colleagues. On the next slide, this slide shows the county's operations greenhouse gas inventory for calendar year 2023, which is the most recent. And county operations make up 3% of the county ride emissions on a location basis, and roughly 2% of the Maplewood virtual power purchase agreement is included. The bar chart also shows all of the sources that contribute to the county operations emissions. This slide provides a variety of high-level overview and context variables and dynamics that are currently in the energy sector. The impacts of these areas are analyzed and inform energy and carbon reduction projects and include energy cost. We're seeing both changes for electricity and natural gas. Both energy sources have recently shifted, particularly in the next two fiscal years, as well as long-term forecast and also noting historic cost volatility. The carbon intensity of the electricity grid is also another external factor. Dominion and the regional grid operator PJM continue to be dynamic in their load forecasting. The Virginia Clean Economy Act does mandate carbon reductions for Dominion, but there's also rapid load growth that's really adding pressure to the grid from data center developments that are seeking to add just any generation source, including fossil fuel generations. In addition, policies and regulatory aspects also impact CIP projects. Factors such as the state corporation commission rulings for utility regulation, Dominion utility programs, including the VEPCA contract can either provide opportunities or constraints for energy projects. An example of this is Dominion's future and still under designed virtual power plant or VPP program. depending on how the program is designed and then accessible to VEPCA members. It could either enable future participation in the VPP program to really have it distributed resources for solar, battery, vehicle-to-grid resources and other technologies in a future decentralized GLRID, or it could create barriers for meaningful participation. And then lastly, the continued evolution of energy technologies and HVAC, battery storage, solar and vehicle electric vehicle charging solutions will also continue to advance rapidly over the 10 year CIP cycle and continue to inform how the county addresses energy and carbon reductions over this time frame. While these technologies evolve and unlock new future opportunities, we will continue to assess how these technologies can enhance part of the existing building retrofits. Minimizing any temporary or ongoing operational disruptions or service deliveries will be necessary to successfully balance goals. So this slide really dives into the historical utility costs for the county. So this chart goes all the way back to 2000 and displays the electricity and natural gas costs as million BTUs or MMBTUs. The electricity is the orange line, and that's a blended rate of the county's facilities and different rate schedules. Natural gas is in the purple line and is based on historical rates over this time period. The electricity has been generally increasing over this timeframe with an increased slope for the next two fiscal years based on the VEPCA contract outcomes. This trend is not just affecting county accounts or VEPCA members, but rate payers across Virginia and the country have also experienced utility hikes recently. Natural gas is much more volatile. I'll note that the highest prices actually occurred in the mid-2000s and then spiked again in 2023, almost doubling in cost. Increases have recently been in both the supply portion of the bill as well as the distribution costs, which Washington Gas currently has a base rate case that's pending at the State Corporation Commission. With price dynamics, slopes of the future electricity costs over the next two fiscal years, and just volatility in general, these considerations have a direct impact on energy project planning scenarios. Predicting future long-term energy trends is difficult to forecast beyond a few fiscal years, but we'll continue to monitor, assess, and refine as data changes over this period. On the next slide, so with the energy cost forecast and then just the general energy sector dynamics that I mentioned, what does this all mean for energy projects? So I think the first key takeaway is that energy efficiency is just more valuable. Projects will have shorter payback periods or the time to recoup energy with the upfront investments. Energy efficiency, whether it's lighting retrofits or equipment upgrades, will help avoid cost or potentially provide cost savings while saving greenhouse gas emissions. Solar will also continue to be a tool to offset future costs, particularly for increasing electricity. The Maplewood Virtual Power Purchase Agreement, or VPPA, has provided the county with utility bill credits to offset some of the grid electricity costs. The VPPA also supports the county operations renewable electricity goal. Generally, there's an inverse relationship between the VPPA credits and the utility rates, and so that'll continue to provide both the environmental benefits and financial benefits for the county. For onsite PPA, we're forecasting to increase the financial benefits since the forecast of the electricity We're not included in the original cash flow, and we're also anticipating future PPA prices to increase, and that's partially because of the federal tax, federal investment tax credit that expired, but would still be cost-effective and provide benefits to the county. For a facility electrification project, the data shows that operational unit costs are increasing in the near term. Electrification is a critical strategy for decarbonizing the county operations, and there's two core aspects that impact the operating costs, and they include how much energy the equipment uses and then the cost of that energy. Electrification equipment efficiency will be important to reduce the operational cost while balancing with the upfront capital cost of different equipment types. These different types of systems may require infrastructure upgrades that include the existing building envelope, electrical systems, switchboards, or distribution systems that all impact the capital cost. It will also be necessary to continue to forecast the multiple energy metrics that include payback periods to really speak to operational cost, GHG per capital dollars invested to speak the investment of dollars per GHG savings, and then the overall GHG savings for the overall impact of project. These metrics should also be considered together to show the total cost of ownership for equipment scenarios, and even when metrics may have diverging recommendations. Lastly, one key takeaway is the continued need and enhancement of evaluation, measurement, and verification or EM&V of energy and electrification projects to measure how these projects are performing after installation and to help inform future planning. This slide illustrates the portfolio of energy performance types and includes lighting retrofits, retrocommissioning, whole building energy performance upgrades, and HVACA electrification. The metrics in the table include payback periods or how long operational cost how long operational cost savings take to recoup the initial capital savings with the more