Nine districts for MoCo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there’s already an existing thread please let me know.

I’m curious, if you’re strongly for or agains nine districts for moco could you explain why? I’m trying to understand the implication of this structure switch to figure out whether I support.

If you're strongly for the nine districts for Montgomery County idea, chances are that you're a Republican who believes this is the only way to get a Republican on the County Council. Which it won't even do anyway, unless you do a lot of gerrymandering of council district boundaries.

I don't know if people believe that. But Democrats who are a little less liberal than the Silver Spring/Tacoma Park contingent should see it as a chance to break up that majority down there who's doing a lot of stuff much of the County doesn't agree with.

Look, Marc Elrich had a property tax increase recommended in the FY21 budget. The only reason, the "only" reason, it didn't go anywhere was because of COVID.

The sad part about a win for the 9 district idea is that Gabe Albornoz will probably lose in a new election. He had the lowest number of votes of the at-large individuals, and he's the most rational.

Somebody is arguing against the at-large members - the ones who are elected county-wide - on grounds that they don't represent much of the county. I'm speechless.

(Tacoma is a place in Washington state. The place in Montgomery County is Takoma. With a k.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If the upcounty voters voted at the rate that downcounty voters voted, candidates from the upcounty would get elected. Stop complaining about Silver Spring and make sure your neighbors vote.

How do you presume to know where I live?

Then you tell me where "further out in the county" is, in terms of Montgomery County geography.
You believe all of upcounty is essentially one area?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How do you presume to know where I live?

Then you tell me where "further out in the county" is, in terms of Montgomery County geography.

You believe all of upcounty is essentially one area?

OK, so you did mean the upcounty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there’s already an existing thread please let me know.

I’m curious, if you’re strongly for or agains nine districts for moco could you explain why? I’m trying to understand the implication of this structure switch to figure out whether I support.

If you're strongly for the nine districts for Montgomery County idea, chances are that you're a Republican who believes this is the only way to get a Republican on the County Council. Which it won't even do anyway, unless you do a lot of gerrymandering of council district boundaries.

I don't know if people believe that. But Democrats who are a little less liberal than the Silver Spring/Tacoma Park contingent should see it as a chance to break up that majority down there who's doing a lot of stuff much of the County doesn't agree with.

Look, Marc Elrich had a property tax increase recommended in the FY21 budget. The only reason, the "only" reason, it didn't go anywhere was because of COVID.

The sad part about a win for the 9 district idea is that Gabe Albornoz will probably lose in a new election. He had the lowest number of votes of the at-large individuals, and he's the most rational.

100% the first paragraph.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there’s already an existing thread please let me know.

I’m curious, if you’re strongly for or agains nine districts for moco could you explain why? I’m trying to understand the implication of this structure switch to figure out whether I support.

If you're strongly for the nine districts for Montgomery County idea, chances are that you're a Republican who believes this is the only way to get a Republican on the County Council. Which it won't even do anyway, unless you do a lot of gerrymandering of council district boundaries.

I don't know if people believe that. But Democrats who are a little less liberal than the Silver Spring/Tacoma Park contingent should see it as a chance to break up that majority down there who's doing a lot of stuff much of the County doesn't agree with.

Look, Marc Elrich had a property tax increase recommended in the FY21 budget. The only reason, the "only" reason, it didn't go anywhere was because of COVID.

The sad part about a win for the 9 district idea is that Gabe Albornoz will probably lose in a new election. He had the lowest number of votes of the at-large individuals, and he's the most rational.

Somebody is arguing against the [b]at-large members - the ones who are elected county-wide - on grounds that they don't represent much of the county. I'm speechless.[/b]

(Tacoma is a place in Washington state. The place in Montgomery County is Takoma. With a k.)

Um, did you read the front page of the nine districts petition?
Somebody is a lot more than one person.

[Anonymous]

It doesn't make it any more rational to know that multiple people (including big downcounty developers) are saying that the council reps WHO ARE ELECTED COUNTY-WIDE don't represent much of the county.

Capital letters for emphasis, not shouting.

[Anonymous]

To me it's like this: if the current Council is against it, then it's probably worth voting for.

What they did is add their own second referendum, so that if both pass, they invalidate each other. In other words, a poison pill:
https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/government/if-both-ballot-measures-on-county-council-structure-pass-the-effect-might-be-no-change/

They added that without any public comment or notice. That tells you something.

Remember term limits a few years ago. The Council was staunchly against that either. Luckily it passed with about 75% of the vote.

[Anonymous]

Sure. Do 9 districts. But the population should be similar for each district.
That would most likely result in more Councilmembers down-county and not at-large where they serve everyone.
Land doesn't get a vote, people do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't make it any more rational to know that multiple people (including big downcounty developers) are saying that the council reps WHO ARE ELECTED COUNTY-WIDE don't represent much of the county.

Capital letters for emphasis, not shouting.

Yup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To me it's like this: if the current Council is against it, then it's probably worth voting for.

What they did is add their own second referendum, so that if both pass, they invalidate each other. In other words, a poison pill:
https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/government/if-both-ballot-measures-on-county-council-structure-pass-the-effect-might-be-no-change/

They added that without any public comment or notice. That tells you something.

Remember term limits a few years ago. The Council was staunchly against that either. Luckily it passed with about 75% of the vote.

Attitudes like this are exactly why the Republican Party in Montgomery County can't get anyone elected.

It's not because of Takoma (or Tacoma) Park. It's not because of socialism. It's not because of the teacher's union. It's because a solid majority of voters in Montgomery County don't want what you're peddling.

[Anonymous]

I haven't read one good reason why we should not get rid of the At large seats, or increase the seats to 9.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read one good reason why we should not get rid of the At large seats, or increase the seats to 9.

(1) because if you get rid of the at-large seats, then if your district council member is a dud, you're just plain out of luck.
(2) there are currently 9 seats on the county council.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read one good reason why we should not get rid of the At large seats, or increase the seats to 9.

(1) because if you get rid of the at-large seats, then if your district council member is a dud, you're just plain out of luck.
(2) there are currently 9 seats on the county council.

1. The "at large member" may not care about my area, and could be a dud too, for my area. Plus, that's why we have elections every few years, to vote the dud out.
2. I was referring to nine districts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read one good reason why we should not get rid of the At large seats, or increase the seats to 9.

(1) because if you get rid of the at-large seats, then if your district council member is a dud, you're just plain out of luck.
(2) there are currently 9 seats on the county council.

1. The "at large member" may not care about my area, and could be a dud too, for my area. Plus, that's why we have elections every few years, to vote the dud out.
2. I was referring to nine districts

Fortunately, you have four to choose from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't make it any more rational to know that multiple people (including big downcounty developers) are saying that the council reps WHO ARE ELECTED COUNTY-WIDE don't represent much of the county.

Capital letters for emphasis, not shouting.

Well, for one, they don't represent (not even at all) anyone who isn't a registered Democrat in MoCo (currently 40% of the population) because we didn't get to vote for them in the Primary.