Election Results

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

Okay. Name all of the anti-bike lane on CT candidates that won. If you can't then bike lanes on CT move forward.

Rick Nash.

That is it. And he lives off Wisconsin Avenue, but happens to be in 3C where Connecticut ave is the focus.

The most important left winger in the entire city government, Elissa Silverman, was thrown out on her ear and replaced with a business friendly centrist Democrat.

Yeah. Browser and the pro business democrats are for bike lane. NYC proved that bike lanes and pedestrian areas are more profitable for the city. Expect bowser and co to continue more bike lanes and pedestrian areas.

Businesses hate bike lanes because they make it harder for people to move about the city, which means they have fewer customers. Not really seeing how NYC is analogous to DC. NYC has a massive subway system that everyone uses. We don't.

1) there is no evidence bike lanes harm businesses, and to the contrary, it is at worst, neutral if not accretive
2) it is far easier to "move about the city" by biking than driving. cheaper and no pollution too

This isn't rocket science. Bike lanes make traffic worse (isn't that kind of the point?). The bike lobby would have you believe that if we make traffic worse, people will switch to bikes from cars. But that's obviously nonsense. People will just stop going to areas that are too difficult to reach. That's not good for businesses or anyone else.

Did you know that in cleveland park, the overwhelming majority of customers to the local businesses walk and bike? They don't drive. Very few of them. Did you know that? So...given that basic information, how do bike lanes hurt the businesses in cleveland ark?

Biking is the least popular form of transportation in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

ANC representatives need to stick to their lane. We're not interested in their opinions on how much the city should spend on Medicaid or what to do with parole violators or what environmental standards restaurants should follow or how much to tax businesses or how much to pay teachers or what they think about any form of transportation.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

Okay. Name all of the anti-bike lane on CT candidates that won. If you can't then bike lanes on CT move forward.

Rick Nash.

That is it. And he lives off Wisconsin Avenue, but happens to be in 3C where Connecticut ave is the focus.

The most important left winger in the entire city government, Elissa Silverman, was thrown out on her ear and replaced with a business friendly centrist Democrat.

Yeah. Browser and the pro business democrats are for bike lane. NYC proved that bike lanes and pedestrian areas are more profitable for the city. Expect bowser and co to continue more bike lanes and pedestrian areas.

Businesses hate bike lanes because they make it harder for people to move about the city, which means they have fewer customers. Not really seeing how NYC is analogous to DC. NYC has a massive subway system that everyone uses. We don't.

1) there is no evidence bike lanes harm businesses, and to the contrary, it is at worst, neutral if not accretive
2) it is far easier to "move about the city" by biking than driving. cheaper and no pollution too

This isn't rocket science. Bike lanes make traffic worse (isn't that kind of the point?). The bike lobby would have you believe that if we make traffic worse, people will switch to bikes from cars. But that's obviously nonsense. People will just stop going to areas that are too difficult to reach. That's not good for businesses or anyone else.

Did you know that in cleveland park, the overwhelming majority of customers to the local businesses walk and bike? They don't drive. Very few of them. Did you know that? So...given that basic information, how do bike lanes hurt the businesses in cleveland ark?

Biking is the least popular form of transportation in DC.

Technically it is scooters, with bicycles coming in a close second to last. More people take an Uber to work than ride a bicycle, which is crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

Okay. Name all of the anti-bike lane on CT candidates that won. If you can't then bike lanes on CT move forward.

Rick Nash.

That is it. And he lives off Wisconsin Avenue, but happens to be in 3C where Connecticut ave is the focus.

The most important left winger in the entire city government, Elissa Silverman, was thrown out on her ear and replaced with a business friendly centrist Democrat.

Yeah. Browser and the pro business democrats are for bike lane. NYC proved that bike lanes and pedestrian areas are more profitable for the city. Expect bowser and co to continue more bike lanes and pedestrian areas.

Businesses hate bike lanes because they make it harder for people to move about the city, which means they have fewer customers. Not really seeing how NYC is analogous to DC. NYC has a massive subway system that everyone uses. We don't.

1) there is no evidence bike lanes harm businesses, and to the contrary, it is at worst, neutral if not accretive
2) it is far easier to "move about the city" by biking than driving. cheaper and no pollution too

This isn't rocket science. Bike lanes make traffic worse (isn't that kind of the point?). The bike lobby would have you believe that if we make traffic worse, people will switch to bikes from cars. But that's obviously nonsense. People will just stop going to areas that are too difficult to reach. That's not good for businesses or anyone else.