clocks representing the longer payback period. Cost per GHG impacts is the lower the dollar sign, the more effective a dollar is at reducing greenhouse gas impact. and sort of the efficiency of that dollar for the environmental return. And then lastly, the total GHG reduction or the absolute GHG reduction from projects with the more leaves representing the greater impact. These metrics are not always aligned for projects, and there's also multiple other feasibility considerations such as end-of-life equipment, facility components, unique facility characteristics, and impact on facility operations. These metrics are also dependent on data inputs for capital cost, operational cost, grid, the grid carbon intensity over the project lifetime, which is 20 to 30 years for HVAC and whole energy projects that's based on the equipment's useful life, and they all have varying levels of uncertainty. The CIP will continue to focus on a portfolio of project types that are coordinated with the facility projects. maintenance projects and identify through energy, greenhouse gas, and cost savings. Funding could include pre-project analysis, energy audits, project implementation, and evaluation of implemented projects. A focus on projects with higher GHG per investment and shorter payback periods will be prioritized to maximize impacts. So moving on from energy efficiency to renewable energy, this slide provides an overview of the onsite solar process where we screen county facilities. We continue to analyze and advance solar PV opportunities through power purchase agreements, screening the county's 90 Total facilities, I think most folks are where the PPA model helps reduce the upfront costs, as well as provide maintenance, where the county purchase the electricity, the program supports the analysis potential upgrades needed to support the PPA. and our focus on the 16 facilities that have passed the feasibility netting out the 10 facilities that currently have active solar sites, as well as the four that are in design. The program has planned to have two to four sites per phase for facilities that have favorable feasibility considerations. And then we'll focus on additional sites that have opportunities, including aligning with the roof replacement schedules as the screening process should be updated. On the next slide, this shows a more detailed version of the continued progress for solar at county facilities with the installed arrays in dark blue and then planned in light blue. Future prescreened PPA sites include Aurora Hills Community Center, Cultural Affairs, Fire Station One, and Barcroft Sports. While the county has been successful at PPA installations, including the Lubber Run that was installed and the four that are in design, we're also looking at future opportunities to potentially integrate battery storage systems as technologies, programs, policies, and regulatory models evolve. Renewable energy projects are seeking to interact with their energy resiliency planning and development projects. So with respect to the energy resiliency and planning program, we are planning to implement the forthcoming recommendations from the climate action plan related to the resiliency hubs that have identified needs, use cases, and area of support. Resiliency is the capacity of the community to prevent, withstand, and respond to and recover from disruptions. We anticipate the recommendations and strategies to include information about proximity to populations that would most benefit from resiliency hubs within the county. It'll be necessary to align the ongoing emergency support functions, sheltering plan, and other processes to augment the necessary support during disruption events and identify core characteristics for facilities, such as the ability to have commercial food distribution. We are anticipating an alternating planning implementation cycle for resiliency hubs over the 10-year CIP cycle. Opportunities to leverage resiliency hub infrastructure, such as batteries to support demand response programs or virtual power plants or other programs, while not impacting the resiliency hub core goals, are also being explored, along with microgrids, battery storage, and backup power solutions as a component of this program. Switching gears a bit, the next slide is focused on the program that supports the analysis, design, and implementation for the ongoing electrification of the county's fleet vehicles and equipment. With 88% of the non-public safety sedan fleet transitioned in 2027, future EV transitions will include public safety vehicles and medium to heavy duty equipment, which may require specific charging solutions. The approach the EV charging stations include to first optimize current infrastructure. There's 97 level two and three EVSE currently installed throughout the county through behavior change and increasing utilization rate of that infrastructure. And parallel explore opportunities to cost effectively decentralized charging, such as the public safety take-home pilot. And then lastly, additional installations of fleet infrastructure will be leveraged last in the loading order to support fleet electrification. This program will continue to support the fleet's transition through continued positive total cost of ownership benefits that the county is realizing. Targeted investments for public safety are expected in the near term with larger investments anticipated in fiscal year 2029 for continued public safety conversions. On the next slide, this program focuses on promoting the community's transportation electrification through public charging opportunities. Strategies were identified through the Carbon Neutral Transportation Master Plan, or CNTMP, and this program will be the next step from the current model of installation of charging infrastructures on county-owned sites. This program seeks to expand into other charging opportunities and models with one to two installations per year that may include right-of-way charging while acknowledging the competition for charging in the right-of-way as well as aligning with the transportation futures planning process. Opportunities may include piloting future technologies, alternative models, particularly focused on a multiplier effect model where community benefits can be amplified. The program will focus on priority areas with higher concentrations of multifamily housing, where there are current limitations or constraints identified with charging in equity-focused areas. Funding will support the analysis implementation of public charging and potential public-private partnership models may be leveraged to support public charging opportunities. this slide shows a snapshot of the ev charging dashboard where we display the semi-annual data of the public charging stations usage at the county's 51 charging ports over nine sites we continue to see growth and are above the industry utilization benchmarks for charging across the county where we've seen 40 000 sessions since 2022. This table is an overview of the energy management programs with the $25.3 million in investments over the 10-year CIP cycle. The next slide is the funding source table for these projects as well. So with that, I will turn it over to Adil, who I think has a concluding slide. Thank you.

