MoCo seeking feedback on proposal to limit single family zoning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

+1000

The Soros-inspired liberal fringe is determined to destroy America. That's not what they say, of course. Judge them by their results.

Montgomery County used to have the best school system in the region and in the nation. That's gone. You can thank the "Progressives" for that.

Oh, yes, you can always expect a well-reasoned and compelling post when it says "Soros-inspired" right in the first line. Can the Rothschilds and space lasers be far behind?

Let's break down your response. What do the Rothschilds and space lasers have to do with the Progressives' dystopian vision for Montgomery County? The answer is nothing, you idiot. Soros on the other hand is funding Progressive candidates all over the nation.

You didn't mention the state of Montgomery County schools, did you? Of course not. You are more interested in insulting than in responding to facts. What would you like to say about the state of the school system now that the Progressives have had their way with it? Would you like to give a real response, or would you rather talk about the Rothschilds and space lasers?

I don't know about the other progressives but I once visited the Belgian suburb of Tervuren and thought that looked like a good model. You may be disappointed in its lack of dystopia. It's just another form of boring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

Sure White Flint too, with bonus metro access.

This was an idyllic post-slavery rural county that greedy developers turned into little SFH enclaves (with racially restrictive covenants). And greedy developers will turn it into something else next.

What is so shocking about that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ All owned by corporations and investors.”. - Yes.

The SFH is also an aspiration. In my view, the MoCo council is telling me all the work I put into moving my family into my SFH neighborhood is worthless. Because someone else cannot do it, what I achieved has no merit at all. And they will partner with developers to destroy our communities.

It’s the ultimate destruction of wealth under a flag of equity, which shows the incompetence and lack of qualification this local government has.

I am not affluent and worked to become a home owner. This is an investment for our family and what we are leaving our children or hoping to sustain us in old age. I am not asking the MoCo Council for a handout but rather to respect and uphold the freedom to build a future. This imposition in neighborhoods is disrespectful and begs the big question to be asked: Why are you disrupting instead of building true prosperity for MoCo. Are developers more important than your constituents? Why are you punishing homeowners that pay YOUR SALARY?

Boy, there sure is a lot of talk about "destruction of neighborhoods" here. When I think of destruction of neighborhoods, I think of the flooding in central Europe. I don't think of legalizing duplexes.

Your response is totally disingenuous. First, it’s up to four-unit buildings under this proposal. But even if it were duplexes, that increases the cars needed to park on the street, the demands on infrastructure, the number of students in already overcrowded schools - none of which developers have any care about and the county is already unable to adequately address these issues due to budget constraints. So quality of life goes way down, people leave, neighborhoods go downhill …. That is a reality.

But even the more fundamental issue: people buy SFHs deliberately - it’s a choice and a major investment.

There’s a reasonable expectation - or there has been - that zoning ensures that the fundamentals of the neighborhood are protected.

Would I have bought my home that I saved for for more than a decade if I knew tomorrow my street would be filled with quadplexes and parking and schools, already at capacity, would be even more taxed? No.

That the trees and quiet and small scale of my neighborhood would be destroyed? No.

I didn’t want to live in downtown - couldn’t have afforded it, either. And now developers and entitled YIMBYs want to gaslight me into thinking I’m the problem for taking issue with this proposal? No.

I guess it depends on what you consider "the fundamentals".

If the proposal goes through, will your street be filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow? No.
If your street were filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow, would the neighborhood be destroyed? No, actually the contrary. More people would be living there.
Would four-unit buildings and parking turn your street into downtown? No.
Are you the problem? No, the housing shortage is the problem, or at least one of them.
If this proposal doesn't go through, will that stop your street from changing? No. There is nothing to stop someone from moving in next door to you, cutting down all the trees, parking 8 cars in the street, and having screaming arguments every night and parties every weekend.

We don’t want more people to come, that’s the point. We want our neighborhoods which we purchased into as SFH to remain as such.

Yes, it's clear that you don't want change. Change will happen anyway, though, no matter what the County Council does or doesn't do.

