MoCo Council Vote Today

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can’t we build on green space up i270? I’m sure land would be cheaper.

And then add more people who ahve to drive everywhere on roads that are already overcongested. hence focusing housing in transit corridors, you know, the way the rest of the world does it.

While I agree with that, it would be harder to make housing affordable to middle-class people in Bethesda, Chevy Chase, and parts of Rockville. While we should work toward that goal, it would be wise to have alternatives in the meantime. I don’t believe this new housing in the previously mentioned areas will be affordable for a two-person household with a $150,000 annual income.

Affordability will be relative to the other homes in the local area, and relative to what prices would ultimately do without the additional supply.

Realistically, yes, new construction close-in is going to be expensive. But unless we reduce the wide gap being the housing supply and the growing demand year-over-year, housing costs will continue to grow faster than incomes can accommodate.

There's no quick fix here. This change certainly isn't going to fix the affordable housing problem on its own, but it will at least help to limit how quickly things get worse.

This is a reasonable, fact-based case for this proposal. Why do you think the sponsors and the members who voted for it thought they had to lie about what the ZTA does by pretending the housing will be affordable for teachers? This ridiculous lie about it being “workforce” housing drove my skepticism of the bill, especially considering that the implied rent at 120 percent AMI is more than $3,000 a month and more than a third higher the current average rent in the county.

Unfortunately, people are idiots and don't understand the nuance here.

Also, there's a strong "me me me" attitude in MoCo. While immediate self-interests obviously drive public policy decisions everywhere, the consideration of those versus long-term public needs is particularly stark in MoCo politics.

Basically, we have too many rich, old people downcounty driving politics who are more concerned about poor, brown people moving into their neighborhoods during the last 10-20 years of their lives than they are about addressing long-term housing problems.

This bill clearly isn’t going to add poor people to wealthy neighborhoods because even the income-restricted housing will only be affordable if you’re well above median income. To the extent that you’re right about what drove opposition, the lies stoked that opposition, which doesn’t make sense as a political strategy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh I read it.
Your "plan" seems to be asking people to give up 5% of ____ if they truly support affordable housing. Got it. Good luck with that.

I think the other poster is alluding to people like MoCo's NIMBY-in-chief who point to subsidies as the solution to affordable housing without pushing the corresponding tax increases necessary to fund them.

The only person who has pushed subsidies without funding them is Andrew Friedson. Friedson’s subsidies were for market rate housing, so maybe that’s why you didn’t include them. If Friedson’s most recent PILOT works, the county will be out a billion in tax revenue. Friedson didn’t fund his Metro subsidy either. That one hasn’t generated much housing but it did produce some apartments that rent for $10k a month.

Elrich points to low-income subsidies as the solution to affordable housing, with no serious attempt to push the tax increases necessary to fund them (which would be ridiculous to do at a county level anyway).

But maybe you're dismissing that because Elrich obviously just doesn't want the poors in the county. He has no true desire for such subsidies, but needs to say something on affordable housing.

Elrich has pushed tax increases the past two budgets. Friedson voted against both of them (while voting for all the spending, which calls into question his reputation as a budget guru) and the council rejected the last one. Elrich also approved a recordation tax increase, a portion of which goes to one of the affordable housing funds. This is weird revisionism on your part.

The tax and budget increases Elrich has sought wouldn't go to significantly expanding low-income housing subsidies. It's not just a matter of increasing taxes, but also what (and how much) that money would go to.

So you’re for canceling the subsidies for market rate development and redirecting them to affordable housing construction?

[Anonymous]

To those of us who want to preserve our SFM neighborhoods -- I was encouraged to hear a story on NPR this morning about how Arlington tried this expanded zoning thing two years ago (they call it "missing middle"). Residents sued to prevent the change and the county lost. It's now on appeal.

I expect MoCo will face similar litigation to defend action.

[Anonymous]

I’m seriously thinking about running for council in the primary with the sole platform of reversing this vote and ending the political career of whatever at-large member I would replace.

I will serve one term, and not run again. No reelection campaign to accept donations from developers for, no way to buy me.

I just want to help wreck the council as it currently is composed. FIRE THEM ALL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To those of us who want to preserve our SFM neighborhoods -- I was encouraged to hear a story on NPR this morning about how Arlington tried this expanded zoning thing two years ago (they call it "missing middle"). Residents sued to prevent the change and the county lost. It's now on appeal.

I expect MoCo will face similar litigation to defend action.

And they will lose, just like Arlington did.

You people need to stop using the tactics of Trump to sue anyone or anything you don't like. There's nothing, nothing illegal or unconstitutional with these housing reforms. Of course lawyers will take your money, and you'll probably delay it a year or so, but you will lose.

Pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh I read it.
Your "plan" seems to be asking people to give up 5% of ____ if they truly support affordable housing. Got it. Good luck with that.

