Shooting at Brandywine & Connecticut Ave NW This Afternoon

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is that Cheh would be considered a far-left activist type in most places in this country. She had a hand in a lot of the problems we see today - she voted to decriminalize fare evasion, she was in favor of lowering the MPD budget below what was necessary to retain officers in 2020, she voted for the DC crime bill that was co-written by DC Justice Lab activists and that Biden ended up opposing, and she endorsed Frumin over Goulet at the end. She just wasn't as far off the deep end as Frumin appears to be.

And that's the problem with the activist groups, there's really no limit. Even if they get everything they want today, they're going to be asking for twice as much tomorrow - even fewer officers, even fewer penalties for violent crime, even more money funneled into failed programs.

Agree. And many in AU Park, Forest Hills and SV support all of the above and "like the sound of" restorative justice. Removing the penalty of losing license for not paying traffic fines was another issue where Cheh raised concerns but voted for it anyway, and we've seen more mayhem on the streets.

Frumin not only appears to be "off the deep end" as you say, but he's visibly uninterested in any part of the job that isn't "fun" or grandstanding. On the stream, he said he wants to work with Janeese Lewis George re: vouchers. She is out there on issues even by the standards of the Council. He also has echoed her views re: violent juveniles. It's not just re: housing issues that he seems out of step with Ward 3, his views on crime "reform" are out there too. We needed someone more like Pinto has turned out to be. Frumin's housing bill is up for a vote this fall, along with a crime bill that will replace the Emergency Bill from June when it sunsets soon. I am nervous about what he willl say and do. No replacing him for a very long time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems some possible policy solutions are:
1. Limiting the number/percentage of voucher holders per building. This is to stem destabilization. If non-voucher residents move out, the problem magnifies as landlords fill more and more units and create private public housing.
2. Ensure that vouchers pay landlord what existing tenants pay and not an amount above that. This would end market distortions for the rental market and temper the incentives for landlord. The main incentive would instead be filling vacant units, not garnering as much profit as possible. The profit is coming from taxpayer dollars.
3. Require that voucher holders participate in relevant support programs
4. Ending the musical chairs of sending people who have been kicked out of one building to another down the street.

All good ideas

Cheh attempted #1, no go. This was also discussed in the WP article about the voucher disaster on Quincy Street in this thread.

HUD audit and tens of millions in fines did not accomplish 2. Since there is a higher likelihood of property damage or need to pay for eviction proceedings, that has been used at times as an excuse.

3 is explicitly not allowed by HUD.

4 would be fab, as would revoking vouchers for behavior that would get someone kicked out of public housing. "Private" de facto public housing should follow the same rules.

A tenant of Section 8 housing can be evicted for the following reasons:
Repeated or serious lease violations
Conducting illegal activities on or near the property
The unit isn't safe and fails to meet health and safety standards
Nonreporting of household members and their income
Criminal activity

Yes, similar guidelines would be useful.

I would have asked Frumin about this at the meeting but he is not that informed about the program and he did not have a staff member who is an expert present, nor did he invite someone from DC agencies. He is a proponent of MORE of this, people have to understand this. He can be pushed to go through the motions, maybe, or to mouth platitudes, but he only wants the fun parts of the job and to get accolades as a SJW.

I really do miss Cheh. I know a few people who heard the shots, it's traumatizing that this happened right where people's kids play, they walk to BreadFurst, Politics & Prose, play tennis and more than 1 has said that they have changed their routine or feel anxiety going out or that they drive now. When people in W7 & 8 talk about trauma related to crime, I have always believed them.

There are a lot of law abiding pro-social people who could benefit from vouchers, but the reality is that many of them have relatives, friends and associates that come along and cause issues. MPD has indicated that the victim and shooters did not live in FH, that's of cold comfort. The man who threw the young mom out the window at Connecticut House, paralyzing her in front of a toddler, was not on the lease. Public public housing, not this private public housing twist, has more rules, security, a chance at door control, but has always had this issue. The way that they try to now shift the responsibility for violent behavior of individuals to landlords is ludicrous, having limited the grounds to screen people out and with AG suing companies that do not accept vouchers. And "services" as the mantra is ridiculous. What "services" would have made the violent, drug dealing felon not throw his baby mama out a window after strangling her and tying her up? Plus there is the not required to participate provision. People might at least try to exercise better "door control" themselves if they stood to lose their voucher if a visitor dealt drugs or was violent in or around the building.

