will stand by for developments! Can you provide more info about the case study? The only map I see is on MCA website and sure looks like it includes a lot of Tyson's business district - cuts Route 7 right in half.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=18BoqXmkjAMvYj8d6xCVDLeUmj01KaWUG&ll=38.93382462010089%2C-77.23710937705073&z=14

Anonymous wrote:VA state and FC have poured money into Tysons - infrastructure, tax incentives, a new Metro line connecting Tysons to DC and Dulles - you are delusional if you think that a citizen's association drawing a map that includes the commercial district and real estate taxes of households without school age children you need to fund this venture would have any chance of succeeding.

Not all the posters saying this should be explored are assuming any part of the Tysons core would be included. You are delusional if you think you'll quell interest in this initiative by rebutting assumptions that may not be part of the case study.

VA state and FC have poured money into Tysons - infrastructure, tax incentives, a new Metro line connecting Tysons to DC and Dulles - you are delusional if you think that a citizen's association drawing a map that includes the commercial district and real estate taxes of households without school age children you need to fund this venture would have any chance of succeeding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people assuming McLean is some fount of massive tax revenue? At least in Arlington the residential areas are all cost centers. The county budget gets almost half its revenue from commercial taxes. McLean is woefully short on retail and commercial centers and lacks the big employment centers that Arlington has. I'm not seeing where McLean gets the funding it needs unless they raise property taxes to 2-3%

Clearly you don’t realize that half of Tysons Corner is in McLean.

Lol. Half of Tysons has a McLean mailing address. That doesn’t mean half of Tysons is in McLean. McLean itself (at best) is arbitrarily defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. The lines currently run along the Dulles Access Road and Spring Hill Road, and doesn’t include any part of the Tysons CBD.

The PP is right. The McLean area does not have a strong commercial tax base. In the unlikely event that it would succeed in incorporating as a separate city (and forget any wild fantasy that McLean could somehow grab part of Tysons), the new city would be overly reliant upon residential property taxes - much more so than Fairfax County as a whole.

FCC isn't exactly Wall Street, and it gets by as an independent jurisdiction. McLean has more expensive residential properties than FCC, and its retail/commercial area is concentrated in a core area that in the aggregate is larger than the commercial area along Broad Street.

As for the residential population, for sure there are a lot of families with children (indeed, the desire for more control over schools that get ignored and left to run on auto-pilot by FCPS is one driver of the initiative to explore incorporation), but it also has singles in apartment buildings in downtown McLean and on the edge of Tysons, as well as older residents who no longer have school-age children.

So I don't think the inability to include the Tysons core in a new jurisdiction would be a show-stopper. You really need to let those who want to explore this see what they can come up. The effort to pre-emptively claim it would be cost-prohibitive is premature and does seem to reflect a desire to keep McLean's tax base within the county or opposition on the part of some to higher taxes. If there were a case that we'd get better schools and services in exchange for higher taxes, I'd gladly pay more in taxes, as would many others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people assuming McLean is some fount of massive tax revenue? At least in Arlington the residential areas are all cost centers. The county budget gets almost half its revenue from commercial taxes. McLean is woefully short on retail and commercial centers and lacks the big employment centers that Arlington has. I'm not seeing where McLean gets the funding it needs unless they raise property taxes to 2-3%

Clearly you don’t realize that half of Tysons Corner is in McLean.

No it isn’t. You are confusing zip codes with municipal boundaries. Tysons is separate from McLean and Vienna. Some parts of McLean have Arlington or Falls Church zip codes too. Look at the MCC tax district that is the boundary I would expect to be used.

Go look at the MCA website. They are the ones that triggered this whole thread. They are the ones exploring this concept. They have a map of what they consider their area. It includes half of Tysons Corner. It’s split right down 123.

Correcting - It’s split down 7, not 123.

It looks like the 22101 and 22102 zip codes arbitrarily established by the USPS. It's meaningless and carries no weight.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people assuming McLean is some fount of massive tax revenue? At least in Arlington the residential areas are all cost centers. The county budget gets almost half its revenue from commercial taxes. McLean is woefully short on retail and commercial centers and lacks the big employment centers that Arlington has. I'm not seeing where McLean gets the funding it needs unless they raise property taxes to 2-3%

Clearly you don’t realize that half of Tysons Corner is in McLean.

No it isn’t. You are confusing zip codes with municipal boundaries. Tysons is separate from McLean and Vienna. Some parts of McLean have Arlington or Falls Church zip codes too. Look at the MCC tax district that is the boundary I would expect to be used.

Go look at the MCA website. They are the ones that triggered this whole thread. They are the ones exploring this concept. They have a map of what they consider their area. It includes half of Tysons Corner. It’s split right down 123.

Anyone can draw a map.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people assuming McLean is some fount of massive tax revenue? At least in Arlington the residential areas are all cost centers. The county budget gets almost half its revenue from commercial taxes. McLean is woefully short on retail and commercial centers and lacks the big employment centers that Arlington has. I'm not seeing where McLean gets the funding it needs unless they raise property taxes to 2-3%

Clearly you don’t realize that half of Tysons Corner is in McLean.

