Scores of people showed up at the continued meeting of the Board of Supervisors on July 27, toting signs and wearing buttons. Many expected a landmark decision from the supervisors that could further ignite the county's already exploding home-building bonanza.
What they got instead was an hour-long wait while the board was in closed session, then a good view of the supervisors' debating next year's comprehensive plan amendment process. After 45 minutes of discussion, the meeting was adjourned. By that point, about a dozen of the original attending citizens remained in the boardroom.
The spontaneous upswelling of citizen participation was driven by a pair of Washington Post items in that day's paper. The first, an article in the Metro section, said that the board had met repeatedly "in secret" to discuss the possible settlement of over a hundred lawsuits filed against the previous board. The lawsuits were filed by developers and property owners who took issue with the previous board's restrictions on growth. The second item was an editorial on the same topic.
Supervisors denied that any decision would be made in secret, and that, in fact, any decision was slated for that day's meeting at all.
"I find it interesting that all these people showed up that expected there would be some kind of sweeping action," said Supervisor Mick Staton (R-Sugarland Run). Settling over a hundred lawsuits in one move would be "ludicrous," he added.
"I think this panic was generated," Staton said. He noted that no motions are ever made in closed session.
Supervisor Bruce Tulloch (R-Potomac) had strong words when the Post's staff writer attempted to question him during a break.
"Put this in your paper," Tulloch said as he stood on the dais glaring down at the writer. "The only thing that said things were going to be settled was you — the Washington Post."
He then walked away.
A CLOSED SESSION, or executive session, is usually held at each business meeting of the board. When the board resumes open session, a member reads a statement that "no formal action was taken" during closed session.
Supervisor Lori Waters (R-Broad Run) read the statement after the supervisors took their seats, stressing each word. Applause broke out from the audience.
Phil Lo Presti, a 30-year eastern Loudoun resident and Democrat (he wore the only non-growth-related button in the room, supporting presidential candidate John Kerry; "I'm one of the people they say don't exist," he half-joked) noted that executive session is an important part of the governing process. It is necessary for matters of personnel, safety and litigation, he said.
"I think the perception is that it's being abused," Lo Presti said as he sat in a roomful of people hefting signs that said things like "No secret votes" and "I'm a Citizen, Remember Me?"
During the hour the supervisors were in executive session, citizens expressed their concerns about the ramifications of settling the lawsuits, a move which would essentially reverse the previous board's slow-growth approach.
"We're afraid. Parents are afraid the quality of life will be diminished," said Susan Klimek Buckley, who recently co-founded the Eastern Loudoun Civic Network in an attempt to raise awareness among homeowners about many issues, including the negative effects of rapid growth.
"The more uncontrolled growth there is, there's going to be an impact on every single person in Loudoun County," she said.
Longtime Purcellville resident Joe Bane, however, carried a "Loudoun Says No To Snob Zoning" sign and worried about property rights if the lawsuits were not settled. He said that a cash-strapped farmer couldn't sell a piece of his land under the previous board's rezoning.
"When people are going after your right to private property, they're going after your freedom," Bane said.