Residents urge council to approve Willard Sherwood community center; speakers stress accessibility, cost and services

Multiple residents and organizational representatives used the city’s public‑comment period on Feb. 24 to press the City Council to approve the Willard Sherwood Community Center project and to explain why they believe the donated county site is preferable to renovating Green Acres.

Barbara Smith, chair of the Fairfax City Young at Heart Senior Advisory Council, said the current Green Acres building has accessibility and maintenance problems and noted the Willard Sherwood site is served by a bus line and is closer to many neighborhoods. "If a senior center is more centrally located in Fairfax City, we'd have much more time to frequent restaurants, shops, and grocery stores on our way to and from our activity at the senior center," she said, urging the council to vote yes.

Several other speakers made related arguments: Michael Fabio noted the county would gift land rent‑free and called the Willard Sherwood project "shovel ready," saying delay could increase costs and risk losing $4,000,000 already spent on planning. Charles Paisley presented cost comparisons he said supported new construction: "The city's share of building this new building is approximately $54,900,000," he said, and he cited a higher estimate for repairing Green Acres.

Janice Miller emphasized the project’s environmental design elements — LEED Gold goals, rooftop solar, water‑use reductions, LED lighting, EV charging, native landscaping and stormwater controls — and said green construction can reduce long‑term operating costs. Carolyn Pitches, speaking on behalf of the school board, said the center would deliver childcare, early childhood programming and health services that support student attendance and family stability.

Those who testified urged timely action. Several speakers warned that delaying approval would raise costs, prevent residents (especially older adults) from benefiting in coming years, and could jeopardize intergovernmental partnerships that helped make the project affordable.

What council heard: Broad public support from senior groups, business and school representatives; numerical cost claims and environmental/operational benefits were central to several presenters’ arguments. The council took no formal vote on the project during this meeting; public comment will be part of the record for future deliberations.