I do not see this genie going back in the bottle. The only thing that has changed since this series from 2019 is things getting worse. 3,000 PSH vouchers being used on Connecticut and Wisconsin, the impact was/is inevitable. The piece I don't quite get is where the City thinks tax income is going to come from if W3 becomes an increasing % of people living on tax money rather than paying it as has historically been the case?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/dc-housed-the-homeless-in-upscale-apartments-it-hasnt-gone-as-planned/2019/04/16/60c8ab9c-5648-11e9-8ef3-fbd41a2ce4d5_story.html

Good post but I really do wish we could nail down whether it’s true that the vouchers cannot be removed. I’m not going to blame the woman for being a DV victim though - I wonder if she had tried to get rid of him and was unable to.

[Anonymous]

Not blaming her but he had an arsenal of weapons in one room and seemed to be in possession with intent to distribute, and had a history of violent felonies, too. DV knows no bounds but violent felons were not living in these buildings and neighborhoods before, especially not virtually free.

I don't think it's that vouchers cannot be removed but that DC agencies do not do so. WP used the word "will" not "cannot." The comments on the article are well worth a read.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/08/08/dc-paid-housing-chronic-homelessness/

Even when tenants are arrested, they’re quickly released and able to return to the building, Derosa said during the meeting, because neither the Housing Authority nor the District’s Department of Human Services will revoke their vouchers or otherwise hold them accountable.

With the changing populations in voucher buildings, some see a market. They may not live in the area themselves. Happened in the alley behind Days Inn when it was a quarantine shelter and now there is visible drug use and dealing even in Forest Hills park, near several large buildings.

A few months after the police shooting, officers raided a third apartment in the building, the one across the hall from Watts’s unit. Same situation: A drug dealer had taken over the apartment, police records say. “This is where I serve at, I take care of them,” the dealer told a Petra property manager, according to the records. Officers seized crack cocaine, cash and 9mm ammunition.

The idea that voluntary "services" will change generational dysfunction, esp the HUD mandated 2 "contacts" per month or that any "security" willing to take the work will be not soon be compromised, is laughable. Landlords cannot control the behavior of people who may not have changed patterns after incarceration. "Returning citizens" apply for housing vouchers before release. People are paying thousands of dollars a month to live in older buildings that have, in effect, been turned into half way houses. Connecticut and Wisconsin had metro/bus, good schools, grocery stores, safe playgrounds and were walkable, ideal for those without cars. It was a fall back for middle class families who wanted to stay in DC but who could not afford SFH.

That all of this is happening in middle class commercial buildings full of families and elderly long term residents is surreal, but lots of money changing hands. Lots of public support, including from Frumin and Bowser, I don't see anything changing until the tax revenue plummets and cuts are made in programs.

If anyone has any ideas re: pressure points to get DC to remove vouchers from problem residents, I'd be happy to join your efforts.

[Anonymous]

The problem is not so much with Frumin but all of you who voted for him in the primary and general election. I was on this board and seeing how people couldn't/wouldn't vote for someone more conservative --even another more conservative democrat, which was perhaps what was needed to balance out the very left of center DC Council. Next time think about this when you vote and consider voting for another party or an independent. You don't have to be married to one party if the person isn't up to the job. He wouldn't be here if you hadn't voted for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not blaming her but he had an arsenal of weapons in one room and seemed to be in possession with intent to distribute, and had a history of violent felonies, too. DV knows no bounds but violent felons were not living in these buildings and neighborhoods before, especially not virtually free.

I don't think it's that vouchers cannot be removed but that DC agencies do not do so. WP used the word "will" not "cannot." The comments on the article are well worth a read.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/08/08/dc-paid-housing-chronic-homelessness/

Even when tenants are arrested, they’re quickly released and able to return to the building, Derosa said during the meeting, because neither the Housing Authority nor the District’s Department of Human Services will revoke their vouchers or otherwise hold them accountable.

With the changing populations in voucher buildings, some see a market. They may not live in the area themselves. Happened in the alley behind Days Inn when it was a quarantine shelter and now there is visible drug use and dealing even in Forest Hills park, near several large buildings.

A few months after the police shooting, officers raided a third apartment in the building, the one across the hall from Watts’s unit. Same situation: A drug dealer had taken over the apartment, police records say. “This is where I serve at, I take care of them,” the dealer told a Petra property manager, according to the records. Officers seized crack cocaine, cash and 9mm ammunition.

