No good options for MoCo?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree, there are no good options. We have three candidates for county executive that are similar enough that for me I’m going to pick the lesser of three evils. Which to me is not Jwando or Glass. Of the three and Friedson seems to be the most levelheaded and the one who’s least likely to dig us deeper in a hole as much as the other two.

Curious why you think that. I'm looking for level-headed, but concluded that Glass most fit that bill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Montgomery County needs to attract more large businesses and corporate HQs -- because that will generate more business tax revenue to the county.

Hilton seriously looked at putting its HQ in MoCo. Once Hilton did the math and also looked at the overall business environment, they put their new HQ in Fairfax County instead.

Until the business environment gets fixed, taxes on residents will keep going up.

Not sure which candidate cares about fixing this - maybe none of them?

Friedson does. Now whether he can successfully make that happen... ?

[Anonymous]

I will be watching this vote. If anybody votes for adding 450 homes to the RIO lakefront, they will not be getting my vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going with Jawando. He listens to residents more than either of the other two candidates. He has some ideological tunnel vision on policing that I don’t like, but he’s mostly in step with a majority of the council so there won’t be changes on policing. Based on how Jawando has handled subsidies, land use, and the budget this year, he seems to be considerably smarter and more willing to consider differing views than the other candidates.

It says something to me that Jawando was endorsed by most of the Somerset elected officials even though Friedson is their district rep. Glass has also done a good job working with municipal officials, and he’s my second choice. I would choose Peter James over Friedson because I’d rather give autonomous vehicles a chance than watch Friedson waive all the taxes developers pay.

Jawando is the most likely to raise taxes.

The only council member who proposed keeping tax rates the same and keeping the ITOC is the one most likely to raise taxes? OK.

Jawando's plan was rife with error.

The council president praised Jawando’s plan and then criticized Friedson for not engaging on the budget and lying about it.

No. She praised him for bringing options forward for consideration. Not trying to substance of them.

I still would have preferred the Jawando budget to Friedson’s pleas to keep funding the green bank, kid museum, and other pet projects. For claiming to be such a tax hawk, Friedson sure does like to spend money.

Well, Jawando was performative and not substantive. I am surprised after 8 years on the Council, he isn't more familiar with how the budget works. Friedson knows how the budget works but was protecting his constituent interests. There is no doubt. Neither is perfect.

One wants to raise taxes and the other doesn't.
One doesn't know how to cut spending and the other doesn't seem to have the will to cut spending.
It likely comes down to whether they can appoint competent department directors AND whether they will actually listen to them.

For that, the best chance is Friedson. Jawando is just like Elrich in that regard. He knows everything and he is fine with increasing taxes to pay for sloppy budgets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree, there are no good options. We have three candidates for county executive that are similar enough that for me I’m going to pick the lesser of three evils. Which to me is not Jwando or Glass. Of the three and Friedson seems to be the most levelheaded and the one who’s least likely to dig us deeper in a hole as much as the other two.

Friedson has been digging a hole his whole time on the council. First it was cutting impact fees so we don’t have enough money to pay for infrastructure to support growth. Then it was tax abatement after tax abatement so we won’t have the money needed to provide services to new residents. He keeps giving away money in a way that doesn’t show up in the budget but is definitely real.

[Anonymous]

Anyone making a decision on executive based on whether or not they will raise taxes is misguided. The County Council sets the tax rates, not the County Executive.

Just look at what happened over the past month. Elrich asked for a property tax increase to cover things like the school budget, but the council dismissed that, cut the ITOC instead and instituted the slightly progressive income tax with the one-tenth higher top rate, with the net effect of less revenue overall and not enough funding to cover the schools.

How effectively the non-school portion of the budget gets implemented is where an Executive comes in, but that can be undermined or assisted by other actions that the Council takes.

I think Glass would have the hardest time, there, as I see his strength (or weakness, if you don't like his positions) as more of a wonk.