No it isn’t. You are confusing zip codes with municipal boundaries. Tysons is separate from McLean and Vienna. Some parts of McLean have Arlington or Falls Church zip codes too. Look at the MCC tax district that is the boundary I would expect to be used.

Go look at the MCA website. They are the ones that triggered this whole thread. They are the ones exploring this concept. They have a map of what they consider their area. It includes half of Tysons Corner. It’s split right down 123.

Correcting - It’s split down 7, not 123.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people assuming McLean is some fount of massive tax revenue? At least in Arlington the residential areas are all cost centers. The county budget gets almost half its revenue from commercial taxes. McLean is woefully short on retail and commercial centers and lacks the big employment centers that Arlington has. I'm not seeing where McLean gets the funding it needs unless they raise property taxes to 2-3%

Clearly you don’t realize that half of Tysons Corner is in McLean.

No it isn’t. You are confusing zip codes with municipal boundaries. Tysons is separate from McLean and Vienna. Some parts of McLean have Arlington or Falls Church zip codes too. Look at the MCC tax district that is the boundary I would expect to be used.

Go look at the MCA website. They are the ones that triggered this whole thread. They are the ones exploring this concept. They have a map of what they consider their area. It includes half of Tysons Corner. It’s split right down 123.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people assuming McLean is some fount of massive tax revenue? At least in Arlington the residential areas are all cost centers. The county budget gets almost half its revenue from commercial taxes. McLean is woefully short on retail and commercial centers and lacks the big employment centers that Arlington has. I'm not seeing where McLean gets the funding it needs unless they raise property taxes to 2-3%

Clearly you don’t realize that half of Tysons Corner is in McLean.

Lol. Half of Tysons has a McLean mailing address. That doesn’t mean half of Tysons is in McLean. McLean itself (at best) is arbitrarily defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. The lines currently run along the Dulles Access Road and Spring Hill Road, and doesn’t include any part of the Tysons CBD.

The PP is right. The McLean area does not have a strong commercial tax base. In the unlikely event that it would succeed in incorporating as a separate city (and forget any wild fantasy that McLean could somehow grab part of Tysons), the new city would be overly reliant upon residential property taxes - much more so than Fairfax County as a whole.

Anonymous wrote:Why are people assuming McLean is some fount of massive tax revenue? At least in Arlington the residential areas are all cost centers. The county budget gets almost half its revenue from commercial taxes. McLean is woefully short on retail and commercial centers and lacks the big employment centers that Arlington has. I'm not seeing where McLean gets the funding it needs unless they raise property taxes to 2-3%

Although McLean has high property values, they have quite a few families with school aged children and very little in terms of DINK (before and after children) population. I would like to see stats on number of school aged children, then we can see if the town can support it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people assuming McLean is some fount of massive tax revenue? At least in Arlington the residential areas are all cost centers. The county budget gets almost half its revenue from commercial taxes. McLean is woefully short on retail and commercial centers and lacks the big employment centers that Arlington has. I'm not seeing where McLean gets the funding it needs unless they raise property taxes to 2-3%

Clearly you don’t realize that half of Tysons Corner is in McLean.

No it isn’t. You are confusing zip codes with municipal boundaries. Tysons is separate from McLean and Vienna. Some parts of McLean have Arlington or Falls Church zip codes too. Look at the MCC tax district that is the boundary I would expect to be used.

Anonymous wrote:Why are people assuming McLean is some fount of massive tax revenue? At least in Arlington the residential areas are all cost centers. The county budget gets almost half its revenue from commercial taxes. McLean is woefully short on retail and commercial centers and lacks the big employment centers that Arlington has. I'm not seeing where McLean gets the funding it needs unless they raise property taxes to 2-3%

Clearly you don’t realize that half of Tysons Corner is in McLean.

Why are people assuming McLean is some fount of massive tax revenue? At least in Arlington the residential areas are all cost centers. The county budget gets almost half its revenue from commercial taxes. McLean is woefully short on retail and commercial centers and lacks the big employment centers that Arlington has. I'm not seeing where McLean gets the funding it needs unless they raise property taxes to 2-3%

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The MCA (and GFCA) have a lot of members with the skill set to map out what the potential budgets might look like. There are some services that might require higher spending than average in the county, but also others where a new jurisdiction could operate more leanly and certainly more efficiently than the county and FCPS.

LMAO.

+1

Running a citizens’ association and a city are entirely different. And this post clearly demonstrates how clueless some of my fellow McLean neighbors are. Perhaps well-intentioned, but utterly clueless.

What bothers you is that they aren’t clueless. For whatever reason, you prefer the idea of an area that’s captive to a massive county that provides the community with poor services and unresponsive government in exchange for its tax dollars.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The MCA (and GFCA) have a lot of members with the skill set to map out what the potential budgets might look like. There are some services that might require higher spending than average in the county, but also others where a new jurisdiction could operate more leanly and certainly more efficiently than the county and FCPS.

LMAO.

+1

Running a citizens’ association and a city are entirely different. And this post clearly demonstrates how clueless some of my fellow McLean neighbors are. Perhaps well-intentioned, but utterly clueless.