Is Frumin running again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:blaming a councilmember for a policy the executive branch put in place before they took office is quite a reach.

the Councilmember can try to get more police in the area (from my vantage point, there is almost always a visible police presence now and has been for a couple of years) and they can try to get more city social service support, but beyond that, I am not quite sure what you expect.

Anyone else find this defense odd? More like a Frumin staffer or friend. And the council member could limit, overhaul or scrap the voucher program to curb the ongoing deterioration of ANC 3F.

Are you really that ignorant or how the DC government works? No, it is not within a council member’s power to scrap a municipal or federal voucher program or declare his ward off limits to said programs. Even speaking out publicly against the shortcomings of the program - many that they were - would likely be very counterproductive.

It is completely within his power to publicly say the residents of 3F have born a disproportionate share of the crime in recent years and ask for a pause in new vouchers until the city can demonstrate it can handle the current voucher population. He could do that tonight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:blaming a councilmember for a policy the executive branch put in place before they took office is quite a reach.

the Councilmember can try to get more police in the area (from my vantage point, there is almost always a visible police presence now and has been for a couple of years) and they can try to get more city social service support, but beyond that, I am not quite sure what you expect.

Anyone else find this defense odd? More like a Frumin staffer or friend. And the council member could limit, overhaul or scrap the voucher program to curb the ongoing deterioration of ANC 3F.

Are you really that ignorant or how the DC government works? No, it is not within a council member’s power to scrap a municipal or federal voucher program or declare his ward off limits to said programs. Even speaking out publicly against the shortcomings of the program - many that they were - would likely be very counterproductive.

It is completely within his power to publicly say the residents of 3F have born a disproportionate share of the crime in recent years and ask for a pause in new vouchers until the city can demonstrate it can handle the current voucher population. He could do that tonight.

He could do that and maybe the performance would give you false hope, but the consequences would be bad for Ward 3.

[Anonymous]

Exactly.

The anti-frumin poster clearly has no idea how the city works functionally or optically. But they should keep going on with their entitled view of the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:blaming a councilmember for a policy the executive branch put in place before they took office is quite a reach.

the Councilmember can try to get more police in the area (from my vantage point, there is almost always a visible police presence now and has been for a couple of years) and they can try to get more city social service support, but beyond that, I am not quite sure what you expect.

Anyone else find this defense odd? More like a Frumin staffer or friend. And the council member could limit, overhaul or scrap the voucher program to curb the ongoing deterioration of ANC 3F.

It’s defensive but not odd. I have a friend who owns a great place in a quiet neighborhood that he intended to rent while on assignment out of the city for a couple of years. He was told he had to an accept a voucher tenant. Landlords can’t discriminate against tenants with vouchers so the likelihood is that any neighborhood with available rentals will get tenants on vouchers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exactly.

The anti-frumin poster clearly has no idea how the city works functionally or optically. But they should keep going on with their entitled view of the world.

Could you please educate us on what this means?

[Anonymous]

You can research what it takes to produce affordable housing nationally and in the District. You can also research the history of racism west of Rock creek Park and you can research how laws are passed in DC, including the composition of the DC Council.

Then you can connect dots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can research what it takes to produce affordable housing nationally and in the District. You can also research the history of racism west of Rock creek Park and you can research how laws are passed in DC, including the composition of the DC Council.

Then you can connect dots.

How does filling my building today with drug addicts and mentally ill men produce affordable housing or punish long dead Ward 3 residents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can research what it takes to produce affordable housing nationally and in the District. You can also research the history of racism west of Rock creek Park and you can research how laws are passed in DC, including the composition of the DC Council.

Then you can connect dots.

ANC 3F — which is most affected by vouchers — was not one of the racist parts of Ward 3. Forest Hills was one of the neighborhoods without a covenant prohibiting Blacks and Jews. So if Frumin is intent on righting the wrongs, he could focus on Spring Valley (which did have a covenant) or his own AU park. But he’s essentially Nimbying a d leaving other parts of Ward 3 to shoulder policies that have significantly increased crime and haven’t shown many benefits beyond enriching landlords.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can research what it takes to produce affordable housing nationally and in the District. You can also research the history of racism west of Rock creek Park and you can research how laws are passed in DC, including the composition of the DC Council.

Then you can connect dots.

