Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[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:Maybe the fairest idea is to put Option C to a voter referendum in Ward 3 next year?

The decision has been made. The city is moving forward with this, and there is nothing the complaining public can do about it. The voters spoke through the ANCs and Councilmember and Mayor who all supported and moved this decision forward.

And, even if the decision hadn't been made, should we put ever new speed hump and liquor license on a referrendum as well?

We live ins a representative democracy, where we elect leaders to make these decisions. That is what happened here.

ANCs are not elected leaders. It's an unpaod volunteer liason position

Prepare to have your mind blown: https://anc.dc.gov/page/anc-elections

Yes they are elected but they are not leaders and their role is advisory. They are supposed to just be community liasons.

no you are wrong.

Advisory Neighborhood Commission

+1. Almost every ANC Rep is unopposed. So all you need is 25 warm bodies to sign a petition and you get the job. This should not entitle anyone to make major transportation decisions. Especially a 25 year old single childless nonprofit worker who’s parents still help him with the rent.

The ANC did not make any decisions.

DDOT announced a process. The ANCs up and down CT Ave held public meetings. DDOT held public meetings, ANCs took input and passed resolutions supporting a concept that was presented by DDOT.

DDOT went down that path based on global best practices and the Mayor personally made the decision. It was supported by our elected Councilmember and the various ANCs with almost unanimity.

So how do you see it as a bunch of 25 year olds?

DDOT announced a process after receiving multiple ANC Resolutions from ANC commissioners who were trained and financed by the bike community. The tail has always been wagging the dog here.

You have a very vivid imagination. Unfortunately it bears no relation whatsoever to what happens in the real world.

For real. This is a wild conspiracy theory that the tiniest amount of sunlight will debunk. Trained by the bike community? Who exactly has been trained by the bike community? Name names. Who has been financed by the bike community? Again, name names. Who is your "bike community" exactly?

https://ggwash.org/view/86058/so-you-might-want-to-run-for-anc-our-training-is-here-to-help

A link to a website that offers training does not support your assertion. Something like 2 of the ANC commissioners throughout the Conn Ave corridor opposed adding bike lanes, out of 23 commissioners. You're saying that 20ish commissioners were trained by GGW and financed by the *checks notes* volunteers in the bike community?

You refuse to name names. Why is that? Is it because you're full of it?

Deafening silence here.

[Anonymous]

I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

Please read the ANC oath of office. It says nothing about representing constituents’ views and doing so could violate the oath of office if such views contradict the best interests of the District.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

Have you considered there are more apartment and condo dwellers than there are SFH dwellers, and they are listening to the constituents who are reaching out to them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

The commissioner you're referring to listens to everyone. Just because he does not obey you does not mean he hasn't been listening. Some of the whispers about him are not just ill-informed but are flat out racist. One of the most absurd ones some of your people have been pushing has been that he is a foreign billionaire behind the redistricting in Cleveland Park using a Trump-affiliated group. Literally insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

Please read the ANC oath of office. It says nothing about representing constituents’ views and doing so could violate the oath of office if such views contradict the best interests of the District.

You're now arguing that an ANC is not supposed to represent their neighborhood's views? You've gone off the deep end

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

The commissioner you're referring to listens to everyone. Just because he does not obey you does not mean he hasn't been listening. Some of the whispers about him are not just ill-informed but are flat out racist. One of the most absurd ones some of your people have been pushing has been that he is a foreign billionaire behind the redistricting in Cleveland Park using a Trump-affiliated group. Literally insane.

If they are mocking their neighbors then no, they are not listening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

Please read the ANC oath of office. It says nothing about representing constituents’ views and doing so could violate the oath of office if such views contradict the best interests of the District.

You're now arguing that an ANC is not supposed to represent their neighborhood's views? You've gone off the deep end

You are either too lazy to bother to read the oath or have too poor reading comprehension to understand it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

The commissioner you're referring to listens to everyone. Just because he does not obey you does not mean he hasn't been listening. Some of the whispers about him are not just ill-informed but are flat out racist. One of the most absurd ones some of your people have been pushing has been that he is a foreign billionaire behind the redistricting in Cleveland Park using a Trump-affiliated group. Literally insane.

