Stabbing at The Connecticut House 4500 block Connecticut Ave NW in Forest Hills just before 8 pm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 had not one, but two chances to elect a different CM who would have fought to try and pause the voucher program. Instead we get the one guy that actually wants more of this.

One more month and the recall process can be started. A message needs to be sent.

Happy to sign. I voted for Goulet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Recall Frumin.

yes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why am I paying a premium to live in this neighborhood?

Frumin believes that Ward 3 owes something to the city. Promises made, promises kept.

You will be waiting a long time for Matt Frumin to tweet about or otherwise bring attention to this issue. It’s as important to him as a literal dumpster fire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People wanted “urban vibrancy” in Ward 3.

e
W3 already has multiple shelters, several halfway houses and the PIW, kind of the new St. Es.

It's never enough for activists. A decade ago D.C. had 5,900 homeless. The activists said they know the perfect solution, just give them all houses, and the problem will go away. Now we have over 8,000 people given free housing with vouchers (well over the number of homeless we had a decade ago), on top of that we have all of the new homeless shelters Bowser built in every Ward in the city, and a ton of other housing programs D.C. has. Yet now we have tent cities we never had in the past.

The response from our progress ANC commissioners? Oh, these plans would have worked, if the city was just allowed to build even more shelters:

Every time we try a progressive policy and it fails miserably, doing the opposite of what progressives claim, they double down and say "well, if we did twice as much it would have worked." I love how these people love to talk about induced demand when it comes to traffic, but think it's impossible to exist when it comes to giving free stuff to the homeless.

D.C. Crime Facts has some good data, but they usually have some pretty stupid takes about how Ward 3 has to continually give up more as well:

When Councilmembers were underfunding the police in order to shrink the force, they explicitly said they were doing so because higher crime poorer wards were "overpoliced." Now that the number of police are down, people want to take the police from Ward 3 because they say the higher crime poorer wards are now underpoliced. Beautiful two-step plan to make sure no has any police.

It's not just the police, either; crime prevention programs that target the more high crime areas (see the recent plan to increase cameras, or the previous plan to charge gun offenders federally) are attacked and stopped because activists say it's racist to target these areas. Then when crime prevention methods target richer areas, the activists say it's racist that the poorer areas aren't getting the resources.

[Anonymous]

Recall Bowser. These programs are hers, not the Council. It is an executive agency placing the tenants. It is an executive agency not providing basic screening. It is an executive agency not ensuring the tenants are law-abiding. (And don’t give me that HUD housing First only requires one in-person site visit per month. That’s a minimum, not a maximum. And I’ll bet that isn’t even taking place.)

It is Bowser. Start there with the recall petition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Recall Bowser. These programs are hers, not the Council. It is an executive agency placing the tenants. It is an executive agency not providing basic screening. It is an executive agency not ensuring the tenants are law-abiding. (And don’t give me that HUD housing First only requires one in-person site visit per month. That’s a minimum, not a maximum. And I’ll bet that isn’t even taking place.)



It is Bowser. Start there with the recall petition.

This. It is NOT going to get better. And Bowsee is surrounded by weak leadership that isn’t capable of fully advising her. Look at her Chief of Staff, Deputy Mayor of Public Safety and the leaderless, invisible MOLC (that is supposed to advise all of the agencies).

I’ve been in DC for over 20 years and for the first time get nervous walking to my car after work.

[Anonymous]

If DC needs more housing for vagrants then I suggest they expand the jail first.

[Anonymous]

Recall Bowser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Recall Bowser. These programs are hers, not the Council. It is an executive agency placing the tenants. It is an executive agency not providing basic screening. It is an executive agency not ensuring the tenants are law-abiding. (And don’t give me that HUD housing First only requires one in-person site visit per month. That’s a minimum, not a maximum. And I’ll bet that isn’t even taking place.)

It is Bowser. Start there with the recall petition.

Right. But Bowser is intentionally doing this to Ward 3 to help her standing in the other Wards. Our Ward 3 and to a lesser extent the At Large members should not be complicit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Recall Bowser. These programs are hers, not the Council. It is an executive agency placing the tenants. It is an executive agency not providing basic screening. It is an executive agency not ensuring the tenants are law-abiding. (And don’t give me that HUD housing First only requires one in-person site visit per month. That’s a minimum, not a maximum. And I’ll bet that isn’t even taking place.)

It is Bowser. Start there with the recall petition.

Right. But Bowser is intentionally doing this to Ward 3 to help her standing in the other Wards. Our Ward 3 and to a lesser extent the At Large members should not be complicit.

Frumin says that Ward 3 needs to be more “welcoming.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Recall Bowser. These programs are hers, not the Council. It is an executive agency placing the tenants. It is an executive agency not providing basic screening. It is an executive agency not ensuring the tenants are law-abiding. (And don’t give me that HUD housing First only requires one in-person site visit per month. That’s a minimum, not a maximum. And I’ll bet that isn’t even taking place.)



It is Bowser. Start there with the recall petition.