Can finish it out and then we can get the questions. So with this proposed CIP just to summarize We will get a proactive replacement of the county's aging building systems, which should ensure the continuity of County services We'll also get an optimized building portfolio that continues to serve the programs which deliver critical services through strategic space consolidation. We'll also continue to invest in expanded solar capacity, EV infrastructure, and focus on long-term resilience and facility decarbonization. That concludes our presentation.

Anybody ready? Whoever's microphone it is gets to go first, if you want.

Thank you, Ms. Cunningham, and I've noted you guys, both of you got us on time, so appreciate it. Looking at slide 31, which is sort of the way you count our emissions by source, after the Maplewood, Just, there's a lot of bright blue for our school buildings. And I just, that's a question for me. Similar to the Madison Community Center, every time I look at Jamestown was getting rebuilt, we walk over there and I look at that. The roof is currently tough shape, it's on their list. It just seems to me that is there science that prevents us from working around the little HVAC chimneys to just put solar on newer roofs? And what can we do on schools or what is your thinking on that?

Yeah, I know that schools has an active, and I think that they have over 10 PPAs as well for solar on their roofs. So I think that they have an active and immature program in that, but I can, if there's specific sites available, I think schools also lend themselves to having large, flat, unobstructed roofs, which makes me a little bit jealous of some of the facilities that may not have those characteristics.

Sure, I guess I have one other question looking at like the energy performance, and then I may have others, but I'll yield the I feel like capacity to analyze the stuff is super important. And I'm not clear whether we have that capacity. And if so, if you have a team of people behind with you and or if the CIP pays for you. So if the CIP were to pay for your work, I have some interest in seeing if there is need and or possibility for team members to help because I've perceived that it's not just the projects that are needed, it's the capacity to analyze the work. And I guess that's a question for a deal and maybe, you know, Michelle or Mark, you would know the answer on this.

Is that in particular to solar or are you saying more in general?

In general. Like Mr. Burr's team having dug in pretty deep, and I think you have other colleagues, on one of the recent projects, LECI, I think. Do we have the capacity, because in 2028, in the budget book, there's a lot more work, and I just wanna make sure we have the capacity, because it's a chicken and egg, right? If you have the capacity, you can do more projects. And I don't know if it's CIP funded or if it's operating funded.

Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. I can chime in. Yeah. I think that, you know, the the team does look at, you know, analysis, you know, needed for this for all the different project streams. And I think one piece in particular that we included in the FY 27 PAYGO was looking at the EM&V work for consultant support on that. And I think that'll be a really helpful piece as well. You know, a few years ago, we endeavored on the decarb tool, which was trying to look at sort of the the planning and analytics approach. You know, we've also, you know, we've learned a lot and worked cross-functionally with that respect. And then also trying to be thoughtful about the projects now that we have projects that have been implemented and looking at that, those sort of outcomes to then, you know, feedback in the planning process. But that's, you know, for buildings itself and then, you know, and then for solar prescreening and working with contractors or EV installations as well. Great.

I think I'll follow up. There's the one slide at 16 PPA or in the queue for analysis of 16. And I'm also mindful it's a difficult question to ask because, you know, CIP funding seems slightly easier. The debt service is a real challenge. And so I just think it's fair to follow up with, you know, the muckety mucks over here.

Yeah, that slide 36 that talked about those, I think that analysis, I believe, Stephen, has been completed. And then you're going to continue to evaluate as things, as new roofs come up. Go ahead, Stephen.

Yeah, that's correct. And so this was sort of the first cut, sort of top of the funnel. And so we're looking at phasing these and, you know, what are the highest opportunities. And that's why in March we put forward four sites. to balance what could go forward, what could align with capacity, and then also continuing on what are the next opportunities and working through that list. And so always mindful about where the opportunities are, what's the opportunity, and sort of how we rack and stack those for that, and then also incorporate new information as new roofs are replaced or there's new opportunities. and and 16 have been evaluated they just are next is that right so i would consider the 16 um that passed sort of a pre-screening analysis looking at roof age shading equipment on the roof to you know to have the highest level of potential from our from um our ppa vendor i would imagine that you know maybe a couple of those will fall off for whatever reason, but I think that that's sort of the sort of opportunity for on-site solar in the near sort of two, four year time frame.

So Steven and his team have gone through and analyzed all 90 of them and 16 were identified as things that Dominion or others would be interested in putting under PPA because they have to meet certain size requirements, it has to be profitable for them. So we think that 16 are the ones that are going to be eligible for those type of things.

Great.

And then, yeah.

I might follow up.

Do you have a follow up?

My question was going to be pretty directly related because I know establishing really that initial PPA framework took a lot to get there. And we have identified these sites and we've moved forward on a number of them, but what is it? What does it take to get from, let's say with these 16, the fact that we have identified them as potentially viable options to actual approval with our Dominion partner? Now that we have the PPA framework, is it a lot easier? Or does that negotiation kind of have to happen every site, every time?

yeah so now that since we did the competitive competitive procurement and so now we have a sort of templated agreement that we've worked through and so I think as we work through it'll be a little bit easier every time as we sort of work with the vendor understand where there are are there you know, potential sort of pitfalls or where there are opportunities. So, yeah, I think a lot of the administrative pieces to through contracting and sort of the process have been built out, built out. And we certainly leverage that for the group before that, that we that you all approved in the I think March, March.

Yeah. Okay, that's really helpful to understand because I think if it took as long for the next tranche as it took for the first ones to get started, we're in bad shape.

Yeah, I think sort of the delta between sort of when Lubber Run was completed and then when we got the, which was fall of 25 and then in the spring of 26, we got the next four to the board. I think that's more illustrative of what the future cadence will look like. That's great.

Okay. I think that's really helpful. And then I'll pass it back. Okay.

Mr. Karantonis, you've been very patient. Thank you. To be honest, to Vice Chair Coffess and to Chair DeFerranti's questions, I would have appreciated basically to show I mean, like you show on slide 37, this is the capacity we have. This is the capacity that's attainable on the table or close, right? So we are right now one megawatt production in solar. This is how much we produce in Arlington on public buildings with the solar panels that we've installed. And then, you know, try to put a... I mean, I don't know if it would be helpful or there is any counter indication on actually saying we want to achieve two megawatts in three years and so forth. So for me, this is also more honest and direct to the public. to show where we are. I noticed also that our relative contribution to, I mean, our share in the energy consumption is now half what it used to be three years ago. It's 2%. which probably means that the energy consumption intensity of the rest has increased. We are holding the line, but apparently the rest of our community is not necessarily holding the line in terms of how much energy they consume. Finally on that, what is explaining the Very steep increase of electric BTU consumption. Exactly. For me, energy intensity is as important as going low carbon and reducing the greenhouse gas impression, but I'm afraid that we're not investing enough in reducing the energy intensity of our operations. So efficiency is for me very important.

