Alexandria Mayor Race

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one, as far as I can tell, is indicating that getting rid of the southern mezz was the city's call or the "city's fault". What people are upset about is that the city not only did not work to inform the residents of this change but now it appears acted to withhold this information from the public. And PPs insistence that this is all no big deal is not making the VM look better. You've identified yourself as being pro-Justin so this is making him look that much worse by association, whether you intend that or not. A vocal Justin supporter treating people like they're nuts for being upset by how this was handled only does harm to the VM.

This is well-expressed and reasonable.

And it gently implies, but does not bluntly declare, that one reason that some people support Wilson is that they expect better of Wilson than this. This is simply a shocking and disappointing departure from the Wilson that people expect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The city induced thousands of people to rely on that south entrance. When the city chose to hush up (and it was the city's choice, not a confidentiality requirement), the city's behavior was just plain dirty. Whether that decision was the council's or the city manager's or the deputy's or whomever doesn't;t matter. If it was a mistake, there was a year to fix it, and no one even checked. The decision was the city's. Everything deeper than that is just internal finger-pointing.

1. Most of those people bought prior to June 2017.

2. Its not at all clear to me that the staff did not think it was part of the confidentiality requirement.

3. No one checked, because they were sure they were right.

4. Who is at fault matters, because the Deputy City Manager is not on the ballot. I am not going to vote against good candidates because one city staffer screwed up on one issue. If you think Feely or Ray or Aguirre or whomever can guarantee you staff perfection on every complex procurement, you are naive, IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sounds like this is a market rate building, so yeah, a problem given that landlords can upgrade and raise rents by right, so denser development is the only way to get committed AH units. If the landlord violated code that is up to staff to address, I don't know wha t happened with your complaint.

but of course my point was merely that the debate (which has been vigorous on AH) might actually have taken up some of their time, along with many other issues.

It does seem we are becoming polarized and its harder and harder to engage with each other. I am trying to respond in good faith however.

You say you are responding in good faith yet have been incredibly dismissive of just how bad this is or how badly people feel towards the City.

City allows landlords to allow buildings to fall into disrepair while tenants are still there paying rent because the landlord wants to redevelop? Well yea, that happens is your response. Do you understand how dismissive that is and how that leads directly into "yep, city sure as shootin doesn't care about AH"?

And your response "I mean I know that to you the question of the southern entrance to the metro station is huge" - again, so unbelievably dismissive about a situation that is a BIG FREAKIN DEAL to people. I don't even LIVE in PY and I'm impacted by this and upset about it. And a new metro station IS a huge deal for the City of Alexandria. But your responding by acting like people are nuts for thinking the council, mayor, and vice mayor shirked their duty by not doing anything to get citizens informed about the changes.

Look, you obviously are pro VM. Maybe you know him personally and know him to be a good man. But he, along with the rest of the people involved, massively messed up here. And pretending they didn't isn't doing him any good. This is a moment for a come to god, We Messed Up And We're Sorry response, not "why are you so mad, bruh?"

Excuse me. I think the City needs to enfore code, of course. If a building owner is violating code and the City is ignoring it that is a big deal, but I think I would have heard about. If the landlord is not in violation than there probably IS nothing the City can do about it. Unethical of the landlord, but I am not here to judge (unnamed) landlords. rather to discuss the upcoming election.

And, I think the change to PY is unfortunate, but AFAICT not the City's fault. And I am not sure communicating that in 2018 instead of June 2017 IS a big deal. Though I also am far more optimistic about how the station will work for south PY than others are.

It's the city's fault. And widely communicating it right away (which the city could have done) would have prevented any claim that the city committed a fraud.

The change is the City's fault? How? The bids came in too high, and there was nothing else they could cut without bigger consequences. Or are we back to not communicating is the City's fault. See the conflation of different things - anger at the substance, the claims about a "coverup" and the conflation of errors by City staff with with dishonesty by CMs' is one of the reasons I am so put off by the angry people here. It seems of a piece with the kind of free association anger that charecterizes so many vocal people in the City.

What did the city do to make sure people were informed of the change? Can you tell me one thing they did to push FOR the release of information rather than against it?

HOw does that respond to my comment? That is about the failure to push back on public information, not about the substance of the change itself. And IF staff erred in not pushing back (but maybe they pushed back but not in writing? I don't know) still no evidence that CMs knew they did not.

There seems to be a lot of jumping from "Jinks misunderstood the NDA and didnt push on WMATA" to "its Smedberg's fault we don't have a second entrance".

In a city where we have so many other big issues I don't think the first point rises to very much. The second seems wholely unsupported by the evidence, even in the absence of a detailed response.

