Washington Post: In D.C., a mayoral critic is on the outs. Again.

[Anonymous]

Any news on the vote?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any news on the vote?

Looks like Bill stays on the board as a non-voting member
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/12/20/dc-council-housing-authority-overhaul-vote/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow -, this is why we don't get good people in public positions. Bill is trying to help people being hurt by the mayor. And he is being subject to personal attacks just for doing his job. Noone is perfect and I don't think silly neighborhood squabbles should distract from housing reform.

Will the needy residents of DC be better off without him as an advocate? Guess y'all think so. You must be a bunch of developers.

It's not "silly neighborhood squabbles". He has actively lobbied against a trail that would make it a million times safer to get around the neighborhood by bike or by walking. Instead, students must risk their lives on one of the busiest streets in NW DC if they want to bike to the new high school. All this because he and his neighbors didn't want to deal with the indignity of people actually using public land behind their houses? WTF?

I'm not a member of the housing board and so can't speak to his behavior there. I guess it is possible that there are people who act completely selfishly on some issues - as he and his fellow NIMBYs have done on the trolley trail - and completely magnanimously on others. But those people are not common and I'm not inclined therefore to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It’s incredible that you can reduce everyone to your own metric of YIMBY/NIMBY good/bad. What a sad way to live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow -, this is why we don't get good people in public positions. Bill is trying to help people being hurt by the mayor. And he is being subject to personal attacks just for doing his job. Noone is perfect and I don't think silly neighborhood squabbles should distract from housing reform.

Will the needy residents of DC be better off without him as an advocate? Guess y'all think so. You must be a bunch of developers.

It's not "silly neighborhood squabbles". He has actively lobbied against a trail that would make it a million times safer to get around the neighborhood by bike or by walking. Instead, students must risk their lives on one of the busiest streets in NW DC if they want to bike to the new high school. All this because he and his neighbors didn't want to deal with the indignity of people actually using public land behind their houses? WTF?

I'm not a member of the housing board and so can't speak to his behavior there. I guess it is possible that there are people who act completely selfishly on some issues - as he and his fellow NIMBYs have done on the trolley trail - and completely magnanimously on others. But those people are not common and I'm not inclined therefore to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It’s incredible that you can reduce everyone to your own metric of YIMBY/NIMBY good/bad. What a sad way to live.

Imagine that someone could launch a campaign to selfishly deny their neighbors' kids a safe way to get to school and then, horror of all horrors, be judged on the basis of those actions! What a world we live in!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow -, this is why we don't get good people in public positions. Bill is trying to help people being hurt by the mayor. And he is being subject to personal attacks just for doing his job. Noone is perfect and I don't think silly neighborhood squabbles should distract from housing reform.

Will the needy residents of DC be better off without him as an advocate? Guess y'all think so. You must be a bunch of developers.

It's not "silly neighborhood squabbles". He has actively lobbied against a trail that would make it a million times safer to get around the neighborhood by bike or by walking. Instead, students must risk their lives on one of the busiest streets in NW DC if they want to bike to the new high school. All this because he and his neighbors didn't want to deal with the indignity of people actually using public land behind their houses? WTF?

I'm not a member of the housing board and so can't speak to his behavior there. I guess it is possible that there are people who act completely selfishly on some issues - as he and his fellow NIMBYs have done on the trolley trail - and completely magnanimously on others. But those people are not common and I'm not inclined therefore to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It’s incredible that you can reduce everyone to your own metric of YIMBY/NIMBY good/bad. What a sad way to live.

Imagine that someone could launch a campaign to selfishly deny their neighbors' kids a safe way to get to school and then, horror of all horrors, be judged on the basis of those actions! What a world we live in!

Imagine someone who thinks their pet cause of a neighborhood sidewalk is more important than ensuring adequate housing for tens of thousands of highly vulnerable people.

Whatever takes someone to that conclusion should probably take a step back to recalibrate their priorities.

[Anonymous]

Noone is going to take that trail to the new schools. It is convenient for a vanishingly small number of families.

I can't believe that useless trail is more important than housing lower income people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow -, this is why we don't get good people in public positions. Bill is trying to help people being hurt by the mayor. And he is being subject to personal attacks just for doing his job. Noone is perfect and I don't think silly neighborhood squabbles should distract from housing reform.

Will the needy residents of DC be better off without him as an advocate? Guess y'all think so. You must be a bunch of developers.

It's not "silly neighborhood squabbles". He has actively lobbied against a trail that would make it a million times safer to get around the neighborhood by bike or by walking. Instead, students must risk their lives on one of the busiest streets in NW DC if they want to bike to the new high school. All this because he and his neighbors didn't want to deal with the indignity of people actually using public land behind their houses? WTF?

I'm not a member of the housing board and so can't speak to his behavior there. I guess it is possible that there are people who act completely selfishly on some issues - as he and his fellow NIMBYs have done on the trolley trail - and completely magnanimously on others. But those people are not common and I'm not inclined therefore to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It’s incredible that you can reduce everyone to your own metric of YIMBY/NIMBY good/bad. What a sad way to live.