I'm not asking anything. I'm pointing out that the cries of "affordable housing" are fake. NIMBYs don't care about affordable housing.

NP, and this is exactly right.

Here's a thought experiment - say that this zoning change was the same in every way, but that it required true affordable housing, or workforce housing. And also assume that the magical revenue fairy was going to underwrite the costs of that affordable/workforce housing. Does anyone think, for one second, that the people complaining "it doesn't *really* provide workforce housing" would support it?

Of course not - because their real objection is that they don;t want to live near people who live in affordable/workforce housing, because they are too poor (if you're being charitable) or too brown (if you're not).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those of us who want to preserve our SFM neighborhoods -- I was encouraged to hear a story on NPR this morning about how Arlington tried this expanded zoning thing two years ago (they call it "missing middle"). Residents sued to prevent the change and the county lost. It's now on appeal.

I expect MoCo will face similar litigation to defend action.

And they will lose, just like Arlington did.

You people need to stop using the tactics of Trump to sue anyone or anything you don't like. There's nothing, nothing illegal or unconstitutional with these housing reforms. Of course lawyers will take your money, and you'll probably delay it a year or so, but you will lose.

Pathetic.

Locking it up in a legal battle is a win. The council needs checks and balances. Clearly they don't listen to the residents actually impacted by these plans.

The Moco Council is only interested in hypothetical residents rather than their constituents who fund the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh I read it.
Your "plan" seems to be asking people to give up 5% of ____ if they truly support affordable housing. Got it. Good luck with that.

I'm not asking anything. I'm pointing out that the cries of "affordable housing" are fake. NIMBYs don't care about affordable housing.

NP, and this is exactly right.

Here's a thought experiment - say that this zoning change was the same in every way, but that it required true affordable housing, or workforce housing. And also assume that the magical revenue fairy was going to underwrite the costs of that affordable/workforce housing. Does anyone think, for one second, that the people complaining "it doesn't *really* provide workforce housing" would support it?

Of course not - because their real objection is that they don;t want to live near people who live in affordable/workforce housing, because they are too poor (if you're being charitable) or too brown (if you're not).

I’m surprised to see an advocate of this proposal admit so quickly that it was based on a lie.

I would have supported this proposal if it had no workforce or affordable housing component instead of the lies. The lies made me skeptical of the proposal because the sponsors never were clear about their real objectives. If you have to lie about something to get support, you’re probably not doing something good.

The crowd that showed up to oppose this had a lot brown people in it. But maybe you don’t really see brown people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those of us who want to preserve our SFM neighborhoods -- I was encouraged to hear a story on NPR this morning about how Arlington tried this expanded zoning thing two years ago (they call it "missing middle"). Residents sued to prevent the change and the county lost. It's now on appeal.

I expect MoCo will face similar litigation to defend action.

And they will lose, just like Arlington did.

You people need to stop using the tactics of Trump to sue anyone or anything you don't like. There's nothing, nothing illegal or unconstitutional with these housing reforms. Of course lawyers will take your money, and you'll probably delay it a year or so, but you will lose.

Pathetic.

Locking it up in a legal battle is a win. The council needs checks and balances. Clearly they don't listen to the residents actually impacted by these plans.

The Moco Council is only interested in hypothetical residents rather than their constituents who fund the county.

They don't listen? Dude, you are outnumbered by like 3-1. You all lost the elections to pro-housing candidates. Your platform is not popular.

Just because you scream the loudest doesn't mean you have the most support. Another page out of the Trump playbook you take, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those of us who want to preserve our SFM neighborhoods -- I was encouraged to hear a story on NPR this morning about how Arlington tried this expanded zoning thing two years ago (they call it "missing middle"). Residents sued to prevent the change and the county lost. It's now on appeal.

I expect MoCo will face similar litigation to defend action.

And they will lose, just like Arlington did.

You people need to stop using the tactics of Trump to sue anyone or anything you don't like. There's nothing, nothing illegal or unconstitutional with these housing reforms. Of course lawyers will take your money, and you'll probably delay it a year or so, but you will lose.

Pathetic.

We just need a better suit

It’s fine, at this point it’s just for entertainment because the county seems determined to do whatever they want. Let’s have some fun with it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those of us who want to preserve our SFM neighborhoods -- I was encouraged to hear a story on NPR this morning about how Arlington tried this expanded zoning thing two years ago (they call it "missing middle"). Residents sued to prevent the change and the county lost. It's now on appeal.

I expect MoCo will face similar litigation to defend action.

And they will lose, just like Arlington did.

You people need to stop using the tactics of Trump to sue anyone or anything you don't like. There's nothing, nothing illegal or unconstitutional with these housing reforms. Of course lawyers will take your money, and you'll probably delay it a year or so, but you will lose.

Pathetic.

Locking it up in a legal battle is a win. The council needs checks and balances. Clearly they don't listen to the residents actually impacted by these plans.

