A debate over financial transparency and fiscal responsibility erupted during the Prince William Board of County Supervisors’ meeting as members weighed the transfer of $31.6 million to Prince William County Schools (PWCS). The funds, representing the school division’s share of the Fiscal Year 2024 general revenue surplus, were allocated under the county’s long-standing revenue-sharing agreement.
While the measure ultimately passed, some supervisors raised concerns that the county’s revenue-sharing model does not adequately oversee how the school system spends taxpayer money.
This article is FREE to read. Please Sign In or Create a FREE Account. Thank you.
The Prince William Board of County Supervisors voted Tuesday to cancel the long-debated Route 28 Bypass Project, ending years of planning and millions of dollars in studies and design work. The decision, which passed with a 5-3 vote, came after a contentious debate over the feasibility and cost of the project.
Initially estimated to cost more than $200 million, the road would have connected with Route 28 at a signalized intersection north of Bull Run Stream in Fairfax County. The plan to build the road, Alternative 2B, was the top recommendation from the 2017 Route 28 Corridor Feasibility Study. The project had received $89 million in funding from the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA) as part of a broader effort to improve the county’s transportation infrastructure.
County transportation director Rick Canizales confirmed that the estimated cost had grown beyond available funding, requiring an additional $80–$100 million to proceed. “After taking all this into consideration and doing all the design work that we’ve done at this point, we come to the board and let you know that as staff, we believe that alternative 2B is not viable because we don’t have enough money and we don’t have enough support in some of the challenges we’re facing,” Canizales said.
Fairfax County, a key stakeholder, did not commit to securing right-of-way approvals needed to move the project forward. “We’ve been trying tooth and nail to find an alignment and a price point that would work for this county… But I sit here wondering when that five and a half million dollars becomes $8 million, becomes $10 million, becomes $16 million just to get the project through design,” said Coles District Supervisor Yesli Vega, who led the charge to kill the project.
Divided Board, Heated Debate
Supervisors clashed over the decision, with some arguing that the project’s cancellation would leave commuters stranded without a straightforward solution to congestion. Vega, representing the district most impacted by the bypass, was vocal about her opposition to the cancellation. “What are we fighting for? Aside from everything that you stated, I’ll tell you what I’ve been fighting for for the past five years. I’ve been fighting for the people that live in these communities… Do we have a problem on Route 28? Yes, we do. Are we going to do something about it? Yes, we will. Because I gave my word that we would, and I’m a woman of my word, and we’re going to follow through on that,” Vega said.
Others supported the cancellation, citing financial realities and the lack of regional cooperation. Supervisor Bob Weir pointed to Fairfax County’s refusal to support the project, stating, “Is it not correct that Fairfax County, particularly Board of Supervisors Chairman Jeff McKay, has stalemated us for months, and we have been spinning our wheels?” Canizales confirmed that he had been discussing right-of-way issues with Fairfax officials for nearly three years without progress.
Occoquan Supervisor Kenny Boddye argued that the project had become an unsustainable financial burden, stating, “We have to find a mechanism for giving this project a hundred million more dollars to even say it’s fully funded to continue on with the project. And right now, neither the CIP nor the five-year plan have any kind of plan for that money.”
Woodbridge Supervisor Margaret Franklin acknowledged the lack of viable alternatives but noted that either way, taxpayers would be footing the bill. “I just want to point out that if we’re canceling the project, we’re going to have to pay out-of-pocket likely for another project. And if we keep the project, you’re saying that we still have to come out-of-pocket. So I just want to be clear that either way, we’re coming out-of-pocket,” she said.
Brentsville Supervisor Tom Gordy also frustrated with regional politics, stating, “Regionalism really doesn’t work here. There are those that have, and then there are those that have not. And those that have wanted to continue to hold those of us who have not under their thumb. And this is a perfect example of that.”
Franklin, Angry, and Bailey voted to keep it, while Vega, Gordy, Boddye, and Chair At-large Deshundra Jefferson voted to kill it.
What’s Next for Route 28?
With the cancellation of the bypass, county officials are now looking at alternative solutions to address congestion along Route 28. One option under consideration is widening the existing roadway, though officials acknowledge that this project would also require significant funding and would need to be evaluated by the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA) for regional funding eligibility.
Despite the board’s decision, the county must now negotiate the financial closeout of the project with NVTA, which had allocated $89 million in funding. Approximately $5.9 million of those funds had already been spent on design and environmental studies and will need to be repaid. The remaining funds will return to NVTA’s regional pool, where Prince William County must compete for future transportation funding.