If they are mocking their neighbors then no, they are not listening.

Can you point to an example of that commissioner mocking neighbors? You can't because he doesn't. Please don't spread lies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

The commissioner you're referring to listens to everyone. Just because he does not obey you does not mean he hasn't been listening. Some of the whispers about him are not just ill-informed but are flat out racist. One of the most absurd ones some of your people have been pushing has been that he is a foreign billionaire behind the redistricting in Cleveland Park using a Trump-affiliated group. Literally insane.

If they are mocking their neighbors then no, they are not listening.

Can you point to an example of that commissioner mocking neighbors? You can't because he doesn't. Please don't spread lies.

You're the one that said you could identify them based on three pieces of information. 1) they mock their constituent neighbors 2) they think everyone should live in a small apartments and 3) they think everyone should ride a bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

The commissioner you're referring to listens to everyone. Just because he does not obey you does not mean he hasn't been listening. Some of the whispers about him are not just ill-informed but are flat out racist. One of the most absurd ones some of your people have been pushing has been that he is a foreign billionaire behind the redistricting in Cleveland Park using a Trump-affiliated group. Literally insane.

If they are mocking their neighbors then no, they are not listening.

Can you point to an example of that commissioner mocking neighbors? You can't because he doesn't. Please don't spread lies.

You're the one that said you could identify them based on three pieces of information. 1) they mock their constituent neighbors 2) they think everyone should live in a small apartments and 3) they think everyone should ride a bike.

Wow, nice attempt at gaslighting. You folks repeatedly claim these things about him without any support. It's why you stay anonymous here.

[Anonymous]

All the baseless accusations about ANC candidates really need to stop. Nobody is in the pocket of developers or foreign interests. Nobody is just trying to maximize their home price.

There are genuine disagreements about the role that an ANC member should play, what the neighborhood's priorities should be, and in particular how to address density and transit. Those disagreements are normal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

The commissioner you're referring to listens to everyone. Just because he does not obey you does not mean he hasn't been listening. Some of the whispers about him are not just ill-informed but are flat out racist. One of the most absurd ones some of your people have been pushing has been that he is a foreign billionaire behind the redistricting in Cleveland Park using a Trump-affiliated group. Literally insane.

If they are mocking their neighbors then no, they are not listening.

Can you point to an example of that commissioner mocking neighbors? You can't because he doesn't. Please don't spread lies.

You're the one that said you could identify them based on three pieces of information. 1) they mock their constituent neighbors 2) they think everyone should live in a small apartments and 3) they think everyone should ride a bike.

Wow, nice attempt at gaslighting. You folks repeatedly claim these things about him without any support. It's why you stay anonymous here.

What exactly is gaslighting about that? That is the exact information from which you made an identification. I don't know who was being discussed from that but you seem to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

Please read the ANC oath of office. It says nothing about representing constituents’ views and doing so could violate the oath of office if such views contradict the best interests of the District.

You're now arguing that an ANC is not supposed to represent their neighborhood's views? You've gone off the deep end

You are either too lazy to bother to read the oath or have too poor reading comprehension to understand it.

According to you, "it says nothing about representing constituents' views and doing so would violate the oath".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea about the GGW, CPSG training, etc. I will say that Cleveland Park has suffered with some urbanist commissioners who do not listen to or respect the views of constituents, opting instead to promote their own views. In some cases, the commissioners have openly mocked their constituents. One commissioner is now desperately trying to show that he does respect constituents in a bid to get reelected, but people are on to him, as evidenced by a post last night. It's the job of an ANC commissioner to represent the neighborhood. If you don't want to do that, get another job.

Please read the ANC oath of office. It says nothing about representing constituents’ views and doing so could violate the oath of office if such views contradict the best interests of the District.

You're now arguing that an ANC is not supposed to represent their neighborhood's views? You've gone off the deep end

You are either too lazy to bother to read the oath or have too poor reading comprehension to understand it.

According to you, "it says nothing about representing constituents' views and doing so would violate the oath".

You can’t even quote correctly.