Yeah, and I think that's one sort of element, you know, particularly with the whole building energy performance where you can get the HVAC savings and electrification plus the envelope lighting, all of that bundled together to have those, you know, additional savings and really gets to the really gets to the reduced EUI, reduced overall energy pieces, because I think that there are some cases. And I think the EMNV report may sort of bring some of this. If we electrify, there could be an opportunity where on an MMVTU basis, we may be using more energy. at the end of the day, just doing the system. And so I think that they're, I'm excited for that report to show some of those sort of relationships between GHG energy and cost going forward. And, you know, and particularly for the size and scope of projects and different applications.

I mean, one of the things that I've been seeing in the economic press, it's not always an accurate image of things. I've seen a relative, I mean, a solar kilowatt is immensely less expensive than a fossil gas-produced kilowatt. Are we... Are we benefiting from Maplewood and the expansion of our solar capacity on the roofs on this side?

Yeah, I think certainly for Maplewood, we are seeing those those bill credits and that inverse relationship. And so we are seeing the financial benefit from from Maplewood as well. And I also think from the contracting time, having the price agreement and And I think it was early 2020 and energy markets have changed so much. So I think that that is that is something that is, you know, helping with some of the grid costs that are, you know, that I that were on the 533 where you see that see that spike at the end. But yeah, it is helpful for both the electricity bill for the VP, VPPA, as well as the PPA rates that for the onsite solar that is lower than lower than the grid electricity.

Okay, in any case, for me, it's very important to set goals here that we can measure progress towards. I understand the intentions and the description of the pathway, but if I say, okay, it is 2027, 2028, are we at two megawatts or are we not, and what does it take, like, what will it take to get there? And who else? I mean, maybe we have to be more innovative in finding even other partners in helping us with this. Finally, on the EV charging program, it is very clear that we have a significant and very positive uptake of the availability. I mean, the moment that we made EV stations more available, I know that it wasn't pay go, that we will be expanding the availability of charging stations. So what is the future of that? What is the next stack going to look like on slide 41? The reason why I'm asking that is because we are getting a lot of input and questions from our residents especially multifamily buildings and also legacy buildings and they are eager to be able to charge their vehicles and you know right now they're also having actual very significant cost savings because of that since gas is so immensely expensive.

Yeah, absolutely. And I think there's so I think for this sort of model where we have the nine sites, we have four additional ones that we're working through design and implementation through a clean fuel infrastructure grant the county received as a sub awardee to the COG. So I think that's going to be the additional sort of model for the sort of chart, you know, traditional level two charger at a county facility. And I think, you know, some of the more forward-looking work for opportunities of potentially right-of-way charging or other models is being evaluated. And I think another piece, too, that we're excited about is sort of a work stream that one of my colleagues worked through was looking at what the zoning requirements were for EV charging and sort of looking at opportunities to update those, as well as enforcement on county properties. And so those were a couple weeks ago approved by approved by you all but I think that was sort of what we were looking for as an opportunity to help streamline the process for installations where we know there's a lot of potential obstacles on the utility side from capacity or other pieces but trying to reduce any sort of barriers or or on the sort of zoning side

yeah thank you we have to put the you have to we have to activate an accelerator there because i think that this is a very very successful program and it will help us in so many ways not only the community but also on our side it will create that last but not least i've seen time and again that we're buying this charging stations with the cable on it it is now practice i've seen it in many places in in in public charging that you expect the owners of the EVs to bring their cables so you have less of an element of maintenance there and it's also a very expensive piece of the charger. So you have nothing dangling or exposed to the elements. People typically carry their cables in their frums and that's okay.

Yep, and that's exactly one of the models that we're exploring to do this work. So that's great you've seen that. Great.

