Reston Association board directs staff to draft opposition and to share non-privileged details with community groups over Reston National proposal

The Reston Association board on June 25 heard sustained public opposition to a developer proposal for Reston National Golf Course and voted to direct staff to prepare a formal submission to the Fairfax County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors opposing the pending zoning applications.

Why it matters: Speakers representing Rescue Rest and dozens of residents said the proposal would gut open space protections that are part of Reston’s comprehensive plan and the 2007 SSPA governance process. Several speakers accused the applicant of using misleading renderings and urged the RA to mobilize members ahead of a county public hearing scheduled for Sept. 23.

Connie Harky, president of Rescue Rest, told the board members that Reston National should remain an 18-hole course and said, “NVR Inc. is participating in this deceptive behavior… They should be ashamed to be advocating for development on either 18-hole golf course.” Harky asked the board to speak at the county hearing and to coordinate with local organizations to increase member turnout.

Director Frell moved that staff draft a substantive letter and/or resolution to submit to the planning commission and board of supervisors setting out principles the association seeks to preserve (including maintaining the course, prohibiting lights and multi-story driving ranges, and protecting trails and home values). The board asked staff to return a draft for review — Director Frell said she expected a draft by the June 30 special meeting and possible action at the July meeting.

Board debate focused heavily on scope and on how much information the association should disclose to the membership while protecting attorney-client privilege. Director Santa proposed and won an amendment clarifying that transparent information sharing should not include attorney-client privileged material. General counsel warned that legal work product and advice are privileged when provided; several directors urged a fine line between useful public information and privileged legal strategy.

President Travis Johnson and staff noted strong member engagement: staff reported more than 600 survey responses and cited a figure of 91% of respondents backing RA involvement in advocacy. Director Santa and others pointed to that membership input as grounds for proceeding.

What the board did: The board (by recorded votes on motions described at the meeting) instructed staff to draft a document for submission to county bodies and separately approved a motion directing staff to engage in transparent information sharing with recognized community organizations about golf-course advocacy, with a clarifying amendment that excluded attorney-client privileged information from the disclosure. The information-sharing motion was adopted with five in favor, one opposed, and one abstention.

Next steps: Staff will produce the draft submission for board review (the maker asked for a draft to be available on or before the June 30 special meeting, with final action at a future meeting). A Fairfax County Planning Commission public hearing on the matter is scheduled Sept. 23, and the board encouraged members to attend and coordinate with community organizations.

The meeting transcript records multiple accusations that developers used misleading renderings and that course operations have been run down; those claims were made from the public microphone and remain contested in the record. The board did not authorize litigation at this meeting; directors emphasized monitoring, drafting comments, and information-sharing as the immediate course of action.