Did you know that in cleveland park, the overwhelming majority of customers to the local businesses walk and bike? They don't drive. Very few of them. Did you know that? So...given that basic information, how do bike lanes hurt the businesses in cleveland ark?

Yup - this was actually studied 10 years ago! IIRC about 10% of the CP business customers were driving.

The same study also found that because of low turnover rates on-street parking spaces were in fact serving very small numbers of people - IIRC on some blocks the parking spaces were serving just a couple of dozen cars per day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

You, or another earlier poster, alleged that some unknown ANC had done something inappropriate.

You didn't offer any concrete example of something inappropriate and instead offered this vague complaint about some ANC conduct that doesn't really cover anything that is actually inappropriate or unethical.

So do you have an example?

I already pointed to one clear example: holding a vote on a transportation policy matter that has been presented as somehow reflecting some sort of democratic mandate. Can you point me to where in the legislation it authorizes such votes?

And here are ANC reps holding workshops with a registered lobbying organization on city-wide transportation policy issues. What that has to do with their role as an ANC rep? I have no idea.
https://waba.org/details/anc/

DDOT welcomes ANC resolutions that represent the “consensus” of the views of their communities on matters specifically in the districts.. Consensus is hard to achieve and none of the ANC activity that I am aware of has done anything to build consensus, which does not seem to stop ANC reps from presenting on behalf of their neighbors who don’t share their views.

So it is pretty accurate to say that ANC reps are acting well beyond their very limited mandates.

DDOT conducted a study and asked the ANC's to weigh in on it. After the ANCs weighed in, the ANC's were given 4 options from DDOT and DDOT asked the ANCs to choose among the options. ALL of the ANCs asked for the same option.

What is the problem with that?

There is no problem with it, but it doesn’t represent anything other than the personal opinion of the ANC reps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

You, or another earlier poster, alleged that some unknown ANC had done something inappropriate.

You didn't offer any concrete example of something inappropriate and instead offered this vague complaint about some ANC conduct that doesn't really cover anything that is actually inappropriate or unethical.

So do you have an example?

I already pointed to one clear example: holding a vote on a transportation policy matter that has been presented as somehow reflecting some sort of democratic mandate. Can you point me to where in the legislation it authorizes such votes?

And here are ANC reps holding workshops with a registered lobbying organization on city-wide transportation policy issues. What that has to do with their role as an ANC rep? I have no idea.
https://waba.org/details/anc/

DDOT welcomes ANC resolutions that represent the “consensus” of the views of their communities on matters specifically in the districts.. Consensus is hard to achieve and none of the ANC activity that I am aware of has done anything to build consensus, which does not seem to stop ANC reps from presenting on behalf of their neighbors who don’t share their views.

So it is pretty accurate to say that ANC reps are acting well beyond their very limited mandates.

DDOT conducted a study and asked the ANC's to weigh in on it. After the ANCs weighed in, the ANC's were given 4 options from DDOT and DDOT asked the ANCs to choose among the options. ALL of the ANCs asked for the same option.

What is the problem with that?

There is no problem with it, but it doesn’t represent anything other than the personal opinion of the ANC reps.

Who were elected by the community to represent them. Kinda like how a republic works, right? Is the US a republic? Is DC a representative from of government? If so, then what is the problem? Other than, you are in the minority of people who disagree with the ANC vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

You, or another earlier poster, alleged that some unknown ANC had done something inappropriate.

You didn't offer any concrete example of something inappropriate and instead offered this vague complaint about some ANC conduct that doesn't really cover anything that is actually inappropriate or unethical.

So do you have an example?

I already pointed to one clear example: holding a vote on a transportation policy matter that has been presented as somehow reflecting some sort of democratic mandate. Can you point me to where in the legislation it authorizes such votes?

And here are ANC reps holding workshops with a registered lobbying organization on city-wide transportation policy issues. What that has to do with their role as an ANC rep? I have no idea.
https://waba.org/details/anc/

DDOT welcomes ANC resolutions that represent the “consensus” of the views of their communities on matters specifically in the districts.. Consensus is hard to achieve and none of the ANC activity that I am aware of has done anything to build consensus, which does not seem to stop ANC reps from presenting on behalf of their neighbors who don’t share their views.