One point of disagreement: You purchased a house. You purchased a property. You did not purchase, or purchase into, a neighborhood.

Go back to your rental hole and stop being bitter other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home.

I am a NP, but I live in one of the wealthier neighborhoods that are unaffected by this proposal. According to your own thesis, you are just bitter that other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home in a neighborhood where these new proposals don't apply.

I don't think that way, mind you, but that appears to be your attitude. It is not a good look. You should try to be better.

What are the areas that are unaffected by this proposal?
I am in a beautiful area of Potomac where we live on 1.5-3 acre lots and our schools are already crowded as it is. I cannot imagine the traffic on river road going in to my job and what my kids schools would look like if we had apartment complexes everywhere!! Is my area exempt?
The truth is that we worked extremely hard for our way of life and we take good care of our neighborhood and we are deeply community minded people, and we don’t want to see it all ruined because the county has messed up the amount of people that let in and cannot handle the influx and strain!

I think we should prioritize affordable housing and the immediate needs of middle class workers over the commuting preferences of wealthy estate owners on River Rd. You may tell yourself that you are “community minded” but if your community doesn’t have anyone living in less than a $1.5 mil home then you are just another selfish elitist like all of the rest of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

Sure White Flint too, with bonus metro access.

This was an idyllic post-slavery rural county that greedy developers turned into little SFH enclaves (with racially restrictive covenants). And greedy developers will turn it into something else next.

What is so shocking about that?

If you don't know what is so shocking about the assertion that Montgomery County was "an idyllic post-slavery rural county" until the greedy developers showed up, I certainly won't be able to explain it to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ All owned by corporations and investors.”. - Yes.

The SFH is also an aspiration. In my view, the MoCo council is telling me all the work I put into moving my family into my SFH neighborhood is worthless. Because someone else cannot do it, what I achieved has no merit at all. And they will partner with developers to destroy our communities.

It’s the ultimate destruction of wealth under a flag of equity, which shows the incompetence and lack of qualification this local government has.

I am not affluent and worked to become a home owner. This is an investment for our family and what we are leaving our children or hoping to sustain us in old age. I am not asking the MoCo Council for a handout but rather to respect and uphold the freedom to build a future. This imposition in neighborhoods is disrespectful and begs the big question to be asked: Why are you disrupting instead of building true prosperity for MoCo. Are developers more important than your constituents? Why are you punishing homeowners that pay YOUR SALARY?

Boy, there sure is a lot of talk about "destruction of neighborhoods" here. When I think of destruction of neighborhoods, I think of the flooding in central Europe. I don't think of legalizing duplexes.

Your response is totally disingenuous. First, it’s up to four-unit buildings under this proposal. But even if it were duplexes, that increases the cars needed to park on the street, the demands on infrastructure, the number of students in already overcrowded schools - none of which developers have any care about and the county is already unable to adequately address these issues due to budget constraints. So quality of life goes way down, people leave, neighborhoods go downhill …. That is a reality.

But even the more fundamental issue: people buy SFHs deliberately - it’s a choice and a major investment.

There’s a reasonable expectation - or there has been - that zoning ensures that the fundamentals of the neighborhood are protected.

Would I have bought my home that I saved for for more than a decade if I knew tomorrow my street would be filled with quadplexes and parking and schools, already at capacity, would be even more taxed? No.

That the trees and quiet and small scale of my neighborhood would be destroyed? No.

I didn’t want to live in downtown - couldn’t have afforded it, either. And now developers and entitled YIMBYs want to gaslight me into thinking I’m the problem for taking issue with this proposal? No.

I guess it depends on what you consider "the fundamentals".

If the proposal goes through, will your street be filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow? No.
If your street were filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow, would the neighborhood be destroyed? No, actually the contrary. More people would be living there.
Would four-unit buildings and parking turn your street into downtown? No.
Are you the problem? No, the housing shortage is the problem, or at least one of them.
If this proposal doesn't go through, will that stop your street from changing? No. There is nothing to stop someone from moving in next door to you, cutting down all the trees, parking 8 cars in the street, and having screaming arguments every night and parties every weekend.