Residents and local business owners who have long relied on Route 28 for their daily commutes remain concerned about what comes next. “Something needs to be done,” said Vega. “I gave my word that we would, and I’m a woman of my word. We’re going to follow through on that.”
The board is expected to discuss alternative plans in upcoming meetings, focusing on securing funding for a new congestion relief strategy.
Coles District Supervisor Yesli Vega is pushing to cancel the long-debated Route 28 Bypass project, a multi-year effort designed to alleviate congestion on Route 28 by extending Godwin Drive to connect Manassas with Dulles Airport. The Prince William Board of County Supervisors is set to vote on her resolution during its meeting on Tuesday, February 4, 2025.
A Project Years in the Making
The project, initially endorsed in September 2020, was meant to relieve congestion on Route 28 by constructing a four-lane divided bypass extending Godwin Drive across Sudley Road. The road would have connected with Route 28 at a signalized intersection north of Bull Run Stream in Fairfax County.
The selected plan, known as Alternative 2B, was the top recommendation from the 2017 Route 28 Corridor Feasibility Study. The project had received $89 million in funding from the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA) as part of a broader effort to improve the county’s transportation infrastructure.
However, as development progressed, the county encountered significant obstacles, including:
- Difficulty in acquiring land inside and outside Prince William County, leading to potential legal disputes over property condemnation.
- Environmental, utility, and historic preservation concerns complicated construction.
- High costs and engineering challenges, particularly regarding bridge and retaining wall designs.
In October 2023, the county attempted to salvage the project by exploring Modified Alternative 2A, a version that would have followed the same route but turned east to rejoin Route 28 south of Bull Run. While this alternative kept the project within Prince William County’s jurisdiction, it ultimately proved even more expensive and disruptive, failing to deliver the intended benefits.
Why Cancel the Project?
Supervisor Vega and other proponents of cancellation argue that continuing the Route 28 Bypass is no longer a viable solution. The county’s transportation staff has recommended ending the project, citing mounting financial and logistical barriers.
The $89 million in funding allocated from the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA) for the bypass has already seen over $6.5 million spent on planning and early development. If the project is canceled, there is a possibility that NVTA may request repayment of its reimbursements with interest, requiring further financial negotiations.
Vega specifically cited concerns about the impact on working-class communities along the proposed bypass route, stating:
“The Loch-Lomond and Yorkshire neighborhoods in addition to the Bull Run Trailer Park lay right along the proposed alignment for the bypass. These are very working-class neighborhoods with significant Hispanic and minority populations where the average home value is not even half the county average in many instances.”
She also emphasized the human cost of the project, adding:
“With little consideration for residents, over 70+ homes in the Coles District would be affected, displacing families from their homes and forcing taxpayers to fund millions of dollars for a project that does not solve the problem of 28 being less congested than it is today. This is why I have opposed the Route 28 Bypass Project.”
Supporters of Vega’s resolution believe canceling the bypass will:
- Open the door for alternative congestion relief solutions
- Avoid further disruptions to homeowners and environmentally sensitive areas
- Provide flexibility in reallocating remaining funds toward cost-effective, innovative transportation projects
What’s at Stake?
Opponents argue that without the bypass, congestion on Route 28 will continue to worsen, particularly for commuters traveling between Manassas, Centreville, and Dulles. Local businesses that rely on efficient transportation networks may also feel the strain if alternative solutions are not identified quickly.
Moreover, residents along Route 28 have long expressed frustration with traffic bottlenecks. Many supported the project when it was included in the 2019 Mobility Bond Referendum, raising concerns that abandoning it now might betray voter expectations.
What Comes Next?
If the board votes to cancel the project, county transportation officials will begin exploring other congestion relief measures, though no concrete alternatives have been proposed yet. Discussions will likely center around enhanced public transit options, road widening initiatives, and improved traffic signal coordination.
The Prince William Board of County Supervisors meets at 2 p.m. at the Prince William County Government Center, 1 County Complex Court in Woodbridge.
“The Route 28 Bypass Project is a major regional transportation project administered by Prince William County. While I acknowledge and appreciate all the planning, design, engineering, and community engagement that has occurred across multiple jurisdictions, I no longer have confidence the project is viable or maintains the necessary support to move forward,” Vega stated.
The proposed resolution, presented at an upcoming board meeting, aims to allow the board to deliberate openly and determine the next steps for the controversial project.
The Route 28 Bypass Project was conceived to address severe traffic congestion along the Route 28 corridor, which would Prince William County to Fairfax County, via a four-mile extension of Godwin Drive. The project would affect about 70 homes along Flat Branch Creek, which aims to link Godwin’s terminus, Sudley Road (Route 234 business), near the UVA Health Prince William Medical Center, to Route 28 in Fairfax County. The project has been in the design and engineering phases for at least four years, with substantial investments in planning and community outreach.