This. It is NOT going to get better. And Bowsee is surrounded by weak leadership that isn’t capable of fully advising her. Look at her Chief of Staff, Deputy Mayor of Public Safety and the leaderless, invisible MOLC (that is supposed to advise all of the agencies).

I’ve been in DC for over 20 years and for the first time get nervous walking to my car after work.

Bowser appointed all of this weak leadership that surrounds her. This is her team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People wanted “urban vibrancy” in Ward 3.

e
W3 already has multiple shelters, several halfway houses and the PIW, kind of the new St. Es.

It's never enough for activists. A decade ago D.C. had 5,900 homeless. The activists said they know the perfect solution, just give them all houses, and the problem will go away. Now we have over 8,000 people given free housing with vouchers (well over the number of homeless we had a decade ago), on top of that we have all of the new homeless shelters Bowser built in every Ward in the city, and a ton of other housing programs D.C. has. Yet now we have tent cities we never had in the past.

The response from our progress ANC commissioners? Oh, these plans would have worked, if the city was just allowed to build even more shelters:

Every time we try a progressive policy and it fails miserably, doing the opposite of what progressives claim, they double down and say "well, if we did twice as much it would have worked." I love how these people love to talk about induced demand when it comes to traffic, but think it's impossible to exist when it comes to giving free stuff to the homeless.

D.C. Crime Facts has some good data, but they usually have some pretty stupid takes about how Ward 3 has to continually give up more as well:

When Councilmembers were underfunding the police in order to shrink the force, they explicitly said they were doing so because higher crime poorer wards were "overpoliced." Now that the number of police are down, people want to take the police from Ward 3 because they say the higher crime poorer wards are now underpoliced. Beautiful two-step plan to make sure no has any police.

It's not just the police, either; crime prevention programs that target the more high crime areas (see the recent plan to increase cameras, or the previous plan to charge gun offenders federally) are attacked and stopped because activists say it's racist to target these areas. Then when crime prevention methods target richer areas, the activists say it's racist that the poorer areas aren't getting the resources.

On the one hand W3 should lose police to high gun crime areas, but if they make a lot of arrests and there is prosecution, it's inequitable.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/04/politics/black-prosecutors-dc-gun-cases/index.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Recall Bowser. These programs are hers, not the Council. It is an executive agency placing the tenants. It is an executive agency not providing basic screening. It is an executive agency not ensuring the tenants are law-abiding. (And don’t give me that HUD housing First only requires one in-person site visit per month. That’s a minimum, not a maximum. And I’ll bet that isn’t even taking place.)

It is Bowser. Start there with the recall petition.

Harder to do. Frumin is possible though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Recall Bowser. These programs are hers, not the Council. It is an executive agency placing the tenants. It is an executive agency not providing basic screening. It is an executive agency not ensuring the tenants are law-abiding. (And don’t give me that HUD housing First only requires one in-person site visit per month. That’s a minimum, not a maximum. And I’ll bet that isn’t even taking place.)

It is Bowser. Start there with the recall petition.

Harder to do. Frumin is possible though.

Who is the ANC Commissioner for these buildings? They need to go too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People wanted “urban vibrancy” in Ward 3.

e
W3 already has multiple shelters, several halfway houses and the PIW, kind of the new St. Es.

It's never enough for activists. A decade ago D.C. had 5,900 homeless. The activists said they know the perfect solution, just give them all houses, and the problem will go away. Now we have over 8,000 people given free housing with vouchers (well over the number of homeless we had a decade ago), on top of that we have all of the new homeless shelters Bowser built in every Ward in the city, and a ton of other housing programs D.C. has. Yet now we have tent cities we never had in the past.

The response from our progress ANC commissioners? Oh, these plans would have worked, if the city was just allowed to build even more shelters:

Every time we try a progressive policy and it fails miserably, doing the opposite of what progressives claim, they double down and say "well, if we did twice as much it would have worked." I love how these people love to talk about induced demand when it comes to traffic, but think it's impossible to exist when it comes to giving free stuff to the homeless.

D.C. Crime Facts has some good data, but they usually have some pretty stupid takes about how Ward 3 has to continually give up more as well:

When Councilmembers were underfunding the police in order to shrink the force, they explicitly said they were doing so because higher crime poorer wards were "overpoliced." Now that the number of police are down, people want to take the police from Ward 3 because they say the higher crime poorer wards are now underpoliced. Beautiful two-step plan to make sure no has any police.

It's not just the police, either; crime prevention programs that target the more high crime areas (see the recent plan to increase cameras, or the previous plan to charge gun offenders federally) are attacked and stopped because activists say it's racist to target these areas. Then when crime prevention methods target richer areas, the activists say it's racist that the poorer areas aren't getting the resources.

Homeless, Inc. is a multi-billion dollar industry.

By focusig on housing, the pols will get the kickbacks they always have in DC.

By NOT focusing on mental illness and addiction, they are misery profiteers with a never ending supply of "victims." With the kindling effect it is the height of cruelty not to try to stabilize people as quickly as possible and keep them stable, not doing so GUARANTEES worsening mental illness for that person that will be harder to effectively treat in the future. It's disgusting.