Jawando could have Elrich-type difficulty in being at odds with some of the Council, though we're only talking on a few issues, since there really isn't much daylight, there. However, I think he'd have a more organized group of people with him in appointed positions.

Friedson might have the best chance of being "effective," since he'll have that entourage ready to go, but how you see that really depends on what you want him to be effective about. He really hasn't shown he can be effective independent of the inputs of his donors, and I expect he'd continue to be effective for them, and anti-effective, then, if there is such a term, for much of the rest of the county, just as he has been on the Council.

I can't support that, so, Glass or Jawando. Hard to pick a poison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going with Jawando. He listens to residents more than either of the other two candidates. He has some ideological tunnel vision on policing that I don’t like, but he’s mostly in step with a majority of the council so there won’t be changes on policing. Based on how Jawando has handled subsidies, land use, and the budget this year, he seems to be considerably smarter and more willing to consider differing views than the other candidates.

It says something to me that Jawando was endorsed by most of the Somerset elected officials even though Friedson is their district rep. Glass has also done a good job working with municipal officials, and he’s my second choice. I would choose Peter James over Friedson because I’d rather give autonomous vehicles a chance than watch Friedson waive all the taxes developers pay.

Jawando is the most likely to raise taxes.

The only council member who proposed keeping tax rates the same and keeping the ITOC is the one most likely to raise taxes? OK.

Jawando's plan was rife with error.

The council president praised Jawando’s plan and then criticized Friedson for not engaging on the budget and lying about it.

No. She praised him for bringing options forward for consideration. Not trying to substance of them.

I still would have preferred the Jawando budget to Friedson’s pleas to keep funding the green bank, kid museum, and other pet projects. For claiming to be such a tax hawk, Friedson sure does like to spend money.

Well, Jawando was performative and not substantive. I am surprised after 8 years on the Council, he isn't more familiar with how the budget works. Friedson knows how the budget works but was protecting his constituent interests. There is no doubt. Neither is perfect.

One wants to raise taxes and the other doesn't.
One doesn't know how to cut spending and the other doesn't seem to have the will to cut spending.
It likely comes down to whether they can appoint competent department directors AND whether they will actually listen to them.

For that, the best chance is Friedson. Jawando is just like Elrich in that regard. He knows everything and he is fine with increasing taxes to pay for sloppy budgets.

Friedson burdens the county by pushing for things that reduce revenues without demonstrable social upside, but with specific benefit for his donors. That ends up resulting in additional taxes or decimated services, pretty much hurting residents either way. Classic privatization of profit with socialization of debt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone making a decision on executive based on whether or not they will raise taxes is misguided. The County Council sets the tax rates, not the County Executive.

Just look at what happened over the past month. Elrich asked for a property tax increase to cover things like the school budget, but the council dismissed that, cut the ITOC instead and instituted the slightly progressive income tax with the one-tenth higher top rate, with the net effect of less revenue overall and not enough funding to cover the schools.

How effectively the non-school portion of the budget gets implemented is where an Executive comes in, but that can be undermined or assisted by other actions that the Council takes.

I think Glass would have the hardest time, there, as I see his strength (or weakness, if you don't like his positions) as more of a wonk.

Jawando could have Elrich-type difficulty in being at odds with some of the Council, though we're only talking on a few issues, since there really isn't much daylight, there. However, I think he'd have a more organized group of people with him in appointed positions.

Friedson might have the best chance of being "effective," since he'll have that entourage ready to go, but how you see that really depends on what you want him to be effective about. He really hasn't shown he can be effective independent of the inputs of his donors, and I expect he'd continue to be effective for them, and anti-effective, then, if there is such a term, for much of the rest of the county, just as he has been on the Council.

I can't support that, so, Glass or Jawando. Hard to pick a poison.

Friedson hasn’t shown he can be effective for the county even when he does his donors’ bidding. He’s made a lot of changes to zoning and the taxes that landlords pay (or now don’t pay). We haven’t seen much housing as a result and I don’t think there’s a single project that broke ground solely because of whatever benefit Friedson gave the developer (who also happened to be his donor).

