Is Frumin running again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I don't think he is horrible - but given Council's particular history, the bar is low. He is at least not a willing lapdog for the DC Chamber.

Ward 3 crime soared under him whereas it went down in almost every other Ward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mary Chen, we miss you!

Said NO ONE

Prefer her over Frumin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I don't think he is horrible - but given Council's particular history, the bar is low. He is at least not a willing lapdog for the DC Chamber.

He’s a willing lapdog for the DSA, which is much, much worse

He is hardly a lapdog to the DSA. Where do you even come up with this?

He burned what little political capital he had on those ridiculous CT Ave bike lanes that few normies wanted. While largely ignoring the crime and blight that has befallen the commercial corridors.

And the housing vouchers. And housing density.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people wanted the bike lanes, including the mayor and DDOT, as well as all of the other Ward 3 candidates from 2022. The only reason they didn't happen is because downtown business interests intervened.

That said, he has supported the various main street orgs in terms of providing funds and resources to businesses on the corridor and has been proactive with MPD in terms of presence and enforcement. Maybe your ire is directed at the failing national economy?

He has done exactly nothing about the rising crime rate along Connecticut stemming from DC blindly putting voucher recipients into empty apartments without offering them any sort of support services. When horrifically violent crimes have happened because of this -- kids dying, etc. -- he offers his thoughts and prayers but says his hands are tied and he can't do anything, like a simp. He's worthless.

And I think Frumin's staffers have better use of their time than posting here.

Exactly this. Crime went up on Frumin’s watch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don’t get is that he seems more interested in helping non-Ward 3 residents over the quality of life for current Ward 3 residents. Fine, run for an At Large seat then. But right now Ward 3 has an absentee councilman.

Disagree. He or his staff come to our ANC meetings and his staff is incredibly responsive to issues that come up where a councilember can help cut red tape.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people wanted the bike lanes, including the mayor and DDOT, as well as all of the other Ward 3 candidates from 2022. The only reason they didn't happen is because downtown business interests intervened.

That said, he has supported the various main street orgs in terms of providing funds and resources to businesses on the corridor and has been proactive with MPD in terms of presence and enforcement. Maybe your ire is directed at the failing national economy?

He has done exactly nothing about the rising crime rate along Connecticut stemming from DC blindly putting voucher recipients into empty apartments without offering them any sort of support services. When horrifically violent crimes have happened because of this -- kids dying, etc. -- he offers his thoughts and prayers but says his hands are tied and he can't do anything, like a simp. He's worthless.

And I think Frumin's staffers have better use of their time than posting here.

So Frumin is in charge of public and section 8 housing in the district and not, you know, the private property owners who are converting their properties to take the money from the city? What exactly do you expect a councilmember to do to intervene between a private property owner and the city when there are no permits or hearing or other "stop points" that could put the brakes on such moves? Methinks you either have no idea of what a councilmember can or can't do, or believe they can act as an executive authoritarian.

He could introduce legislation to cap the number of voucher residents allowed in one building. In fact, Ward 3 residents have explicitly asked him to do this multiple times but he steadfastly refuses to do so.

Try harder with your simping for him.

Not simping for him, but this particular example, no, that legislation would never pass and it isn't worth the time to try. How about offering real solutions and not something completely unviable?

NP here. For one, there could be a cap on the number of tenants per building on vouchers to avoid destabilizing the tenant population as the vouchers have done. Secondly, the city should stop using tax dollars to pay above market rents for voucher tenants. Thirdly, he could have prevented a weed store opening only a few blocks from a school in the Van Ness Area. Residents did not want any of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't say Frumin is a joke for Ward 3. I would just say he is a joke -- an abject embarrassment to the city, his family and himself. He is another virtue signaling, intensely mediocre white clowncilman who has reduced DC QOL and destroyed hundreds of millions in business equity. Unless defeated, he will continue to do his best to bring violent, drug addicted Section 8 tenants, homeless people and bike lanes to Ward 3, all bc he allegedly had a black law firm colleague (at some 10th tier, no-name law firm) say he didnt want to live near him (Frumin). That just means his partner had common sense. Im white, and I dont want to live near Frumin.