So it is pretty accurate to say that ANC reps are acting well beyond their very limited mandates.

DDOT conducted a study and asked the ANC's to weigh in on it. After the ANCs weighed in, the ANC's were given 4 options from DDOT and DDOT asked the ANCs to choose among the options. ALL of the ANCs asked for the same option.

What is the problem with that?

There is no problem with it, but it doesn’t represent anything other than the personal opinion of the ANC reps.

Who were elected by the community to represent them. Kinda like how a republic works, right? Is the US a republic? Is DC a representative from of government? If so, then what is the problem? Other than, you are in the minority of people who disagree with the ANC vote.

You don’t seem to understand that is not their role. Their role is to help to provide lines of communication between neighborhoods and government agencies and in some cases, build consensus with their neighbors and offer resolutions to DDOT on issues directly related to their neighborhood. Before the ANC reps involved identified to DDOT their preference, do you know if any of them engaged in a consensus building process with their neighbors? That was their job. Not substituting their opinion for the opinion of their neighbors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

You, or another earlier poster, alleged that some unknown ANC had done something inappropriate.

You didn't offer any concrete example of something inappropriate and instead offered this vague complaint about some ANC conduct that doesn't really cover anything that is actually inappropriate or unethical.

So do you have an example?

I already pointed to one clear example: holding a vote on a transportation policy matter that has been presented as somehow reflecting some sort of democratic mandate. Can you point me to where in the legislation it authorizes such votes?

And here are ANC reps holding workshops with a registered lobbying organization on city-wide transportation policy issues. What that has to do with their role as an ANC rep? I have no idea.
https://waba.org/details/anc/

DDOT welcomes ANC resolutions that represent the “consensus” of the views of their communities on matters specifically in the districts.. Consensus is hard to achieve and none of the ANC activity that I am aware of has done anything to build consensus, which does not seem to stop ANC reps from presenting on behalf of their neighbors who don’t share their views.

So it is pretty accurate to say that ANC reps are acting well beyond their very limited mandates.

DDOT conducted a study and asked the ANC's to weigh in on it. After the ANCs weighed in, the ANC's were given 4 options from DDOT and DDOT asked the ANCs to choose among the options. ALL of the ANCs asked for the same option.

What is the problem with that?

There is no problem with it, but it doesn’t represent anything other than the personal opinion of the ANC reps.

That sort of is what representative democracy is - you don't like the opinion you run someone with a differing one. Which is what yesterday's election was.

Though in the case of the Connecticut Avenue bike lanes the public comments at the meetings and at least according to the ANC representatives the private ones ran overwhelmingly in favor or Concept C.

Incredibly at the most recent public meeting about the plans at UDC this summer which was well after the anti bike lane folks got organized (4 years into the process) the room was packed and the pro safe street folks outnumbered the pro car folks by about 10 to 1 based on comments and applause.

So it is just possible that the personal opinion you are deriding in fact reflects the sentiment of the community and not yours?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

You, or another earlier poster, alleged that some unknown ANC had done something inappropriate.

You didn't offer any concrete example of something inappropriate and instead offered this vague complaint about some ANC conduct that doesn't really cover anything that is actually inappropriate or unethical.

So do you have an example?

I already pointed to one clear example: holding a vote on a transportation policy matter that has been presented as somehow reflecting some sort of democratic mandate. Can you point me to where in the legislation it authorizes such votes?

And here are ANC reps holding workshops with a registered lobbying organization on city-wide transportation policy issues. What that has to do with their role as an ANC rep? I have no idea.
https://waba.org/details/anc/

DDOT welcomes ANC resolutions that represent the “consensus” of the views of their communities on matters specifically in the districts.. Consensus is hard to achieve and none of the ANC activity that I am aware of has done anything to build consensus, which does not seem to stop ANC reps from presenting on behalf of their neighbors who don’t share their views.

So it is pretty accurate to say that ANC reps are acting well beyond their very limited mandates.

DDOT conducted a study and asked the ANC's to weigh in on it. After the ANCs weighed in, the ANC's were given 4 options from DDOT and DDOT asked the ANCs to choose among the options. ALL of the ANCs asked for the same option.

What is the problem with that?

There is no problem with it, but it doesn’t represent anything other than the personal opinion of the ANC reps.

