Voices raise against town charter
By Claire Compton
The majority of responses to a request from Reston representatives Delegate Ken Plum and Senator Janet Howell regarding the RCA's proposed town charter are in, and they range from vehemently opposed to unclear.
Three questions were asked in the letter from Plum and Howell, which was sent to several Reston organizations. Firstly, whether the organization had played any role in developing the proposed charter, whether the organization had had any correspondence with the RCA in preparation of the charter, and finally, a request for an official letter or resolution stating a position on the referendum and proposed charter.
The most recent response has yet to be written, but was decided last night at the Reston Association's board meeting. The RA board voted on a letter that answered no to the first two questions and replied that they did not have enough information to answer the third.
The RA was more encouraging in their response than some of the earlier letters. The first organization to respond, the Reston Town Center Association, replied in a letter dated Oct. 25 that “the RTCA Board of Directors opposes both the referendum and the charter; and opposes the effort to include any property in the Reston Town Center District within the boundaries of a broader town proposal.”
The RTCA stated that position was a result of an anonymous vote by the board.
A letter from the county executive has perhaps been the most harshly-worded in its condemnation of the charter.
Anthony Griffin called the document a “radical proposal that has not been given the careful analysis that any such proposal should warrant,” and said the Board of Supervisors would be opposed to “balkanization of the county.”
RA members expressed more support for the effort, thanking RCA President Mike Corrigan for his work. RA Board President Jenn Blackwell cautioned that the discussion should proceed as to whether Reston could be a town under the proposed charter, not whether it should be a town at all.
All members said they simply didn't have enough information from the charter to state a position either way.
Frank Lynch said he regretted the community discussion had veered toward the confrontational.
“I thought the executive's response was quite honestly condescending and I found it offensive,” he said. “But I don't know what we're doing.”