It's funny you think a councilmember has the power to destory hundreds of millions in business equity. I am curious how you come to this conclusion and by what measure you quantify it.

It is also funny that you think a councilmember has the ability to negate a transaction between a private property owner and someone receiving housing vouchers from the city. On what basis do you think a councilmember has that legal ability?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't say Frumin is a joke for Ward 3. I would just say he is a joke -- an abject embarrassment to the city, his family and himself. He is another virtue signaling, intensely mediocre white clowncilman who has reduced DC QOL and destroyed hundreds of millions in business equity. Unless defeated, he will continue to do his best to bring violent, drug addicted Section 8 tenants, homeless people and bike lanes to Ward 3, all bc he allegedly had a black law firm colleague (at some 10th tier, no-name law firm) say he didnt want to live near him (Frumin). That just means his partner had common sense. Im white, and I dont want to live near Frumin.

Frumin has been in office during the cancellation and removal of bike lanes in Ward 3. He is the only Councilmember to see a reduction in bike lanes, possibly in history.

As for the section 8 and voucher tenant issues, that is on Bowser for pushing them into ward 3 aggressively and on the companies that would prefer to have voucher tenants than non voucher tenants.

I am no fan of Mr. Let's Build a Hockey Rink but get your facts right.

Wouldn’t have gone through on Mary Cheh’s watch. No backbone and he spoken in support of vouchers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people wanted the bike lanes, including the mayor and DDOT, as well as all of the other Ward 3 candidates from 2022. The only reason they didn't happen is because downtown business interests intervened.

That said, he has supported the various main street orgs in terms of providing funds and resources to businesses on the corridor and has been proactive with MPD in terms of presence and enforcement. Maybe your ire is directed at the failing national economy?

He has done exactly nothing about the rising crime rate along Connecticut stemming from DC blindly putting voucher recipients into empty apartments without offering them any sort of support services. When horrifically violent crimes have happened because of this -- kids dying, etc. -- he offers his thoughts and prayers but says his hands are tied and he can't do anything, like a simp. He's worthless.

And I think Frumin's staffers have better use of their time than posting here.

So Frumin is in charge of public and section 8 housing in the district and not, you know, the private property owners who are converting their properties to take the money from the city? What exactly do you expect a councilmember to do to intervene between a private property owner and the city when there are no permits or hearing or other "stop points" that could put the brakes on such moves? Methinks you either have no idea of what a councilmember can or can't do, or believe they can act as an executive authoritarian.

He could introduce legislation to cap the number of voucher residents allowed in one building. In fact, Ward 3 residents have explicitly asked him to do this multiple times but he steadfastly refuses to do so.

Try harder with your simping for him.

Not simping for him, but this particular example, no, that legislation would never pass and it isn't worth the time to try. How about offering real solutions and not something completely unviable?

NP here. For one, there could be a cap on the number of tenants per building on vouchers to avoid destabilizing the tenant population as the vouchers have done. Secondly, the city should stop using tax dollars to pay above market rents for voucher tenants. Thirdly, he could have prevented a weed store opening only a few blocks from a school in the Van Ness Area. Residents did not want any of this.

How do you propose putting a cap on a transaction between a landlord and a tenant?
I agree, the city should stop doing that. It doesn't have the votes on the council and even if it did, it is set by the mayor to help her landlord friends.
A copuncilmember cannot stop a legally operating business application from being granted by the city. What is the legal basis by which you think this can happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don’t get is that he seems more interested in helping non-Ward 3 residents over the quality of life for current Ward 3 residents. Fine, run for an At Large seat then. But right now Ward 3 has an absentee councilman.