You're rather unsuccessfully trying to make it seem as if people are blaming the city for the change to the southern entrance when in reality, people are blaming the city for not working to make that information public as soon as possible. No one here is claiming the city is the one that killed the southern entrance, we're saying that the city didn't do enough/anything to make that change public knowledge. So in my response, I'm just changing the conversation back to what people are actually complaining about - the failure on the part of the city was about not getting this information out there to the citizens. The change to the project was WMATAs call, the secrecy around it is looking increasingly like the city's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The city induced thousands of people to rely on that south entrance. When the city chose to hush up (and it was the city's choice, not a confidentiality requirement), the city's behavior was just plain dirty. Whether that decision was the council's or the city manager's or the deputy's or whomever doesn't;t matter. If it was a mistake, there was a year to fix it, and no one even checked. The decision was the city's. Everything deeper than that is just internal finger-pointing.

1. Most of those people bought prior to June 2017.

2. Its not at all clear to me that the staff did not think it was part of the confidentiality requirement.

3. No one checked, because they were sure they were right.

4. Who is at fault matters, because the Deputy City Manager is not on the ballot. I am not going to vote against good candidates because one city staffer screwed up on one issue. If you think Feely or Ray or Aguirre or whomever can guarantee you staff perfection on every complex procurement, you are naive, IMO.

Absolutely right. They can't. But if they won't coddle staff and will put the city manager on the ropes when he treats residents, permit applicants, real estate investors, and everybody else so arrogantly, then it's an improvement. If this was all so out-of-character, maybe it would be different. It's not. It's just one thing after another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one, as far as I can tell, is indicating that getting rid of the southern mezz was the city's call or the "city's fault". What people are upset about is that the city not only did not work to inform the residents of this change but now it appears acted to withhold this information from the public. And PPs insistence that this is all no big deal is not making the VM look better. You've identified yourself as being pro-Justin so this is making him look that much worse by association, whether you intend that or not. A vocal Justin supporter treating people like they're nuts for being upset by how this was handled only does harm to the VM.

Oh please.

I am not in the VMs campaign, do not work for him, and have only met him maybe three times. I do like his positions on most things, and think he is about the smartest and most energetic local elected official in the region. But please don't blame him for anything I have said. That would be REALLY unfair (and were I to take that approach I would have a thousand reasons to oppose the Mayor, but I know it is not fair to blame her for her supporters)

Let me just say that the handful documents which have been shown indicating WMATA did not believe the NDA applied has just become public today. I know of no evidence that the VM or any other elected official saw them before today. The VM, who has a day job, has not had time to respond to this. Yet people are already judging.

I do hope I have the right to express that I think some of the reaction is quite unreasonable. But perhaps not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sounds like this is a market rate building, so yeah, a problem given that landlords can upgrade and raise rents by right, so denser development is the only way to get committed AH units. If the landlord violated code that is up to staff to address, I don't know wha t happened with your complaint.

but of course my point was merely that the debate (which has been vigorous on AH) might actually have taken up some of their time, along with many other issues.

It does seem we are becoming polarized and its harder and harder to engage with each other. I am trying to respond in good faith however.

You say you are responding in good faith yet have been incredibly dismissive of just how bad this is or how badly people feel towards the City.

City allows landlords to allow buildings to fall into disrepair while tenants are still there paying rent because the landlord wants to redevelop? Well yea, that happens is your response. Do you understand how dismissive that is and how that leads directly into "yep, city sure as shootin doesn't care about AH"?

And your response "I mean I know that to you the question of the southern entrance to the metro station is huge" - again, so unbelievably dismissive about a situation that is a BIG FREAKIN DEAL to people. I don't even LIVE in PY and I'm impacted by this and upset about it. And a new metro station IS a huge deal for the City of Alexandria. But your responding by acting like people are nuts for thinking the council, mayor, and vice mayor shirked their duty by not doing anything to get citizens informed about the changes.

Look, you obviously are pro VM. Maybe you know him personally and know him to be a good man. But he, along with the rest of the people involved, massively messed up here. And pretending they didn't isn't doing him any good. This is a moment for a come to god, We Messed Up And We're Sorry response, not "why are you so mad, bruh?"

Excuse me. I think the City needs to enfore code, of course. If a building owner is violating code and the City is ignoring it that is a big deal, but I think I would have heard about. If the landlord is not in violation than there probably IS nothing the City can do about it. Unethical of the landlord, but I am not here to judge (unnamed) landlords. rather to discuss the upcoming election.

And, I think the change to PY is unfortunate, but AFAICT not the City's fault. And I am not sure communicating that in 2018 instead of June 2017 IS a big deal. Though I also am far more optimistic about how the station will work for south PY than others are.

It's the city's fault. And widely communicating it right away (which the city could have done) would have prevented any claim that the city committed a fraud.