ANC 3F — which is most affected by vouchers — was not one of the racist parts of Ward 3. Forest Hills was one of the neighborhoods without a covenant prohibiting Blacks and Jews. So if Frumin is intent on righting the wrongs, he could focus on Spring Valley (which did have a covenant) or his own AU park. But he’s essentially Nimbying a d leaving other parts of Ward 3 to shoulder policies that have significantly increased crime and haven’t shown many benefits beyond enriching landlords.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can research what it takes to produce affordable housing nationally and in the District. You can also research the history of racism west of Rock creek Park and you can research how laws are passed in DC, including the composition of the DC Council.

Then you can connect dots.

ANC 3F — which is most affected by vouchers — was not one of the racist parts of Ward 3. Forest Hills was one of the neighborhoods without a covenant prohibiting Blacks and Jews. So if Frumin is intent on righting the wrongs, he could focus on Spring Valley (which did have a covenant) or his own AU park. But he’s essentially Nimbying a d leaving other parts of Ward 3 to shoulder policies that have significantly increased crime and haven’t shown many benefits beyond enriching landlords.

Those of us who have been following this thread are still waiting for an explanation of what statutory authority the Ward 3 councilmember has to direct vouchers to one part of the city or another or to restructure or pause the implementation of the program. If we are missing something, please let us know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can research what it takes to produce affordable housing nationally and in the District. You can also research the history of racism west of Rock creek Park and you can research how laws are passed in DC, including the composition of the DC Council.

Then you can connect dots.

ANC 3F — which is most affected by vouchers — was not one of the racist parts of Ward 3. Forest Hills was one of the neighborhoods without a covenant prohibiting Blacks and Jews. So if Frumin is intent on righting the wrongs, he could focus on Spring Valley (which did have a covenant) or his own AU park. But he’s essentially Nimbying a d leaving other parts of Ward 3 to shoulder policies that have significantly increased crime and haven’t shown many benefits beyond enriching landlords.

Exactly.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can research what it takes to produce affordable housing nationally and in the District. You can also research the history of racism west of Rock creek Park and you can research how laws are passed in DC, including the composition of the DC Council.

Then you can connect dots.

ANC 3F — which is most affected by vouchers — was not one of the racist parts of Ward 3. Forest Hills was one of the neighborhoods without a covenant prohibiting Blacks and Jews. So if Frumin is intent on righting the wrongs, he could focus on Spring Valley (which did have a covenant) or his own AU park. But he’s essentially Nimbying a d leaving other parts of Ward 3 to shoulder policies that have significantly increased crime and haven’t shown many benefits beyond enriching landlords.

Those of us who have been following this thread are still waiting for an explanation of what statutory authority the Ward 3 councilmember has to direct vouchers to one part of the city or another or to restructure or pause the implementation of the program. If we are missing something, please let us know.

Found it! “The Council’s central role as a legislative body is to make laws.”

https://dccouncil.gov/

[Anonymous]

He doesn't have sole authority to direct vouchers to another part of the city, but it's his literal JOB to advocate for the residents of the ward he represents, who are being negatively impacted by a poorly-run program.

It's his literal JOB to convince, cajole, strong-arm, etc. various parties towards policies that benefit his ward. This is how our system of government works.

If he isn't willing to do his JOB, or is putting the interests of residents from other wards above the interests of the residents he represents, he should find another job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He doesn't have sole authority to direct vouchers to another part of the city, but it's his literal JOB to advocate for the residents of the ward he represents, who are being negatively impacted by a poorly-run program.

It's his literal JOB to convince, cajole, strong-arm, etc. various parties towards policies that benefit his ward. This is how our system of government works.

If he isn't willing to do his JOB, or is putting the interests of residents from other wards above the interests of the residents he represents, he should find another job.

As has been said before on this thread, it would be counterproductive for him to make public criticisms of the program. His predecessor did that for instance and sparked a huge backlash.

You have valid concerns about the program, but this is a sensitive issue by virtue of Ward 3 being the wealthiest part of the city. If you’re interested in exploring how the program can be changed, you should request a meeting with him to discuss.

I strongly suspect that he is doing what he can behind the scenes, but is keeping quiet about it publicly for the reason previously stated.

[Anonymous]

It’s hilarious that when anyone dares criticize Frumin, his supporters come out of the woodwork to say, “He’s just a mere DC Council member, what do you expect him to do?” It’s as if he’s still on the ANC with no real power. Frumin could throw his weight around a bit on this matter but chooses not to because he’s seemingly scared of angering extremely online white leftists (a tiny portion of DC’s population). He pays zero attention to his actual constituents, who are gonna dump him on his mediocre white ass if just one viable opponent steps up.