Who were elected by the community to represent them. Kinda like how a republic works, right? Is the US a republic? Is DC a representative from of government? If so, then what is the problem? Other than, you are in the minority of people who disagree with the ANC vote.

You don’t seem to understand that is not their role. Their role is to help to provide lines of communication between neighborhoods and government agencies and in some cases, build consensus with their neighbors and offer resolutions to DDOT on issues directly related to their neighborhood. Before the ANC reps involved identified to DDOT their preference, do you know if any of them engaged in a consensus building process with their neighbors? That was their job. Not substituting their opinion for the opinion of their neighbors.

No that is not the statutory role of an ANC at all - you are suggesting some weird version of direct democracy where an ANC commissioner goes and knocks on doors until they have he opinion of every single resident. Which is impossible - we'd rule by referendum if that was the appropriate model but it is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

You, or another earlier poster, alleged that some unknown ANC had done something inappropriate.

You didn't offer any concrete example of something inappropriate and instead offered this vague complaint about some ANC conduct that doesn't really cover anything that is actually inappropriate or unethical.

So do you have an example?

I already pointed to one clear example: holding a vote on a transportation policy matter that has been presented as somehow reflecting some sort of democratic mandate. Can you point me to where in the legislation it authorizes such votes?

And here are ANC reps holding workshops with a registered lobbying organization on city-wide transportation policy issues. What that has to do with their role as an ANC rep? I have no idea.
https://waba.org/details/anc/

DDOT welcomes ANC resolutions that represent the “consensus” of the views of their communities on matters specifically in the districts.. Consensus is hard to achieve and none of the ANC activity that I am aware of has done anything to build consensus, which does not seem to stop ANC reps from presenting on behalf of their neighbors who don’t share their views.

So it is pretty accurate to say that ANC reps are acting well beyond their very limited mandates.

DDOT conducted a study and asked the ANC's to weigh in on it. After the ANCs weighed in, the ANC's were given 4 options from DDOT and DDOT asked the ANCs to choose among the options. ALL of the ANCs asked for the same option.

What is the problem with that?

There is no problem with it, but it doesn’t represent anything other than the personal opinion of the ANC reps.

Who were elected by the community to represent them. Kinda like how a republic works, right? Is the US a republic? Is DC a representative from of government? If so, then what is the problem? Other than, you are in the minority of people who disagree with the ANC vote.

This seems a little ridiculous. No one cares what ANCs think about public policy matters. That's not part of their job description.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

You, or another earlier poster, alleged that some unknown ANC had done something inappropriate.

You didn't offer any concrete example of something inappropriate and instead offered this vague complaint about some ANC conduct that doesn't really cover anything that is actually inappropriate or unethical.

So do you have an example?

I already pointed to one clear example: holding a vote on a transportation policy matter that has been presented as somehow reflecting some sort of democratic mandate. Can you point me to where in the legislation it authorizes such votes?

And here are ANC reps holding workshops with a registered lobbying organization on city-wide transportation policy issues. What that has to do with their role as an ANC rep? I have no idea.
https://waba.org/details/anc/

DDOT welcomes ANC resolutions that represent the “consensus” of the views of their communities on matters specifically in the districts.. Consensus is hard to achieve and none of the ANC activity that I am aware of has done anything to build consensus, which does not seem to stop ANC reps from presenting on behalf of their neighbors who don’t share their views.

So it is pretty accurate to say that ANC reps are acting well beyond their very limited mandates.

DDOT conducted a study and asked the ANC's to weigh in on it. After the ANCs weighed in, the ANC's were given 4 options from DDOT and DDOT asked the ANCs to choose among the options. ALL of the ANCs asked for the same option.

What is the problem with that?

There is no problem with it, but it doesn’t represent anything other than the personal opinion of the ANC reps.

Who were elected by the community to represent them. Kinda like how a republic works, right? Is the US a republic? Is DC a representative from of government? If so, then what is the problem? Other than, you are in the minority of people who disagree with the ANC vote.

You don’t seem to understand that is not their role. Their role is to help to provide lines of communication between neighborhoods and government agencies and in some cases, build consensus with their neighbors and offer resolutions to DDOT on issues directly related to their neighborhood. Before the ANC reps involved identified to DDOT their preference, do you know if any of them engaged in a consensus building process with their neighbors? That was their job. Not substituting their opinion for the opinion of their neighbors.