We don’t want more people to come, that’s the point. We want our neighborhoods which we purchased into as SFH to remain as such.

Yes, it's clear that you don't want change. Change will happen anyway, though, no matter what the County Council does or doesn't do.

One point of disagreement: You purchased a house. You purchased a property. You did not purchase, or purchase into, a neighborhood.

Go back to your rental hole and stop being bitter other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home.

I am a NP, but I live in one of the wealthier neighborhoods that are unaffected by this proposal. According to your own thesis, you are just bitter that other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home in a neighborhood where these new proposals don't apply.

I don't think that way, mind you, but that appears to be your attitude. It is not a good look. You should try to be better.

What are the areas that are unaffected by this proposal?
I am in a beautiful area of Potomac where we live on 1.5-3 acre lots and our schools are already crowded as it is. I cannot imagine the traffic on river road going in to my job and what my kids schools would look like if we had apartment complexes everywhere!! Is my area exempt?
The truth is that we worked extremely hard for our way of life and we take good care of our neighborhood and we are deeply community minded people, and we don’t want to see it all ruined because the county has messed up the amount of people that let in and cannot handle the influx and strain!

I think we should prioritize affordable housing and the immediate needs of middle class workers over the commuting preferences of wealthy estate owners on River Rd. You may tell yourself that you are “community minded” but if your community doesn’t have anyone living in less than a $1.5 mil home then you are just another selfish elitist like all of the rest of them.

DP. I honestly can't tell if the post you're responding to was even actually sincere or not. Damn Poe's Law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

Sure White Flint too, with bonus metro access.

This was an idyllic post-slavery rural county that greedy developers turned into little SFH enclaves (with racially restrictive covenants). And greedy developers will turn it into something else next.

What is so shocking about that?

If you don't know what is so shocking about the assertion that Montgomery County was "an idyllic post-slavery rural county" until the greedy developers showed up, I certainly won't be able to explain it to you.

Maybe you don't realize that it's critical of nostalgia. Something like 40% of the county was enslaved. This was a rural county run by the landowning (former slaveowning) interests until the suburbs came.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

Sure White Flint too, with bonus metro access.

This was an idyllic post-slavery rural county that greedy developers turned into little SFH enclaves (with racially restrictive covenants). And greedy developers will turn it into something else next.

What is so shocking about that?

If you don't know what is so shocking about the assertion that Montgomery County was "an idyllic post-slavery rural county" until the greedy developers showed up, I certainly won't be able to explain it to you.

Maybe you don't realize that it's critical of nostalgia. Something like 40% of the county was enslaved. This was a rural county run by the landowning (former slaveowning) interests until the suburbs came.

And Montgomery Planning was founded by a segregationist developer whose family is still a major landowner in the county to this day. Maybe we should throw out Planning too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

Sure White Flint too, with bonus metro access.

This was an idyllic post-slavery rural county that greedy developers turned into little SFH enclaves (with racially restrictive covenants). And greedy developers will turn it into something else next.

What is so shocking about that?

If you don't know what is so shocking about the assertion that Montgomery County was "an idyllic post-slavery rural county" until the greedy developers showed up, I certainly won't be able to explain it to you.

Maybe you don't realize that it's critical of nostalgia. Something like 40% of the county was enslaved. This was a rural county run by the landowning (former slaveowning) interests until the suburbs came.

"Poe's law is an adage of Internet culture which says that, without a clear indicator of the author's intent, any parodic or sarcastic expression of extreme views can be mistaken by some readers for a sincere expression of those views."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

Sure White Flint too, with bonus metro access.

This was an idyllic post-slavery rural county that greedy developers turned into little SFH enclaves (with racially restrictive covenants). And greedy developers will turn it into something else next.

What is so shocking about that?

If you don't know what is so shocking about the assertion that Montgomery County was "an idyllic post-slavery rural county" until the greedy developers showed up, I certainly won't be able to explain it to you.

Maybe you don't realize that it's critical of nostalgia. Something like 40% of the county was enslaved. This was a rural county run by the landowning (former slaveowning) interests until the suburbs came.