Mr. Speight. Yeah, I'll close it out with that. Well, at least just one question. And thank you, Stephen, for a great presentation. I want to go to slide 38. We can pull that up. Here we go. So most folks know this about me. We're going to spend about $8.5 million in energy resiliency planning and development. And as we go through this, perhaps you can give me an idea or the board here an idea in a scenario base When we get to implementation of three sites over a 10-year CIP period, I understand there'll be some feedback. How will these three sites be selected and what kind of criteria were you talking about to prioritize them? I'm asking that because, you know, all these efforts and these conversations that we're having about solar, EV, environmental sustainability, environmental climate justice, right? we have to understand if we're going to have sustainable and equitable outcomes that we are tapping into some of the most vulnerable populations in our community if it's going to be an equitable decision at the end of the day, right? So can you talk me through like just a scenario on this slide of what that may look like?

Yeah, absolutely. And I think that you really hit on a core of one of these sort of community engagement pieces and aligning with the climate action plan is really getting to the communities where this is going to be such critical work in areas of the county where we really need to sort of invest and focus these you know, these physical sort of locations, you know, for the increasing sort of climate issues and risks that, you know, that are coming. And so that's a core piece of this work is to identify what's needed, you know, from the communities and then also where, you know, where where should these be located within the county and so that's sort of the first sort of community you know to really understand what's needed where it's needed and then sort of the second bucket is more of the technical piece where similar to what we did with the lubber run you know like what size of batter do you need what's the configuration how does it what sort of technical pieces of equipment do you need to support the community needs at the community identified location and so that's really bringing those two pieces together but i think really the sort of front end and aligning with all of the engagement work that the climate action plan isn't is is currently working through is really you know getting to those core pieces of are we going to the right spots for the right populations for the right needs um for these for these um um resiliency hubs yeah

And just, you know, I think Jennifer Freddie and the entire team is doing outstanding work, but I often think about a lot of this policy that is being shaped is, yeah, is it we're doing a lot for all of Arlington, but who in Arlington is perhaps not so much in tune or being left behind because this is the future. Right? And if we're talking about solar and EV, how do we get folks cognizant of what we're doing and understanding it and involved? Because this is only $8.5 million. It's a lot. But we want to hear from some of those communities that have not been heard from in the past. So that's something I'm looking at. And I just thank you for the presentation. And thank you, Ms. Cunningham and Chair, for the opportunity.

Can I take the opportunity to maybe go back to you, Mr. Chair, your question on slide 36? On the, I think your, the essence of your question was what would it take for us to accelerate the PPAs and do we need anything to basically accelerate the remaining 16? I think, Stephen, I think we have all the resources on our end. Do we need any additional funding to speed that up or no?

No, I think sort of looking at the yeah, the PPA model with the reduced capital. So I think that it's really, you know, and I think it's that administrative process that, you know, through the second piece, I think that we're really sort of fine tuning to really increase and sort of just get more and more solar out in the community.

It's really working with Dominion basically.

Correct. Yeah.

So I think one of the questions is, is there a bandwidth constraint on our side from a staffing perspective? No.

Just that you can only work with Dominion.

Yeah. I just wanted to clarify that specifically.

This is an opportunity to throw the lawyers under the bus if the CAO, you know, not metaphorically. But I hear you. And Dominion is great partners some of the time. And so, you know, I appreciate the answer, but I also sent a note, I'm not, you know, faster, faster, if we can't do it is okay. I just want to, I appreciate you getting specific on the why of what we would need to do, because just lived experience on the weatherization assistance program, you know, upfront costs. from Fannie and Freddie, slow everything down, and we're going to get the money back in 20 years, sometimes.

Yeah, I think that's really important, and I think you're hearing consistently, go faster if you can, and let us know what you need to do to go faster. In particular, given the shocking increase in electricity costs for us, for our schools, for our residents, The ROI of each of these projects really has shifted quite a bit. And so particularly for lighting retrofits and retro commissioning, first of all, I'm very excited to see the retro commissioning. But for those, like what's the fastest we can go on those? Because I presume those return on investments are months or years and maybe faster as the electricity costs go higher.

Yeah, I think it's certainly I'm Yeah, it's been just a couple of years of for the lighting retrofits. And I think for retro commissioning, really looking at those where there is those sort of lower capital investments for those savings. So, yes, looking to accelerate those as we can and find those, you know, find those opportunities where there are like the biggest pieces and also align with the facilities team when in particular there's like a maintenance issue or this type of, you know, fixture isn't available anymore. It's really creating those issues. And so finding those synergies that have both the maintenance benefit plus the accelerated energy benefits and carbon benefits.

