The fact that you like him does not mean that he has been even remotely honest on this important issue. |
Sounds like this is a market rate building, so yeah, a problem given that landlords can upgrade and raise rents by right, so denser development is the only way to get committed AH units. If the landlord violated code that is up to staff to address, I don't know wha t happened with your complaint. but of course my point was merely that the debate (which has been vigorous on AH) might actually have taken up some of their time, along with many other issues. It does seem we are becoming polarized and its harder and harder to engage with each other. I am trying to respond in good faith however. |
It is to be proposed by the bidder. They want to do the design process with the community, and could not have done so until the issue became public, AFAICT. |
If their time is being eaten up, then cut down on unnecessary nonsense at meetings. The PY metro issue is incredibly important. The City induced people to move there, to buy property there, relying on this Metro access. The City know the whole time that it was lying. The whole council and the senior staff clearly knew. That's just plain stealing. |
You say you are responding in good faith yet have been incredibly dismissive of just how bad this is or how badly people feel towards the City. City allows landlords to allow buildings to fall into disrepair while tenants are still there paying rent because the landlord wants to redevelop? Well yea, that happens is your response. Do you understand how dismissive that is and how that leads directly into "yep, city sure as shootin doesn't care about AH"? And your response "I mean I know that to you the question of the southern entrance to the metro station is huge" - again, so unbelievably dismissive about a situation that is a BIG FREAKIN DEAL to people. I don't even LIVE in PY and I'm impacted by this and upset about it. And a new metro station IS a huge deal for the City of Alexandria. But your responding by acting like people are nuts for thinking the council, mayor, and vice mayor shirked their duty by not doing anything to get citizens informed about the changes. Look, you obviously are pro VM. Maybe you know him personally and know him to be a good man. But he, along with the rest of the people involved, massively messed up here. And pretending they didn't isn't doing him any good. This is a moment for a come to god, We Messed Up And We're Sorry response, not "why are you so mad, bruh?" |
There's no reason they couldn't have asked bidders to study feasibility and present options for the community though, as part of their July 2017 RFP amendment. The fact that they did not... is meaningful, I think. We also know the city can't find anything in writing from WMATA saying this was confidential (and one email to the contrary) - so as far as I'm concerned, "until the issue became public" was in Alexandria's hands to control. |
No, but given that the discussion here is speculative and circumstantial (not one document from that FOIA request shows him lying, or discussing being dishonest, or even being flippant about the needs of the public) I think it justifies the priors I use in interpretating his actions. Just as though I don't like the Mayor, I don't think she is a closet Republican, say, or motivated by anything other than her sincere (though IMO misguided) beliefs. |
Excuse me. I think the City needs to enfore code, of course. If a building owner is violating code and the City is ignoring it that is a big deal, but I think I would have heard about. If the landlord is not in violation than there probably IS nothing the City can do about it. Unethical of the landlord, but I am not here to judge (unnamed) landlords. rather to discuss the upcoming election. And, I think the change to PY is unfortunate, but AFAICT not the City's fault. And I am not sure communicating that in 2018 instead of June 2017 IS a big deal. Though I also am far more optimistic about how the station will work for south PY than others are. |
It's the city's fault. And widely communicating it right away (which the city could have done) would have prevented any claim that the city committed a fraud. |
I am not quite sure of that, but I am sure we will be hearing more about the details of the procurement process. And again, I do not see anything in the FOIA documents in which anyone at T&ES actually says "yeah, WMATA says the NDA does not apply" I do not think we have yet seen staff's side of things on this. But anyway, it seems clear that staff's decision not to open a public discussion of 'path C' was consistent with their belief they should not share the absence of a southern mezzanine. |
The change is the City's fault? How? The bids came in too high, and there was nothing else they could cut without bigger consequences. Or are we back to not communicating is the City's fault. See the conflation of different things - anger at the substance, the claims about a "coverup" and the conflation of errors by City staff with with dishonesty by CMs' is one of the reasons I am so put off by the angry people here. It seems of a piece with the kind of free association anger that charecterizes so many vocal people in the City. |
What did the city do to make sure people were informed of the change? Can you tell me one thing they did to push FOR the release of information rather than against it? |
The city induced thousands of people to rely on that south entrance. When the city chose to hush up (and it was the city's choice, not a confidentiality requirement), the city's behavior was just plain dirty. Whether that decision was the council's or the city manager's or the deputy's or whomever doesn't;t matter. If it was a mistake, there was a year to fix it, and no one even checked. The decision was the city's. Everything deeper than that is just internal finger-pointing. |
HOw does that respond to my comment? That is about the failure to push back on public information, not about the substance of the change itself. And IF staff erred in not pushing back (but maybe they pushed back but not in writing? I don't know) still no evidence that CMs knew they did not. There seems to be a lot of jumping from "Jinks misunderstood the NDA and didnt push on WMATA" to "its Smedberg's fault we don't have a second entrance". In a city where we have so many other big issues I don't think the first point rises to very much. The second seems wholely unsupported by the evidence, even in the absence of a detailed response. |
| No one, as far as I can tell, is indicating that getting rid of the southern mezz was the city's call or the "city's fault". What people are upset about is that the city not only did not work to inform the residents of this change but now it appears acted to withhold this information from the public. And PPs insistence that this is all no big deal is not making the VM look better. You've identified yourself as being pro-Justin so this is making him look that much worse by association, whether you intend that or not. A vocal Justin supporter treating people like they're nuts for being upset by how this was handled only does harm to the VM. |