Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:C'mon folks. We can get to 1000 replies on this thread. Three to go!

Okay, but honestly maybe the same 3 people care. This is really an issue for your ANC meeting.

It's very possible to see one ANC supporting it (the one to the north) and the other ANC having major concerns (the one to the west and south).

[Anonymous]

The closest ANC Commissioners in 3C and 3F support the pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The closest ANC Commissioners in 3C and 3F support the pool.

Not quite, amigo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The closest ANC Commissioners in 3C and 3F support the pool.

Not quite, amigo.

how so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The closest ANC Commissioners in 3C and 3F support the pool.

Not quite, amigo.

Margie Siegel and David the new guy both have told me to my face that they fully support the pool. If either tell you something different then they are lying to one of us.

[Anonymous]

Margie Siegel is a liar then and folks should show up at the next ANC meeting and ask her in public what her views are. This is a big deal and she needs to be on the record

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Margie Siegel is a liar then and folks should show up at the next ANC meeting and ask her in public what her views are. This is a big deal and she needs to be on the record

How about you run against her on the single issue aand let the voters decide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Margie Siegel is a liar then and folks should show up at the next ANC meeting and ask her in public what her views are. This is a big deal and she needs to be on the record

How about you run against her on the single issue aand let the voters decide.

Single issue? More than that to take on with her. That said, if people are saying she is duplicitous on the pool, she needs to state clearly what her views are. Let the cards fall where they may.

[Anonymous]

If no one with a contrary view is running against her then what difference does it make?

[Anonymous]

Except at a conceptual level, it's hard for any thoughtful person to decide whether one is for or against the pool proposal until we see where it will be sited, what tradeoffs are involved with building it and how impacts will be addressed. It is concerning that Miss Cheh et all have not provided any details in this regard yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Except at a conceptual level, it's hard for any thoughtful person to decide whether one is for or against the pool proposal until we see where it will be sited, what tradeoffs are involved with building it and how impacts will be addressed. It is concerning that Miss Cheh et all have not provided any details in this regard yet.

That isn't how the question is (was) posedz

It was Q. pool at Hearst? A. Yes

Now, no matter how crazy the design, it has to happen per the Council vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Margie Siegel is a liar then and folks should show up at the next ANC meeting and ask her in public what her views are. This is a big deal and she needs to be on the record

How about you run against her on the single issue aand let the voters decide.

Single issue? More than that to take on with her. That said, if people are saying she is duplicitous on the pool, she needs to state clearly what her views are. Let the cards fall where they may.

Got to agree here, and I am really so far from caring about this issue. I don't live nearby, we belong to a private pool. However PP doesn't need to run against her to think it's reasonable for her to go on record either "for" or "against." It's not Hillary Clinton, she can't slime her way out of everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Except at a conceptual level, it's hard for any thoughtful person to decide whether one is for or against the pool proposal until we see where it will be sited, what tradeoffs are involved with building it and how impacts will be addressed. It is concerning that Miss Cheh et all have not provided any details in this regard yet.

That isn't how the question is (was) posedz

It was Q. pool at Hearst? A. Yes

Now, no matter how crazy the design, it has to happen per the Council vote.

Building a pool at Hearst will involve a substantial transformation of the southern half of the park -- field, lawn, trees, tennis courts, all will be impacted. DPR and Cheh's staff obviously know this, but don't want to say it publicly until the pool project is too far along to derail.

[Anonymous]

It's always easier to stop something that let it go forward. If she comes out for the pool before the election she loses. So many people in her area are against it.

[Anonymous]

There are people who literally will chain themselves to those 100 year-old oaks in Hearst Park to prevent them from being cut down for the Mary Cheh Pool.