That was 160 years ago and it is completely irrelevant to the discussion about single family zoning today. People from all races and ethnicities live in single family neighborhoods, and this proposal to eliminate single family zoning will disproportionately impact the SF neighborhoods with higher % of POC. Stop trying to use a fallacious social justice oriented argument to support your agenda when this policy will actually worsen racial inequality. This is the opposite of social justice, it is pulling up the ladder and reducing opportunities for POC to create generation wealth for their families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

Sure White Flint too, with bonus metro access.

This was an idyllic post-slavery rural county that greedy developers turned into little SFH enclaves (with racially restrictive covenants). And greedy developers will turn it into something else next.

What is so shocking about that?

If you don't know what is so shocking about the assertion that Montgomery County was "an idyllic post-slavery rural county" until the greedy developers showed up, I certainly won't be able to explain it to you.

Maybe you don't realize that it's critical of nostalgia. Something like 40% of the county was enslaved. This was a rural county run by the landowning (former slaveowning) interests until the suburbs came.

That was 160 years ago and it is completely irrelevant to the discussion about single family zoning today. People from all races and ethnicities live in single family neighborhoods, and this proposal to eliminate single family zoning will disproportionately impact the SF neighborhoods with higher % of POC. Stop trying to use a fallacious social justice oriented argument to support your agenda when this policy will actually worsen racial inequality. This is the opposite of social justice, it is pulling up the ladder and reducing opportunities for POC to create generation wealth for their families.

The YImBY claims to support some social justice if hilarious. Upzoned areas become WHITER. This is already one the most diverse areas in the entire country.

Here are the YImBYS.

https://ggwash.org/event/ggwash-fall-mixer?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR3zxlxNymI9psVcqiyBxYsj28iT38yWUjKgyPYpp5jD8JfRyIZObsQsyiY_aem_fzsHP1FyV80GhNZcV30lxw

This might be the least diverse group of people in the entire area, short of maybe a local polo club. I mean sure, there is a white guy, and then a different white guy with a sweater. So, maybe a little diversity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

Sure White Flint too, with bonus metro access.

This was an idyllic post-slavery rural county that greedy developers turned into little SFH enclaves (with racially restrictive covenants). And greedy developers will turn it into something else next.

What is so shocking about that?

If you don't know what is so shocking about the assertion that Montgomery County was "an idyllic post-slavery rural county" until the greedy developers showed up, I certainly won't be able to explain it to you.

Maybe you don't realize that it's critical of nostalgia. Something like 40% of the county was enslaved. This was a rural county run by the landowning (former slaveowning) interests until the suburbs came.

That was 160 years ago and it is completely irrelevant to the discussion about single family zoning today. People from all races and ethnicities live in single family neighborhoods, and this proposal to eliminate single family zoning will disproportionately impact the SF neighborhoods with higher % of POC. Stop trying to use a fallacious social justice oriented argument to support your agenda when this policy will actually worsen racial inequality. This is the opposite of social justice, it is pulling up the ladder and reducing opportunities for POC to create generation wealth for their families.

Eh. Not really. Housing discrimination was legal until 1968 - 56 years ago. Speaking of opportunities to create generational wealth for families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

+1000

The Soros-inspired liberal fringe is determined to destroy America. That's not what they say, of course. Judge them by their results.

Montgomery County used to have the best school system in the region and in the nation. That's gone. You can thank the "Progressives" for that.

Oh, yes, you can always expect a well-reasoned and compelling post when it says "Soros-inspired" right in the first line. Can the Rothschilds and space lasers be far behind?

Let's break down your response. What do the Rothschilds and space lasers have to do with the Progressives' dystopian vision for Montgomery County? The answer is nothing, you idiot. Soros on the other hand is funding Progressive candidates all over the nation.

You didn't mention the state of Montgomery County schools, did you? Of course not. You are more interested in insulting than in responding to facts. What would you like to say about the state of the school system now that the Progressives have had their way with it? Would you like to give a real response, or would you rather talk about the Rothschilds and space lasers?