The change is the City's fault? How? The bids came in too high, and there was nothing else they could cut without bigger consequences. Or are we back to not communicating is the City's fault. See the conflation of different things - anger at the substance, the claims about a "coverup" and the conflation of errors by City staff with with dishonesty by CMs' is one of the reasons I am so put off by the angry people here. It seems of a piece with the kind of free association anger that charecterizes so many vocal people in the City.

What did the city do to make sure people were informed of the change? Can you tell me one thing they did to push FOR the release of information rather than against it?

HOw does that respond to my comment? That is about the failure to push back on public information, not about the substance of the change itself. And IF staff erred in not pushing back (but maybe they pushed back but not in writing? I don't know) still no evidence that CMs knew they did not.

There seems to be a lot of jumping from "Jinks misunderstood the NDA and didnt push on WMATA" to "its Smedberg's fault we don't have a second entrance".

In a city where we have so many other big issues I don't think the first point rises to very much. The second seems wholely unsupported by the evidence, even in the absence of a detailed response.

You're rather unsuccessfully trying to make it seem as if people are blaming the city for the change to the southern entrance when in reality, people are blaming the city for not working to make that information public as soon as possible. No one here is claiming the city is the one that killed the southern entrance, we're saying that the city didn't do enough/anything to make that change public knowledge. So in my response, I'm just changing the conversation back to what people are actually complaining about - the failure on the part of the city was about not getting this information out there to the citizens. The change to the project was WMATAs call, the secrecy around it is looking increasingly like the city's.

It's the city's fault. And widely communicating it right away (which the city could have done) would have prevented any claim that the city committed a fraud.



PP said its the City's fault. I realize there are different anon posters here. But given the nature of the rhetoric, I can hardly blame PP for confusing the the issue of secrecy with the issue of the change itself.

Thank you though for saying increasingingly looking - I think we agree that nothing is yet proven from these documents. Though it does look worse for Mr Jinks and staff than it did yesterday.

[Anonymous]

A vote for Wilson after learning all this is a blank check to let Alexandria's leadership lie to its constituents.

End of story.

Dude is cooked. Buh Bye!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The city induced thousands of people to rely on that south entrance. When the city chose to hush up (and it was the city's choice, not a confidentiality requirement), the city's behavior was just plain dirty. Whether that decision was the council's or the city manager's or the deputy's or whomever doesn't;t matter. If it was a mistake, there was a year to fix it, and no one even checked. The decision was the city's. Everything deeper than that is just internal finger-pointing.

1. Most of those people bought prior to June 2017.

2. Its not at all clear to me that the staff did not think it was part of the confidentiality requirement.

3. No one checked, because they were sure they were right.

4. Who is at fault matters, because the Deputy City Manager is not on the ballot. I am not going to vote against good candidates because one city staffer screwed up on one issue. If you think Feely or Ray or Aguirre or whomever can guarantee you staff perfection on every complex procurement, you are naive, IMO.

Absolutely right. They can't. But if they won't coddle staff and will put the city manager on the ropes when he treats residents, permit applicants, real estate investors, and everybody else so arrogantly, then it's an improvement. If this was all so out-of-character, maybe it would be different. It's not. It's just one thing after another.

I though the dig against staff, especially by those candidates, is that staff is too easy on investors, and permit applicants.

My own interactions with staff on various issues have been mostly positive, and I think an attempt to have Council micromanage staff (or get rude to them, the way the Mayor did with City attorney in public over the Ramsey houses) will result in a worse functioning City.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A vote for Wilson after learning all this is a blank check to let Alexandria's leadership lie to its constituents.

End of story.

Dude is cooked. Buh Bye!

Where was Alison in all this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one, as far as I can tell, is indicating that getting rid of the southern mezz was the city's call or the "city's fault". What people are upset about is that the city not only did not work to inform the residents of this change but now it appears acted to withhold this information from the public. And PPs insistence that this is all no big deal is not making the VM look better. You've identified yourself as being pro-Justin so this is making him look that much worse by association, whether you intend that or not. A vocal Justin supporter treating people like they're nuts for being upset by how this was handled only does harm to the VM.

Oh please.

I am not in the VMs campaign, do not work for him, and have only met him maybe three times. I do like his positions on most things, and think he is about the smartest and most energetic local elected official in the region. But please don't blame him for anything I have said. That would be REALLY unfair (and were I to take that approach I would have a thousand reasons to oppose the Mayor, but I know it is not fair to blame her for her supporters)

Let me just say that the handful documents which have been shown indicating WMATA did not believe the NDA applied has just become public today. I know of no evidence that the VM or any other elected official saw them before today. The VM, who has a day job, has not had time to respond to this. Yet people are already judging.

I do hope I have the right to express that I think some of the reaction is quite unreasonable. But perhaps not.