The council is dominated by group think. I would rather some tension between the executive and council. Not on an Elrich level but as a councilmember Jawando showed he was far more open to input from colleagues on bills than Elrich ever did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree, there are no good options. We have three candidates for county executive that are similar enough that for me I’m going to pick the lesser of three evils. Which to me is not Jwando or Glass. Of the three and Friedson seems to be the most levelheaded and the one who’s least likely to dig us deeper in a hole as much as the other two.

Curious why you think that. I'm looking for level-headed, but concluded that Glass most fit that bill.

I'm not PP, and don't know what their opinion is based on, but I work with Council and agree with this take. Friedson is the most practical/realistic of the three. For what it's worth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree, there are no good options. We have three candidates for county executive that are similar enough that for me I’m going to pick the lesser of three evils. Which to me is not Jwando or Glass. Of the three and Friedson seems to be the most levelheaded and the one who’s least likely to dig us deeper in a hole as much as the other two.

Curious why you think that. I'm looking for level-headed, but concluded that Glass most fit that bill.

I'm not PP, and don't know what their opinion is based on, but I work with Council and agree with this take. Friedson is the most practical/realistic of the three. For what it's worth.

Thanks for this. Can you give an example?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree, there are no good options. We have three candidates for county executive that are similar enough that for me I’m going to pick the lesser of three evils. Which to me is not Jwando or Glass. Of the three and Friedson seems to be the most levelheaded and the one who’s least likely to dig us deeper in a hole as much as the other two.

Curious why you think that. I'm looking for level-headed, but concluded that Glass most fit that bill.

I'm not PP, and don't know what their opinion is based on, but I work with Council and agree with this take. Friedson is the most practical/realistic of the three. For what it's worth.

Curious why you think that. Voting for the spending and opposing the revenue is impractical/unrealistic. It shows a total lack of maturity and is more of a republican budget approach than a democratic one.

[Anonymous]

We have 17 people running for 4 slots and it is a struggle to find 4 I like AND I think can be in the top 4.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have 17 people running for 4 slots and it is a struggle to find 4 I like AND I think can be in the top 4.

If you’re far left/NIMBY: Elrich, Sayles, Caballero, maybe Barrie?
If you’re center-left/YIMBY: Goldberg, Pope, Silvestre, McNulty

Obviously not all candidates are the same, but these seem to be the general camps they fall into. The former camp is generally endorsed by MCEA, while the latter camp is generally endorsed by GGWash. Sierra Club endorsements are a little all over the place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have 17 people running for 4 slots and it is a struggle to find 4 I like AND I think can be in the top 4.

If you’re far left/NIMBY: Elrich, Sayles, Caballero, maybe Barrie?
If you’re center-left/YIMBY: Goldberg, Pope, Silvestre, McNulty

Obviously not all candidates are the same, but these seem to be the general camps they fall into. The former camp is generally endorsed by MCEA, while the latter camp is generally endorsed by GGWash. Sierra Club endorsements are a little all over the place.

Sayles is in the enviable position of being endorsed by both MCEA and GGWash, although she did catch some flak for her trip to Hawaii during the budget, so perhaps it cancels out. She’ll still win because she’s an incumbent (whom many people don’t seem to hate with a passion) in a deeply divided field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Election day is coming soon in MoCo. I have my ballot mostly down, including niche positions like sheriff and registrar of wills. Yet, I still don't know who to choose for County Exec. Jawando seems like a career politician and the whole scandal with the Board of Elections puts me off. Friedson chose not to take public financing, which seems scummy, and attacks his opponents without having much policy besides not raising taxes. I'm leaning Evan but I'm not entirely sure if I should.

Friedson only voted one time to not raise taxes.
Every single time besides this last time he voted to INCREASE taxes.

Glass is better choice than Friedson for all the reasons you mentions plus Friedson's voting record.