Disagree. He or his staff come to our ANC meetings and his staff is incredibly responsive to issues that come up where a councilember can help cut red tape.

Such as?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't say Frumin is a joke for Ward 3. I would just say he is a joke -- an abject embarrassment to the city, his family and himself. He is another virtue signaling, intensely mediocre white clowncilman who has reduced DC QOL and destroyed hundreds of millions in business equity. Unless defeated, he will continue to do his best to bring violent, drug addicted Section 8 tenants, homeless people and bike lanes to Ward 3, all bc he allegedly had a black law firm colleague (at some 10th tier, no-name law firm) say he didnt want to live near him (Frumin). That just means his partner had common sense. Im white, and I dont want to live near Frumin.

Frumin has been in office during the cancellation and removal of bike lanes in Ward 3. He is the only Councilmember to see a reduction in bike lanes, possibly in history.

As for the section 8 and voucher tenant issues, that is on Bowser for pushing them into ward 3 aggressively and on the companies that would prefer to have voucher tenants than non voucher tenants.

I am no fan of Mr. Let's Build a Hockey Rink but get your facts right.

Wouldn’t have gone through on Mary Cheh’s watch. No backbone and he spoken in support of vouchers.

Cheh was in office for 16 years. For the last 8, she was head of a very powerful committee and could thus horse trade with the Mayor. Frumin is in his first term and thus has no such power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don’t get is that he seems more interested in helping non-Ward 3 residents over the quality of life for current Ward 3 residents. Fine, run for an At Large seat then. But right now Ward 3 has an absentee councilman.

Disagree. He or his staff come to our ANC meetings and his staff is incredibly responsive to issues that come up where a councilember can help cut red tape.

Such as?

Getting potholes fixed, getting illegal dumping picked up on border park areas, getting more capital bikeshare stations in our area, getting faded street signs replaced. I could go on, but some of these things had been stagnating for years and Frumin's staff was able to get things done effectively.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people wanted the bike lanes, including the mayor and DDOT, as well as all of the other Ward 3 candidates from 2022. The only reason they didn't happen is because downtown business interests intervened.

That said, he has supported the various main street orgs in terms of providing funds and resources to businesses on the corridor and has been proactive with MPD in terms of presence and enforcement. Maybe your ire is directed at the failing national economy?

He has done exactly nothing about the rising crime rate along Connecticut stemming from DC blindly putting voucher recipients into empty apartments without offering them any sort of support services. When horrifically violent crimes have happened because of this -- kids dying, etc. -- he offers his thoughts and prayers but says his hands are tied and he can't do anything, like a simp. He's worthless.

And I think Frumin's staffers have better use of their time than posting here.

So Frumin is in charge of public and section 8 housing in the district and not, you know, the private property owners who are converting their properties to take the money from the city? What exactly do you expect a councilmember to do to intervene between a private property owner and the city when there are no permits or hearing or other "stop points" that could put the brakes on such moves? Methinks you either have no idea of what a councilmember can or can't do, or believe they can act as an executive authoritarian.

He could introduce legislation to cap the number of voucher residents allowed in one building. In fact, Ward 3 residents have explicitly asked him to do this multiple times but he steadfastly refuses to do so.

Try harder with your simping for him.

Not simping for him, but this particular example, no, that legislation would never pass and it isn't worth the time to try. How about offering real solutions and not something completely unviable?

NP here. For one, there could be a cap on the number of tenants per building on vouchers to avoid destabilizing the tenant population as the vouchers have done. Secondly, the city should stop using tax dollars to pay above market rents for voucher tenants. Thirdly, he could have prevented a weed store opening only a few blocks from a school in the Van Ness Area. Residents did not want any of this.

How do you propose putting a cap on a transaction between a landlord and a tenant?
I agree, the city should stop doing that. It doesn't have the votes on the council and even if it did, it is set by the mayor to help her landlord friends.
A copuncilmember cannot stop a legally operating business application from being granted by the city. What is the legal basis by which you think this can happen?