The idea that voluntary "services" will change generational dysfunction, esp the HUD mandated 2 "contacts" per month or that any "security" willing to take the work will be not soon be compromised, is laughable. Landlords cannot control the behavior of people who may not have changed patterns after incarceration. "Returning citizens" apply for housing vouchers before release. People are paying thousands of dollars a month to live in older buildings that have, in effect, been turned into half way houses. Connecticut and Wisconsin had metro/bus, good schools, grocery stores, safe playgrounds and were walkable, ideal for those without cars. It was a fall back for middle class families who wanted to stay in DC but who could not afford SFH.

That all of this is happening in middle class commercial buildings full of families and elderly long term residents is surreal, but lots of money changing hands. Lots of public support, including from Frumin and Bowser, I don't see anything changing until the tax revenue plummets and cuts are made in programs.

If anyone has any ideas re: pressure points to get DC to remove vouchers from problem residents, I'd be happy to join your efforts.

This is why I’ll be moving to Bethesda to rent …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is not so much with Frumin but all of you who voted for him in the primary and general election. I was on this board and seeing how people couldn't/wouldn't vote for someone more conservative --even another more conservative democrat, which was perhaps what was needed to balance out the very left of center DC Council. Next time think about this when you vote and consider voting for another party or an independent. You don't have to be married to one party if the person isn't up to the job. He wouldn't be here if you hadn't voted for him.

Many did NOT vote for him.

Met friends at a park/playground in Bethesda earlier. Just uncomfortable going to FH playground.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is not so much with Frumin but all of you who voted for him in the primary and general election. I was on this board and seeing how people couldn't/wouldn't vote for someone more conservative --even another more conservative democrat, which was perhaps what was needed to balance out the very left of center DC Council. Next time think about this when you vote and consider voting for another party or an independent. You don't have to be married to one party if the person isn't up to the job. He wouldn't be here if you hadn't voted for him.

Many did NOT vote for him.

Met friends at a park/playground in Bethesda earlier. Just uncomfortable going to FH playground.

You guys need to get some b*lls and take back the playground. Tell the loiterers to move on. Call the police on open pot smoking. arrange a meeting with the police about how it’s not acceptable to have the park unsafe.

[Anonymous]

A primary benefit of the area was the safety. It's hard to be in denial after last week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is not so much with Frumin but all of you who voted for him in the primary and general election. I was on this board and seeing how people couldn't/wouldn't vote for someone more conservative --even another more conservative democrat, which was perhaps what was needed to balance out the very left of center DC Council. Next time think about this when you vote and consider voting for another party or an independent. You don't have to be married to one party if the person isn't up to the job. He wouldn't be here if you hadn't voted for him.

Many did NOT vote for him.

Met friends at a park/playground in Bethesda earlier. Just uncomfortable going to FH playground.

You guys need to get some b*lls and take back the playground. Tell the loiterers to move on. Call the police on open pot smoking. arrange a meeting with the police about how it’s not acceptable to have the park unsafe.

The elected leaders want things to be like they are. The taxpaying citizens have no recourse until they are voted out.

[Anonymous]

Call and write Frumin and the mayor’s office, too. Ask them to act. Don’t just throw up your hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is not so much with Frumin but all of you who voted for him in the primary and general election. I was on this board and seeing how people couldn't/wouldn't vote for someone more conservative --even another more conservative democrat, which was perhaps what was needed to balance out the very left of center DC Council. Next time think about this when you vote and consider voting for another party or an independent. You don't have to be married to one party if the person isn't up to the job. He wouldn't be here if you hadn't voted for him.

Many did NOT vote for him.

Met friends at a park/playground in Bethesda earlier. Just uncomfortable going to FH playground.

I didn't vote for him either, but enough did. And once he was the Dem nominee, that was it.

[Anonymous]

Here's a thread with people justifying voting for Frumin:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1065610.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's a thread with people justifying voting for Frumin:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1065610.page

Results:

DEM Matthew Frumin - DEM22,962
75.88%

REP David Krucoff - REP6,853
22.65%

LIB Adrian Salsgiver - LIB327
1.08%

Write-in118
0.39%

OVER VOTES22
UNDER VOTES754


So who here was one of the 22,962 who voted for him?

[Anonymous]

I still can't believe that absolute fraud only would refer to an attempted murder in our neighborhood as an incident.

This week needs be remembered next election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A primary benefit of the area was the safety. It's hard to be in denial after last week.

j

One incident and now families in FH are allegedly traumatized, families in W7 and W8 have far more incidents and yet carry on.

For those of you threatening to move to Bethesda, just a heads up there are gangs there too. Crimes are rising in MoCo and across the VA border as well.


DC will carry on and be fine, it's tax base isn't going anywhere. DC has always been a transient town.