The project was included in a county bond referendum approved by voters, which adds another layer of complexity to discussions about its potential cancellation.
Concerns and Uncertainty
Vega’s comments reflect growing skepticism about the feasibility and community support for the bypass. She highlighted the conflicting information circulating about the project and called for greater clarity.
“There are a lot of conversations going on, a lot of he-said-she-said, and I know there are outside groups who have been pushing for this project for years,” said Vega, who represents homeowners that would be affected by the new roadway. “I definitely think that having an open and transparent discussion is critical.”
Other supervisors echoed the need for clarity and public engagement. Neabsco District Supervisor Victor Angry noted that stakeholders, including Manassas and Manassas Park cities, are also partners in the project. Supervisor Kenny Boddye emphasized the importance of a public discussion, given that voters initially approved the project through a bond referendum.
“This project needs transparency and input from everyone involved. The community deserves an open discussion about whether we move forward or close it out,” Boddye said.
County staff, led by Director of Transportation Rick Canizales, will prepare the resolution and provide additional information about the project’s current status. Supervisors have requested input from all stakeholders, including neighboring jurisdictions and regional partners.
Discussions will also address past collaboration between jurisdictions. Vega and other supervisors questioned whether an executive committee previously tasked with overseeing the project had been active in recent years, potentially contributing to the lack of coordination.
Canceling the Route 28 Bypass Project would likely have significant implications for traffic management and development in Prince William County. Supporters argue that the bypass is essential to alleviating congestion and improving connectivity. Opponents, however, have raised concerns about environmental impacts, community displacement, and the project’s overall cost.
The board’s upcoming discussion on the resolution will serve as a critical juncture for the project, offering supervisors and the public an opportunity to weigh its future.
As Prince William County grows, officials highlight the need for new water sources to meet future demand. A primary concern is the expansion of data centers, which have become a significant consumer of water.
Calvin Farr, General Manager of Prince William Water, explained the county’s projected water needs: "We have dynamic hydraulic models we look at, really, to see if we can handle the additional growth. And if we don't, we identify capital needs. At that point, we put that in our master plan for capital needs that, you know, that is needed to supply additional growth."
This article is for our Locals Only members. Please Sign In or upgrade and Become a Locals Only Member today! Make the smart choice for staying informed about your community. Thank you!
In a meeting on October 8, 2024, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors approved funding for new positions in the Commonwealth Attorney’s Office, addressing the office’s need for additional resources to handle an increasing caseload. The positions include four new attorney roles: paralegal, victim-witness staff, and administrative staff. Commonwealth Attorney Amy Ashworth emphasized the importance of these positions for the efficiency and effectiveness of the county’s criminal justice system.
The new hires come after Ashworth said she would withhold prosecution of certain misdemeanor charges, effective May 1, 2024, if county leaders don’t give her more employees.
During the meeting, Ashworth explained the need for the positions, noting that the Virginia Compensation Board had allocated funding for four attorney positions at $70,000 each, but that amount fell short of what is needed in Northern Virginia. “Obviously, that doesn’t cover what we pay in Northern Virginia for an attorney,” she said. She also worked with the county’s budget office to creatively allocate the funding, ensuring that critical positions would be filled.
Ashworth explained that while the positions were funded for fiscal year 2025, the full costs of the positions will be felt in FY 2026 due to the timing of when the hires are expected to take place. “They’d be active for maybe six or seven months of the remainder of the fiscal year. But in fiscal ’26, they would presumably be hired and filled, and their salaries and benefits would be paid for the entirety of the fiscal year,” she said.
The new positions come after an updated time study from the Supreme Court of Virginia recommended that the Prince William Commonwealth Attorney’s Office be staffed with 61 attorneys, 30 administrative staff, and 15 paralegals. Ashworth pointed out this was an increase from the previous year’s recommendation and highlighted the office’s struggle with understaffing. “We are operating with approximately half of the administrative staff that the time study recommends and approximately half of the paralegals,” she told the board.
Supervisors acknowledged the importance of providing adequate resources to the Commonwealth Attorney’s Office, particularly in light of the increasing demands on the local criminal justice system. Supervisor Bob Weir expressed concern about the funding shortfalls, asking, “Are we on the hook for the delta between the two amounts?” He pointed out that the revenue provided by the Compensation Board did not fully cover the costs associated with the positions.
Supervisor Yesli Vega, who was previously critical of the Commonwealth Attorney’s Office, expressed her support for the additional staffing, recognizing the need for more resources. “I do understand that there is a need and that this continues to be an opportunity for myself and the Commonwealth Attorney to work collaboratively to assure that we’re addressing the needs that the office really has,” she said.
