Last Halloween eve, a public meeting was held led by three local elected officials and leaders of the Reston Citizens Association (RCA) to discuss a referendum on Reston becoming a town. The meeting was requested by Del. Ken Plum, acting on behalf of himself, state Sen. Janet Howell and Supervisor Cathy Hudgins following a well-attended RCA press conference announcing the progress of the petition drive for the Town Referendum. Petitions have been signed by nearly 4,000 Restons asking the state to authorize a referendum so the people of Reston can decide for themselves whether or not to incorporate as a town. After all, founder Robert Simon always intended his unique planned community to be a town.

The meeting, according to Plum, was to be a working meeting. About 60 people filled the room, the majority being supporters of the referendum including two candidates for supervisor, Marie Huhtala and Spike Williams, incumbent School Board representative Stu Gibson and his challenger Christine Arakelian, and a score of people with signs calling for “democracy for Reston” and to “let the people decide.” However, Plum had declared that since it was a “meeting” and not a “hearing,” no one but the politicians and RCA leaders would be allowed to speak.

The agenda included delivery of the petitions, discussion of the draft town charter and setting the agenda for a follow-on meeting to plan legislation for the referendum. Accordingly, Jane Wong, a constant presence gathering petition signatures at Reston grocery stores, presented a 4-inch stack of signed petitions to Del. Plum. As she handed Plum the petitions, she told him the 3,700 signatures expressed the wishes of his constituents for the right to decide the future of their community in a referendum. Regrettably, Del. Plum and Sen. Howell, both running unopposed for re-election, never acknowledged that they heard those voices.

The meeting agenda called for a presumably constructive discussion of a draft Town Charter with the elected officials, who until that evening had claimed neutrality on the town question while waiting to hear from the community. All three, especially Howell and Plum, had been vigorous advocates for town status before becoming legislators. But, one week before this election, their demeanor suggested much less than neutrality. As RCA President Mike Corrigan carefully presented the draft charter section by section, Plum and Howell, in particular, repeatedly nitpicked and questioned in a most negative tone. Not once did they offer a positive suggestion. Their questions or arguments ranged from the valid in a few cases to mostly puzzling to the outright absurd and obviously ill-intentioned. For example, Plum said he found it just incredible that the Reston town would cost less than smaller Herndon or Vienna — although it had been pointed out that this town would not include many expensive services provided by both, such as police, fire department, water and others. Howell, at one point, opined that she doubted that Reston Interfaith would want to be “coordinated” by a town. And all three politicians bemoaned the great difficulty getting approval for a new town by the legislature in Richmond, or in Hudgins’ case, getting it past the rigorous review of the Board of Supervisors. All three know that in fact the way their respective august bodies work is when a proposal comes from a legislator or supervisor and applies within their district only, it gains automatic approval. Hudgins, who in 2005 and 2006 voted for 262 out of 263 development proposals, certainly knows this. So do Plum and Howell.

Next time: Some reactions to this performance.