And so is there a bandwidth constraint there or a capital constraint? I like things that pay us back quickly. Mm-hmm.

Can we get back to you? Yeah. Yeah, rather than sort of like look at the project list for the next few years. And then I think with every, you know, facility, again, I would say like a lighting retrofit could have impact on operations, right? You know, for an actively, so just wanting to make sure that we're thoughtful, but I understand the direction of what you guys are saying completely, completely.

Great. I think sort of related to that is, and this can be offline as well, but if we had an extra 500,000 or a million to put towards this, what would it get you? I'm shaking the couch cushions, Mr. Manager. But I think just as we had on the operating side, there were some painful investments on public safety. I mean, they were exciting, but they were also painful for our taxpayers. But we did that because they pay back really quickly if all goes well. I think y'all are in charge of a category of investments that have the same. So we'd like to know that. I haven't found the extra million, though, so if you're curious about that. And then I think my last one is just that I admit I was wrong on the EV chargers. Y'all did a great job getting a lot of users. So good job.

yeah and we're excited to update the dashboard here at the end of the month and see what fy26 is looking like and we've seen anecdotally sort of a dip after the federal tax credit but with gas prices that's sort of helping and so excited to keep both what the what the chargers are doing then also what the vehicle registrations are for electric vehicles perfect anyone else Mr. chair is that vestigial no that's for when we're all set okay

Anyone on staff side, anything you didn't get to say that you wish you had said? Should we call Greg up for some really tough question? Does anyone have one?

Oh, I can think of one.

Or Tyler? No.

Okay.

We'll just do Mad Libs questions. Nope. I think we're good. So if anyone has closing comments or questions, we are allowed to finish early and take back that time. Anyone? Anyone? Huge thank you for all that you do and for the concise presentation and great question answering. I know there were a lot of holiday and weekend hours put in over the last four days to make this come together, so thank you. We always appreciate your work. All right. I think, Mr. Chair, it's to you.

Thank you, Ms. Cunningham, for leading us. And another way of putting it is if I were in charge of your work, we would have bridges falling down. We would have no energy efficiency, no solar projects. So all of us are super, super grateful for your work. um thank you very much each of you and all of the team behind that makes it all happen um we will now transition we're going to have a closed meeting motion you guys don't have to sit at the table for me to make that motion but you're welcome to it's i'll make the following motion and take an affirmative recorded vote In open meeting, I move that the County Board convene a closed meeting as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711 and for discussions regarding the performance of a board appointee and consultation with and legal advice from the County Attorney regarding the County's legal authority and options to comment on and participate in review of a pending federal project that may impact the County's transportation network, emergency response, airspace, certain infrastructure, and historic preservation efforts. Two, criminal investigative records rules and confidentiality restrictions as applies to an active criminal investigation, the legal risks to the county and police department and its personnel disclosing or withholding particular categories of records during an active criminal investigation and the county's potential civil liability as it relates to ensuring a proper administrative investigation following an active Criminal investigation in three counties legal authority regarding its personnel and off-duty events and collective bargaining agreements Regarding the same as their second seconded by Mr. Spain. All those in favor say aye. Aye. That motion passes unanimously. We are in closed session. Can someone, maybe Mason or someone just help and text our County attorney to let them know we're a little bit early and we will start colleagues at 2.40, if that's okay. That gives six minutes. So thanks very much. We're in closed.

That's an interesting background here.

is appreciate you and high and tight. Let's keep this high and tight, which I'm always like, I didn't play enough baseball. Oh, I got it. We are back from closed session. I make the following motion and we'll take a roll call vote. I move that the members of the county board certify that at the just concluded closed session only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under chapter 37 title 2.2 of the code of Virginia were discussed and that only such public business matters as were identified in the motion by which the closed meeting was convened were heard, discussed, or considered by the board. Is there a second?

Second.

Clerk will call the roll.

Certainly, Mr. DeFranti? Yes. Ms. Coffey?

Yes.

Ms. Cunningham?

Yes.

Mr. Spain Senior? Yes. Mr. Karantonis? Yes.

Thank you. We're adjourned.