One of the most critical roles approved was for a victim-witness staff member, a position Ashworth emphasized as essential to ensuring that victims and witnesses feel safe and supported when coming to court. “There is a lot of reluctance on the part of people to do that, to be involved. People are afraid that there will be retribution,” she said, explaining the importance of the victim-witness role in helping alleviate those fears and ensuring witnesses are kept informed and supported throughout the legal process.
The discussion also highlighted the need for collaboration between local and state governments to ensure that compensation for critical public safety roles is adequate. “We have to make sure that each of these [departments] have adequate resources,” said Supervisor Andrea Bailey. “Quite frankly, we’re going to continue to have these discussions about how the Compensation Board does their part.”
The new positions are set to be fully incorporated into the FY 2026 budget, and discussions are ongoing about how to fund the shortfalls between state-provided compensation and local needs. Ashworth closed the discussion by expressing gratitude for the board’s support and underscoring the importance of providing adequate resources to maintain a functioning and just legal system.
The Prince William Board of County Supervisors met on Tuesday, October 8, 2024, to discuss a proposal to address the risks associated with street panhandling by offering employment opportunities to those begging on busy streets. The plan, spearheaded by the county's health, wellbeing, and environmental sustainability team, sought to provide panhandlers with jobs paying $13 an hour for two days a week, hoping this alternative would reduce their presence on streets and mitigate safety concerns.
Inspired by similar initiatives in cities like Albuquerque, New Mexico, the program aimed to address panhandling through a multi-faceted approach. This included coordinated community outreach, focused pedestrian violation enforcement, and public engagement efforts encouraging residents to give to local nonprofits instead of handing money directly to panhandlers. The idea was to transition panhandlers into employment while also addressing issues such as addiction and underemployment, which often drive individuals to beg for money.
This article is for our Locals Only members. Please Sign In or upgrade and Become a Locals Only Member today! Make the smart choice for staying informed about your community. Thank you!
A proposal to introduce artificial intelligence (AI) tracking for traffic and pedestrian safety in Prince William County was deferred after a contentious discussion during the Sept. 19, 2024, Board of County Supervisors meeting. If approved, this initiative would mark the first time the county government has used AI technology to track and analyze citizens’ movements.
The initiative aims to enhance traffic safety by deploying AI-enabled camera technology to monitor traffic patterns and analyze near-miss incidents at 26 high-risk locations throughout the county, including non-vehicular near misses. This gives the impression that the AI will use equipment that can differentiate different people. The proposed locations are scattered throughout the county and primarily encompass the Routes 1 and 234 corridors in Woodbridge and the Manassas areas, respectively.
This article is for our Locals Only members. Please Sign In or upgrade and Become a Locals Only Member today! Make the smart choice for staying informed about your community. Thank you!
Supervisor Yesli Vega has put forth a proposal to explore providing a tax break for terminally ill residents in the county, aiming to ease the financial burden on families dealing with the high costs of medical care.
At the recent Prince William Board of County Supervisors meeting, Vega directed county staff to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the potential implementation of the tax break. Vega emphasized the importance of providing relief to residents who are struggling with the financial challenges that come with terminal illness.
“If you’ve ever had a loved one or know somebody that is going through something as a terminal disease, it could be very challenging,” said Vega, who represents the Coles District. “With the additional stressors added to making it to doctor’s appointments, the cost of medicine, treatment that is not covered by insurance, I think that we owe it to them and to their families that are doing their very best with the cards that they’ve been dealt with to look into this.”
The proposal aims to offer tax relief on real estate or personal property taxes for residents certified as terminally ill. Vega requested the county staff provide a detailed report on how such a program could be implemented, including its financial impact on the county’s revenue.
Board Response and Next Steps
Supervisor Vega’s initiative received general interest from her colleagues on the board, but no formal decisions have been made yet regarding the next steps. As Vega highlighted during her remarks, the goal is to assist families who are facing severe financial strain while dealing with life-threatening illnesses. She compared the proposal to previous initiatives aimed at helping vulnerable communities in the county.
“We certainly saw this board come together with the tax break that we just gave to Wounded Warriors,” Vega noted during the meeting, emphasizing the board’s past support for similar programs.
The analysis will examine the tax break’s financial feasibility and whether similar measures in other counties can be replicated in Prince William County. The board will also consider the broader implications of implementing such a tax break on the county’s budget.
After the county staff completes its analysis, Vega’s proposal will be discussed further in upcoming meetings. The board is expected to revisit the issue in the coming months, with the goal of making a decision before the end of the year.