Imagine that someone could launch a campaign to selfishly deny their neighbors' kids a safe way to get to school and then, horror of all horrors, be judged on the basis of those actions! What a world we live in!

Imagine someone who thinks their pet cause of a neighborhood sidewalk is more important than ensuring adequate housing for tens of thousands of highly vulnerable people.

Whatever takes someone to that conclusion should probably take a step back to recalibrate their priorities.

Imagine that both are important in different ways, and that a person's actions on one may reflect on their actions on the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Noone is going to take that trail to the new schools. It is convenient for a vanishingly small number of families.

I can't believe that useless trail is more important than housing lower income people.

No one is going to take that trail to the new school under the current conditions
1) Frequently muddy....especially after it rains
2) Not continuous in terms of cycling. Lacks bridges
3) Doesn't connect to Georgetown
4) Doesn't connect to the CCT
5) BTW from Galena to Foxhall is a long walk. Maybe an hour

Hardly anyone uses the trail now because of those conditions.

And frankly, that's the way people who live next to it want to keep it that way....so they can use it as their own backyard.

The trail goes directly behind the school. So if the city puts money into it, people will use it.

And people like Slover and many others want as few people as possible using that trail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any news on the vote?

Looks like he was removed and is no longer on the committee
https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/583007/bowser-won-her-new-dcha-board-is-there-any-reason-to-believe-it-will-make-a-difference/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow -, this is why we don't get good people in public positions. Bill is trying to help people being hurt by the mayor. And he is being subject to personal attacks just for doing his job. Noone is perfect and I don't think silly neighborhood squabbles should distract from housing reform.

Will the needy residents of DC be better off without him as an advocate? Guess y'all think so. You must be a bunch of developers.

It's not "silly neighborhood squabbles". He has actively lobbied against a trail that would make it a million times safer to get around the neighborhood by bike or by walking. Instead, students must risk their lives on one of the busiest streets in NW DC if they want to bike to the new high school. All this because he and his neighbors didn't want to deal with the indignity of people actually using public land behind their houses? WTF?

I'm not a member of the housing board and so can't speak to his behavior there. I guess it is possible that there are people who act completely selfishly on some issues - as he and his fellow NIMBYs have done on the trolley trail - and completely magnanimously on others. But those people are not common and I'm not inclined therefore to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It’s incredible that you can reduce everyone to your own metric of YIMBY/NIMBY good/bad. What a sad way to live.

Imagine that someone could launch a campaign to selfishly deny their neighbors' kids a safe way to get to school and then, horror of all horrors, be judged on the basis of those actions! What a world we live in!

Imagine someone who thinks their pet cause of a neighborhood sidewalk is more important than ensuring adequate housing for tens of thousands of highly vulnerable people.

Whatever takes someone to that conclusion should probably take a step back to recalibrate their priorities.

Imagine that both are important in different ways, and that a person's actions on one may reflect on their actions on the other.

Imagine thinking that a positions on a new sidewalk should take precedence or “weigh on” the importance of housing for the most poor families in the city. Seriously get a grip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any news on the vote?

Looks like he was removed and is no longer on the committee
https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/583007/bowser-won-her-new-dcha-board-is-there-any-reason-to-believe-it-will-make-a-difference/

At some point Bowser is going to need to be held accountable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any news on the vote?

Looks like he was removed and is no longer on the committee
https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/583007/bowser-won-her-new-dcha-board-is-there-any-reason-to-believe-it-will-make-a-difference/

At some point Bowser is going to need to be held accountable.

She was just re-elected handily. What we're seeing is her using her mandate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any news on the vote?

Looks like he was removed and is no longer on the committee
https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/583007/bowser-won-her-new-dcha-board-is-there-any-reason-to-believe-it-will-make-a-difference/

At some point Bowser is going to need to be held accountable.

She was just re-elected handily. What we're seeing is her using her mandate.

Her mandate was to cover up for her prior decade of mismanagement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any news on the vote?

Looks like he was removed and is no longer on the committee
https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/583007/bowser-won-her-new-dcha-board-is-there-any-reason-to-believe-it-will-make-a-difference/

At some point Bowser is going to need to be held accountable.

She was just re-elected handily. What we're seeing is her using her mandate.

Her mandate was to cover up for her prior decade of mismanagement?

That seems to be the message from the voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any news on the vote?

Looks like he was removed and is no longer on the committee
https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/583007/bowser-won-her-new-dcha-board-is-there-any-reason-to-believe-it-will-make-a-difference/

At some point Bowser is going to need to be held accountable.

She was just re-elected handily. What we're seeing is her using her mandate.

Her mandate was to cover up for her prior decade of mismanagement?

Her mandate presumably was to do more of what she's been doing. That is generally the mandate when the voters re-elect incumbents.