The Moco Council is only interested in hypothetical residents rather than their constituents who fund the county.

They don't listen? Dude, you are outnumbered by like 3-1. You all lost the elections to pro-housing candidates. Your platform is not popular.

Just because you scream the loudest doesn't mean you have the most support. Another page out of the Trump playbook you take, I guess.

Dude bro man, you can’t demonstrate that to be true any more than you can demonstrate that trumps polices are widely popular because he was elected.

Do you love Trump? Do you blindly accept this policies because he was elected? According to you you should just STFU and enjoy it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those of us who want to preserve our SFM neighborhoods -- I was encouraged to hear a story on NPR this morning about how Arlington tried this expanded zoning thing two years ago (they call it "missing middle"). Residents sued to prevent the change and the county lost. It's now on appeal.

I expect MoCo will face similar litigation to defend action.

And they will lose, just like Arlington did.

You people need to stop using the tactics of Trump to sue anyone or anything you don't like. There's nothing, nothing illegal or unconstitutional with these housing reforms. Of course lawyers will take your money, and you'll probably delay it a year or so, but you will lose.

Pathetic.

Locking it up in a legal battle is a win. The council needs checks and balances. Clearly they don't listen to the residents actually impacted by these plans.

The Moco Council is only interested in hypothetical residents rather than their constituents who fund the county.

They don't listen? Dude, you are outnumbered by like 3-1. You all lost the elections to pro-housing candidates. Your platform is not popular.

Just because you scream the loudest doesn't mean you have the most support. Another page out of the Trump playbook you take, I guess.

Lmao, you bandaids cries about Elrich every day. Was he not elected?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh I read it.
Your "plan" seems to be asking people to give up 5% of ____ if they truly support affordable housing. Got it. Good luck with that.

I'm not asking anything. I'm pointing out that the cries of "affordable housing" are fake. NIMBYs don't care about affordable housing.

NP, and this is exactly right.

Here's a thought experiment - say that this zoning change was the same in every way, but that it required true affordable housing, or workforce housing. And also assume that the magical revenue fairy was going to underwrite the costs of that affordable/workforce housing. Does anyone think, for one second, that the people complaining "it doesn't *really* provide workforce housing" would support it?

Of course not - because their real objection is that they don;t want to live near people who live in affordable/workforce housing, because they are too poor (if you're being charitable) or too brown (if you're not).

I’m surprised to see an advocate of this proposal admit so quickly that it was based on a lie.

I would have supported this proposal if it had no workforce or affordable housing component instead of the lies. The lies made me skeptical of the proposal because the sponsors never were clear about their real objectives. If you have to lie about something to get support, you’re probably not doing something good.

The crowd that showed up to oppose this had a lot brown people in it. But maybe you don’t really see brown people?

The white YImBYs absolutely do not care as long as they get to play sim city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those of us who want to preserve our SFM neighborhoods -- I was encouraged to hear a story on NPR this morning about how Arlington tried this expanded zoning thing two years ago (they call it "missing middle"). Residents sued to prevent the change and the county lost. It's now on appeal.

I expect MoCo will face similar litigation to defend action.

And they will lose, just like Arlington did.

You people need to stop using the tactics of Trump to sue anyone or anything you don't like. There's nothing, nothing illegal or unconstitutional with these housing reforms. Of course lawyers will take your money, and you'll probably delay it a year or so, but you will lose.

Pathetic.

Locking it up in a legal battle is a win. The council needs checks and balances. Clearly they don't listen to the residents actually impacted by these plans.

The Moco Council is only interested in hypothetical residents rather than their constituents who fund the county.

Absolutely. I bet that we could delay it for years, maybe long enough that the current crop of electeds have failed up or out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those of us who want to preserve our SFM neighborhoods -- I was encouraged to hear a story on NPR this morning about how Arlington tried this expanded zoning thing two years ago (they call it "missing middle"). Residents sued to prevent the change and the county lost. It's now on appeal.

I expect MoCo will face similar litigation to defend action.

And they will lose, just like Arlington did.

You people need to stop using the tactics of Trump to sue anyone or anything you don't like. There's nothing, nothing illegal or unconstitutional with these housing reforms. Of course lawyers will take your money, and you'll probably delay it a year or so, but you will lose.

Pathetic.

Locking it up in a legal battle is a win. The council needs checks and balances. Clearly they don't listen to the residents actually impacted by these plans.

The Moco Council is only interested in hypothetical residents rather than their constituents who fund the county.

They don't listen? Dude, you are outnumbered by like 3-1. You all lost the elections to pro-housing candidates. Your platform is not popular.

Just because you scream the loudest doesn't mean you have the most support. Another page out of the Trump playbook you take, I guess.

Lmao, you bandaids cries about Elrich every day. Was he not elected?

They are crying about elected official Elrich right now! Hurt feelings because he tells the truth. Sad.