Approved Materials - Reston Community Center

March 4, 2013 Board of Governors Meeting Minutes
how many of the online comments are from repeat persons. As it stands right now, we are at a roughly
2:1 favorable ratio for the proposed center. She indicated that we are being extremely transparent with
the engagement process and she hopes there will be public input at Board meetings at some point soon.
She also said that we will send reminders for the upcoming meetings, with special emphasis placed on
inviting the public to the March 25 meeting.
Roger asked Leila for a summary of the public input. She reported that people that are in favor are
enthusiastic and are largely supportive of an aquatics center for both competitive and therapeutic
swimmers. Additional interests include basketball courts, fitness features and multipurpose rooms. She
thinks the public commentary is reflective of what was voiced at the February 11 Community Relations
and Program/Policy Joint Committee Meeting.
Leila said she was invited to and attended the recent Reston Association Board meeting. They asked for
more details on the proposed center, including a concept plan. Leila told them we don’t have a plan since
this engagement process would determine that plan. At the meeting, Mike Sanio, RA Board member,
asked why we didn’t include or incorporate indoor tennis. Leila responded that indoor tennis is not in
RCC’s “wheelhouse.” It is a Reston Association asset that RCC has no intention of interfering with. At
the Reston Association meeting, someone said that Reston was owed more Fairfax County general funds
for recreation. Leila told the Reston Association Board that our RCC Board members agree, but a
unanimous desire for something does not necessarily result in action. She told them that the RCC Board
would pursue any potential proffers available through the development of new projects in Reston.
Bill P. indicated that the Reston Master Plan Task Force has demonstrated broad support for both a
recreation center and a performing arts center being realized from new development in Reston. He
suggested that if we could secure proffer money to offset costs related to these amenities it would
diminish pressure on the Small District 5 revenues from taxes.
Bill B. indicated that in the context of Park Authority capital project planning, no new facilities are on their
Capital Improvement Plan (currently describes projects through 2020). There is no money allocated for a
new recreation center in Reston or in all of Fairfax County. Their next ten-year CIP will be presented next
week and their commitments will be to renovations, refurbishments and other costs related to existing
facilities and assets. He indicated that if Reston wants recreation amenities to accommodate current
demands and the increased growth expected with Metro’s arrival, we cannot rely on the County to provide
such amenities in the next decade. He also indicated that if RCC does not proceed with the current
partnership opportunity with the Park Authority to redevelop Baron Cameron Park, there are at least three
other parties (with various plans for the space) that are waiting and hoping to move forward with
concepts for that same opportunity.
There was general discussion surrounding the concerns expressed by members of the public such as
funding for a new recreation facility, location, and traffic related to impacts of the arrival of the Wiehle
Metro stop. The Board members agreed that since they are all community members as well, they share
these same concerns and are committed to considering all of them as they proceed with the community
engagement process.
Old Business:
There was no old business.
New Business:
MOTION #5:
To Enter Into Closed Session to Discuss a Personnel Matter
Bill B. moved to enter into closed session pursuant to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, chapter
2.2-3705, Section 1, to discuss a personnel matter. Roger seconded the motion. The motion passed
unanimously.
Cristin Bratt left the room for the closed session.
MOTION #6:
To Reconvene in Open Session
- 3 -