When was the last time ANC 3 C acted as you described, particularly under the liong timer serving, now departing former Chair?
Answer: Never.

ANC 3C acted the same way for the last two years as it did for the previous 25. Nothing changed except the results of votes taken on the Dais.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

You, or another earlier poster, alleged that some unknown ANC had done something inappropriate.

You didn't offer any concrete example of something inappropriate and instead offered this vague complaint about some ANC conduct that doesn't really cover anything that is actually inappropriate or unethical.

So do you have an example?

I already pointed to one clear example: holding a vote on a transportation policy matter that has been presented as somehow reflecting some sort of democratic mandate. Can you point me to where in the legislation it authorizes such votes?

And here are ANC reps holding workshops with a registered lobbying organization on city-wide transportation policy issues. What that has to do with their role as an ANC rep? I have no idea.
https://waba.org/details/anc/

DDOT welcomes ANC resolutions that represent the “consensus” of the views of their communities on matters specifically in the districts.. Consensus is hard to achieve and none of the ANC activity that I am aware of has done anything to build consensus, which does not seem to stop ANC reps from presenting on behalf of their neighbors who don’t share their views.

So it is pretty accurate to say that ANC reps are acting well beyond their very limited mandates.

DDOT conducted a study and asked the ANC's to weigh in on it. After the ANCs weighed in, the ANC's were given 4 options from DDOT and DDOT asked the ANCs to choose among the options. ALL of the ANCs asked for the same option.

What is the problem with that?

There is no problem with it, but it doesn’t represent anything other than the personal opinion of the ANC reps.

That sort of is what representative democracy is - you don't like the opinion you run someone with a differing one. Which is what yesterday's election was.

Though in the case of the Connecticut Avenue bike lanes the public comments at the meetings and at least according to the ANC representatives the private ones ran overwhelmingly in favor or Concept C.

Incredibly at the most recent public meeting about the plans at UDC this summer which was well after the anti bike lane folks got organized (4 years into the process) the room was packed and the pro safe street folks outnumbered the pro car folks by about 10 to 1 based on comments and applause.

So it is just possible that the personal opinion you are deriding in fact reflects the sentiment of the community and not yours?

You think ANC reps are some form of representative Democracy? This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Furthermore, and this part is clear, any recommendations they offer to DDOT are purely their own unless they were formed by consensus of their neighborhood. So yes, it is only their opinion, nothing less, nothing more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

You, or another earlier poster, alleged that some unknown ANC had done something inappropriate.

You didn't offer any concrete example of something inappropriate and instead offered this vague complaint about some ANC conduct that doesn't really cover anything that is actually inappropriate or unethical.

So do you have an example?

I already pointed to one clear example: holding a vote on a transportation policy matter that has been presented as somehow reflecting some sort of democratic mandate. Can you point me to where in the legislation it authorizes such votes?

And here are ANC reps holding workshops with a registered lobbying organization on city-wide transportation policy issues. What that has to do with their role as an ANC rep? I have no idea.
https://waba.org/details/anc/

DDOT welcomes ANC resolutions that represent the “consensus” of the views of their communities on matters specifically in the districts.. Consensus is hard to achieve and none of the ANC activity that I am aware of has done anything to build consensus, which does not seem to stop ANC reps from presenting on behalf of their neighbors who don’t share their views.

So it is pretty accurate to say that ANC reps are acting well beyond their very limited mandates.

DDOT conducted a study and asked the ANC's to weigh in on it. After the ANCs weighed in, the ANC's were given 4 options from DDOT and DDOT asked the ANCs to choose among the options. ALL of the ANCs asked for the same option.

What is the problem with that?

There is no problem with it, but it doesn’t represent anything other than the personal opinion of the ANC reps.

Who were elected by the community to represent them. Kinda like how a republic works, right? Is the US a republic? Is DC a representative from of government? If so, then what is the problem? Other than, you are in the minority of people who disagree with the ANC vote.

You don’t seem to understand that is not their role. Their role is to help to provide lines of communication between neighborhoods and government agencies and in some cases, build consensus with their neighbors and offer resolutions to DDOT on issues directly related to their neighborhood. Before the ANC reps involved identified to DDOT their preference, do you know if any of them engaged in a consensus building process with their neighbors? That was their job. Not substituting their opinion for the opinion of their neighbors.