The city is using our tax dollars to pay over market rates for vouchers. Frumin could oppose that instead he rolls out the the red carpet. We had a 30 percent(!) increase in crime under his watch — much of it occurring in or around voucher buildings. The city of course could allocate and ration the number of vouchers per building. The city could also restrict areas and corridors. Your saying his hand are tied? If so, why even have a ward rep in the first place???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people wanted the bike lanes, including the mayor and DDOT, as well as all of the other Ward 3 candidates from 2022. The only reason they didn't happen is because downtown business interests intervened.

That said, he has supported the various main street orgs in terms of providing funds and resources to businesses on the corridor and has been proactive with MPD in terms of presence and enforcement. Maybe your ire is directed at the failing national economy?

He has done exactly nothing about the rising crime rate along Connecticut stemming from DC blindly putting voucher recipients into empty apartments without offering them any sort of support services. When horrifically violent crimes have happened because of this -- kids dying, etc. -- he offers his thoughts and prayers but says his hands are tied and he can't do anything, like a simp. He's worthless.

And I think Frumin's staffers have better use of their time than posting here.

Exactly this. Crime went up on Frumin’s watch.

Does Frumin manage the metropolitan police department? What is the crime rate city wide and how does it compare to ward 3? Here, let me answer:

https://www.crimedatadc.com/ward/3

So no, Crime has not gone up on Frumin's watch. In fact, by almost every metric, it is down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people wanted the bike lanes, including the mayor and DDOT, as well as all of the other Ward 3 candidates from 2022. The only reason they didn't happen is because downtown business interests intervened.

That said, he has supported the various main street orgs in terms of providing funds and resources to businesses on the corridor and has been proactive with MPD in terms of presence and enforcement. Maybe your ire is directed at the failing national economy?

He has done exactly nothing about the rising crime rate along Connecticut stemming from DC blindly putting voucher recipients into empty apartments without offering them any sort of support services. When horrifically violent crimes have happened because of this -- kids dying, etc. -- he offers his thoughts and prayers but says his hands are tied and he can't do anything, like a simp. He's worthless.

And I think Frumin's staffers have better use of their time than posting here.

So Frumin is in charge of public and section 8 housing in the district and not, you know, the private property owners who are converting their properties to take the money from the city? What exactly do you expect a councilmember to do to intervene between a private property owner and the city when there are no permits or hearing or other "stop points" that could put the brakes on such moves? Methinks you either have no idea of what a councilmember can or can't do, or believe they can act as an executive authoritarian.

He could introduce legislation to cap the number of voucher residents allowed in one building. In fact, Ward 3 residents have explicitly asked him to do this multiple times but he steadfastly refuses to do so.

Try harder with your simping for him.

Not simping for him, but this particular example, no, that legislation would never pass and it isn't worth the time to try. How about offering real solutions and not something completely unviable?

NP here. For one, there could be a cap on the number of tenants per building on vouchers to avoid destabilizing the tenant population as the vouchers have done. Secondly, the city should stop using tax dollars to pay above market rents for voucher tenants. Thirdly, he could have prevented a weed store opening only a few blocks from a school in the Van Ness Area. Residents did not want any of this.

How do you propose putting a cap on a transaction between a landlord and a tenant?
I agree, the city should stop doing that. It doesn't have the votes on the council and even if it did, it is set by the mayor to help her landlord friends.
A copuncilmember cannot stop a legally operating business application from being granted by the city. What is the legal basis by which you think this can happen?

The city is using our tax dollars to pay over market rates for vouchers. Frumin could oppose that instead he rolls out the the red carpet. We had a 30 percent(!) increase in crime under his watch — much of it occurring in or around voucher buildings. The city of course could allocate and ration the number of vouchers per building. The city could also restrict areas and corridors. Your saying his hand are tied? If so, why even have a ward rep in the first place???

Nope: https://www.crimedatadc.com/ward/3