I don't know about the other progressives but I once visited the Belgian suburb of Tervuren and thought that looked like a good model. You may be disappointed in its lack of dystopia. It's just another form of boring.

You should move there, it already has what you want. As a YIMBY bonus it’s almost entirely white and very racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

Sure White Flint too, with bonus metro access.

This was an idyllic post-slavery rural county that greedy developers turned into little SFH enclaves (with racially restrictive covenants). And greedy developers will turn it into something else next.

What is so shocking about that?

If you don't know what is so shocking about the assertion that Montgomery County was "an idyllic post-slavery rural county" until the greedy developers showed up, I certainly won't be able to explain it to you.

Maybe you don't realize that it's critical of nostalgia. Something like 40% of the county was enslaved. This was a rural county run by the landowning (former slaveowning) interests until the suburbs came.

That was 160 years ago and it is completely irrelevant to the discussion about single family zoning today. People from all races and ethnicities live in single family neighborhoods, and this proposal to eliminate single family zoning will disproportionately impact the SF neighborhoods with higher % of POC. Stop trying to use a fallacious social justice oriented argument to support your agenda when this policy will actually worsen racial inequality. This is the opposite of social justice, it is pulling up the ladder and reducing opportunities for POC to create generation wealth for their families.

The county changed thanks to development bringing in more people to the suburbs. At the time the changes started, those developments had racially restrictive covenants, reducing opportunities for POC to create generational wealth for their families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

+1000

The Soros-inspired liberal fringe is determined to destroy America. That's not what they say, of course. Judge them by their results.

Montgomery County used to have the best school system in the region and in the nation. That's gone. You can thank the "Progressives" for that.

Oh, yes, you can always expect a well-reasoned and compelling post when it says "Soros-inspired" right in the first line. Can the Rothschilds and space lasers be far behind?

Let's break down your response. What do the Rothschilds and space lasers have to do with the Progressives' dystopian vision for Montgomery County? The answer is nothing, you idiot. Soros on the other hand is funding Progressive candidates all over the nation.

You didn't mention the state of Montgomery County schools, did you? Of course not. You are more interested in insulting than in responding to facts. What would you like to say about the state of the school system now that the Progressives have had their way with it? Would you like to give a real response, or would you rather talk about the Rothschilds and space lasers?

I don't know about the other progressives but I once visited the Belgian suburb of Tervuren and thought that looked like a good model. You may be disappointed in its lack of dystopia. It's just another form of boring.

You should move there, it already has what you want. As a YIMBY bonus it’s almost entirely white and very racist.

I did say it was boring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

Sure White Flint too, with bonus metro access.

This was an idyllic post-slavery rural county that greedy developers turned into little SFH enclaves (with racially restrictive covenants). And greedy developers will turn it into something else next.

What is so shocking about that?

If you don't know what is so shocking about the assertion that Montgomery County was "an idyllic post-slavery rural county" until the greedy developers showed up, I certainly won't be able to explain it to you.

Maybe you don't realize that it's critical of nostalgia. Something like 40% of the county was enslaved. This was a rural county run by the landowning (former slaveowning) interests until the suburbs came.

That was 160 years ago and it is completely irrelevant to the discussion about single family zoning today. People from all races and ethnicities live in single family neighborhoods, and this proposal to eliminate single family zoning will disproportionately impact the SF neighborhoods with higher % of POC. Stop trying to use a fallacious social justice oriented argument to support your agenda when this policy will actually worsen racial inequality. This is the opposite of social justice, it is pulling up the ladder and reducing opportunities for POC to create generation wealth for their families.

The county changed thanks to development bringing in more people to the suburbs. At the time the changes started, those developments had racially restrictive covenants, reducing opportunities for POC to create generational wealth for their families.

DP. Even for the ones that didn't have restrictive covenants, which were illegal after 1948, there was a whole collection of laws and programs that enabled white people to buy houses in the suburbs but made it very difficult for black people to do so. This explains why the population of Montgomery County became much more white during the post World War II suburban boom years.