What you are describing has never been how any ANC in DC has ever operated in the 50 years they have been in existence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

You, or another earlier poster, alleged that some unknown ANC had done something inappropriate.

You didn't offer any concrete example of something inappropriate and instead offered this vague complaint about some ANC conduct that doesn't really cover anything that is actually inappropriate or unethical.

So do you have an example?

I already pointed to one clear example: holding a vote on a transportation policy matter that has been presented as somehow reflecting some sort of democratic mandate. Can you point me to where in the legislation it authorizes such votes?

And here are ANC reps holding workshops with a registered lobbying organization on city-wide transportation policy issues. What that has to do with their role as an ANC rep? I have no idea.
https://waba.org/details/anc/

DDOT welcomes ANC resolutions that represent the “consensus” of the views of their communities on matters specifically in the districts.. Consensus is hard to achieve and none of the ANC activity that I am aware of has done anything to build consensus, which does not seem to stop ANC reps from presenting on behalf of their neighbors who don’t share their views.

So it is pretty accurate to say that ANC reps are acting well beyond their very limited mandates.

DDOT conducted a study and asked the ANC's to weigh in on it. After the ANCs weighed in, the ANC's were given 4 options from DDOT and DDOT asked the ANCs to choose among the options. ALL of the ANCs asked for the same option.

What is the problem with that?

There is no problem with it, but it doesn’t represent anything other than the personal opinion of the ANC reps.

That sort of is what representative democracy is - you don't like the opinion you run someone with a differing one. Which is what yesterday's election was.

Though in the case of the Connecticut Avenue bike lanes the public comments at the meetings and at least according to the ANC representatives the private ones ran overwhelmingly in favor or Concept C.

Incredibly at the most recent public meeting about the plans at UDC this summer which was well after the anti bike lane folks got organized (4 years into the process) the room was packed and the pro safe street folks outnumbered the pro car folks by about 10 to 1 based on comments and applause.

So it is just possible that the personal opinion you are deriding in fact reflects the sentiment of the community and not yours?

You think ANC reps are some form of representative Democracy? This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Furthermore, and this part is clear, any recommendations they offer to DDOT are purely their own unless they were formed by consensus of their neighborhood. So yes, it is only their opinion, nothing less, nothing more.

This is utter nonsense.

Of course ANC's are a version of representative democracy - please explain how they are not?

What ANC's are not is legislators or even decision makers as all ANC's do is Advise.

So if it is so clear maybe you can explain it because so far you are just offering your opinions.

And you need to use the magic google tool and look up the word consensus because it means something other than what you think it means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

You, or another earlier poster, alleged that some unknown ANC had done something inappropriate.

You didn't offer any concrete example of something inappropriate and instead offered this vague complaint about some ANC conduct that doesn't really cover anything that is actually inappropriate or unethical.

So do you have an example?

I already pointed to one clear example: holding a vote on a transportation policy matter that has been presented as somehow reflecting some sort of democratic mandate. Can you point me to where in the legislation it authorizes such votes?

And here are ANC reps holding workshops with a registered lobbying organization on city-wide transportation policy issues. What that has to do with their role as an ANC rep? I have no idea.
https://waba.org/details/anc/

DDOT welcomes ANC resolutions that represent the “consensus” of the views of their communities on matters specifically in the districts.. Consensus is hard to achieve and none of the ANC activity that I am aware of has done anything to build consensus, which does not seem to stop ANC reps from presenting on behalf of their neighbors who don’t share their views.

So it is pretty accurate to say that ANC reps are acting well beyond their very limited mandates.

DDOT conducted a study and asked the ANC's to weigh in on it. After the ANCs weighed in, the ANC's were given 4 options from DDOT and DDOT asked the ANCs to choose among the options. ALL of the ANCs asked for the same option.

What is the problem with that?

There is no problem with it, but it doesn’t represent anything other than the personal opinion of the ANC reps.

Who were elected by the community to represent them. Kinda like how a republic works, right? Is the US a republic? Is DC a representative from of government? If so, then what is the problem? Other than, you are in the minority of people who disagree with the ANC vote.

This seems a little ridiculous. No one cares what ANCs think about public policy matters. That's not part of their job description.

ANCs weighing in on things like transportation policy seem a bit like interns at work volunteering their opinions to the president of the company and everyone is like "thanks, but no one is asking you."