Sure, and we have the right to express that the behavior on the part of the city staff, CMs, VM, and mayor is unreasonable and unacceptable to us. So just like you can tell us you disagree with us, we can tell you that we disagree with you. And these are public servants and as such, they are open to the judgement of the public. That's an integral part of the gig. If they don't want public scrutiny, there are a plethora of private sector options available to them. Will I be open to hearing their response to this release of information? Yes. Does that mean I have to sit quietly with my hands gently folded waiting for them to anoint me with the blessing of their speech until discussing it? No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A vote for Wilson after learning all this is a blank check to let Alexandria's leadership lie to its constituents.

End of story.

Dude is cooked. Buh Bye!

Where was Alison in all this?

Well that's the question, right? It's the person that was probably acting more competently and was actually getting involved in the situation that turned into a total cluster vs. the person who was apparently not paying ANY attention... who is the better option?

Doesn't exactly give that warm fuzzy feeling going into the primary...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one, as far as I can tell, is indicating that getting rid of the southern mezz was the city's call or the "city's fault". What people are upset about is that the city not only did not work to inform the residents of this change but now it appears acted to withhold this information from the public. And PPs insistence that this is all no big deal is not making the VM look better. You've identified yourself as being pro-Justin so this is making him look that much worse by association, whether you intend that or not. A vocal Justin supporter treating people like they're nuts for being upset by how this was handled only does harm to the VM.

Oh please.

I am not in the VMs campaign, do not work for him, and have only met him maybe three times. I do like his positions on most things, and think he is about the smartest and most energetic local elected official in the region. But please don't blame him for anything I have said. That would be REALLY unfair (and were I to take that approach I would have a thousand reasons to oppose the Mayor, but I know it is not fair to blame her for her supporters)

Let me just say that the handful documents which have been shown indicating WMATA did not believe the NDA applied has just become public today. I know of no evidence that the VM or any other elected official saw them before today. The VM, who has a day job, has not had time to respond to this. Yet people are already judging.

I do hope I have the right to express that I think some of the reaction is quite unreasonable. But perhaps not.

Sure, and we have the right to express that the behavior on the part of the city staff, CMs, VM, and mayor is unreasonable and unacceptable to us. So just like you can tell us you disagree with us, we can tell you that we disagree with you. And these are public servants and as such, they are open to the judgement of the public. That's an integral part of the gig. If they don't want public scrutiny, there are a plethora of private sector options available to them. Will I be open to hearing their response to this release of information? Yes. Does that mean I have to sit quietly with my hands gently folded waiting for them to anoint me with the blessing of their speech until discussing it? No.

yes you do have that right. And yhu will note, I have not told you that your rhetoric will lead me or anyone else to vote against any particular candidate. I have not tried to silence you.

I am glad you are open to a response. But what I read in the posts above is "these FOIA documents, such as they are, suggest that someone City staff knew the NDA did not apply, and there is no evidence of any pushback"

But "its clear that the elected officals were dishonest and they should be defeated in the election" which IMHO is not the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A vote for Wilson after learning all this is a blank check to let Alexandria's leadership lie to its constituents.

End of story.

Dude is cooked. Buh Bye!

Where was Alison in all this?

Well that's the question, right? It's the person that was probably acting more competently and was actually getting involved in the situation that turned into a total cluster vs. the person who was apparently not paying ANY attention... who is the better option?

Doesn't exactly give that warm fuzzy feeling going into the primary...

Well maybe, just maybe, we should take a deep breath and wait to learn more. But personally, there are to me many more important issues in the City. But that is just me, don't take it as the VM saying this is not important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A vote for Wilson after learning all this is a blank check to let Alexandria's leadership lie to its constituents.

End of story.

Dude is cooked. Buh Bye!

Where was Alison in all this?

She had all the same info and also did nothing about it.

The choice in this race is Allison in the corner, listening and chatting and casting dissent votes and never being on the record versus Justin, active, educated and in the fray, but also spinning and lying and not caring what it takes to get shit done.

It's an incredibly frustrating choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That image is blurry but there's more here if you are interested. https://pycr.blog/

Basically residents of Potomac Yard did a FOIA around the metro mezzanine deletion and found evidence of the city council knowing about the deletion in 2017 (not "just a few weeks ago" as several are stating).

More importantly, the documents show that when WMATA posted an image of the one mezzanine design in early April, city staff worked hard to get it taken down - even as WMATA expressed that it was not confidential under their rules (recall that the city is saying the WMATA NDA is why they couldn't tell the public).

Holy crap... thank you for posting that. If their interpretation of the information holds up, my vote has been changed.

From who(m) to who(m)? At least as far as mayoral candidates, they both knew and they both did nothing.

I'm definitely much more anti-incumbent knowing it though. Every member of the council knew in 2017.

And NO ONE said anything even though the NDA did not prohibit discussion of design issues and/or changes. All of them are culpable.