Why is the Foxhall Community Citizens Association scared of public school children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I don't expect anything until after the election. Should be fun to watch the people running for the Ward 3 council seat try to please everyone while saying nothing.

On queue with the above prediction, Frumin responded as follows:

“Thank you [name redacted]. See my website here for responses to many of the questions you raise.

In short, I think MacArthur should be renovated promptly in its existing envelope where it likely will serve 700 students and without a 500 seat set aside for citywide seats. The Hardy community and the neighbors should play important roles in shaping the program and how it relates to the fabric of the community. It can and should be a great school and have the benefit of helping to relieve overcrowding at Wilson which is an urgent priority.

We really need to look for an alternative to Foxhall, not forsake the funding, but the Mayor already is suggesting it will be years before it happens and we should use those years to explore alternatives. Certainly it should not be 550 seats.

If the relevant funds in the Capital Improvement Plan are not used fully by these two projects, they should be used elsewhere in the Ward to address overcrowding.

And, an urgent priority is to give Stoddert as large of an addition as the community seeks to address overcrowding there. I know sounds have been made that all that can be done is to take Stoddert to something like 516, but clearly there are ways to add more capacity and if it is needed to fully serve the existing Stoddert boundary, it should be delivered ASAP.

In my blog post, I outline some of the work I have done in this area and how it informs my thinking on these subjects. Again, see here“

That seems like a reasonable response. What is your objection to it?

"The Hardy community and the neighbors should play important roles in shaping the program and how it relates to the fabric of the community. "

That is pandering. One of the things that the Foxhall neighbors have insisted on is that the people who live closest -- them -- should have a greater voice. I'm sorry that's not how democracy works, every voice is equal. And the Foxhallers have already shown themselves unwilling to engage in good faith. Build the school that needs to be built, not the one the neighbors want. And as to the neighbors having a say in the program? Are you kidding me?

I've known Matt for a long time and one of the things he'll tell you -- which anyone who observes public education in DC will agree with -- is that DCPS makes boneheaded facilities decisions. And those decisions have long-lasting impacts, because facilities have long lives. And the reason DCPS makes so many boneheaded facilities decisions is that the decisions are inherently highly political, and DCPS is unwilling or unable to do the work necessary to come up with better solutions.

Now, I'll be the first to admit that Foxhall Elementary is suboptimal, and the direct result of previous boneheaded moves -- leading off with the handling of the Old Hardy School. But I also feel that given that we can't change the past, it's the best available option right now. "Tapping the brakes" -- as Frumin is proposing -- may sound like a reasonable compromise, but given the way facilities budgeting works it's tantamount to scuttling the project. And it is caving into the same kind of myopic, self-centered political pressure that has led to so many boneheaded decisions in the past.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I don't expect anything until after the election. Should be fun to watch the people running for the Ward 3 council seat try to please everyone while saying nothing.

On queue with the above prediction, Frumin responded as follows:

“Thank you [name redacted]. See my website here for responses to many of the questions you raise.

In short, I think MacArthur should be renovated promptly in its existing envelope where it likely will serve 700 students and without a 500 seat set aside for citywide seats. The Hardy community and the neighbors should play important roles in shaping the program and how it relates to the fabric of the community. It can and should be a great school and have the benefit of helping to relieve overcrowding at Wilson which is an urgent priority.

We really need to look for an alternative to Foxhall, not forsake the funding, but the Mayor already is suggesting it will be years before it happens and we should use those years to explore alternatives. Certainly it should not be 550 seats.

If the relevant funds in the Capital Improvement Plan are not used fully by these two projects, they should be used elsewhere in the Ward to address overcrowding.

And, an urgent priority is to give Stoddert as large of an addition as the community seeks to address overcrowding there. I know sounds have been made that all that can be done is to take Stoddert to something like 516, but clearly there are ways to add more capacity and if it is needed to fully serve the existing Stoddert boundary, it should be delivered ASAP.

In my blog post, I outline some of the work I have done in this area and how it informs my thinking on these subjects. Again, see here“

That seems like a reasonable response. What is your objection to it?

"The Hardy community and the neighbors should play important roles in shaping the program and how it relates to the fabric of the community. "

That is pandering. One of the things that the Foxhall neighbors have insisted on is that the people who live closest -- them -- should have a greater voice. I'm sorry that's not how democracy works, every voice is equal. And the Foxhallers have already shown themselves unwilling to engage in good faith. Build the school that needs to be built, not the one the neighbors want. And as to the neighbors having a say in the program? Are you kidding me?

I disagree. I think the bigger issue is DCPS wants to siphon families who are in the Stoddert zone to the new school That is untenable from a logistics standpoint. It would take kids who are walkable to their neighborhood school and force their families to drive. That is stupid. Frumin seems to be more concerned about that, and rightly so. Just because it fits the Foxhall NIMBY narrative doesn't mean it is wrong.

The idea that there would be three schools focus on a two bloc area in a transit poor location is really a bad idea. Yes, the school overcrowding needs to be addressed, but it also needs to be done in a smart manner. What the Mayor is proposing for lower Palisades simply doesn't make any sense.

I think you both are misreading what Frumin is saying. When talking about the Hardy community shaping the program, he talking about the high school at MacArthur, not the ES at Foxhall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I don't expect anything until after the election. Should be fun to watch the people running for the Ward 3 council seat try to please everyone while saying nothing.

On queue with the above prediction, Frumin responded as follows:

“Thank you [name redacted]. See my website here for responses to many of the questions you raise.

In short, I think MacArthur should be renovated promptly in its existing envelope where it likely will serve 700 students and without a 500 seat set aside for citywide seats. The Hardy community and the neighbors should play important roles in shaping the program and how it relates to the fabric of the community. It can and should be a great school and have the benefit of helping to relieve overcrowding at Wilson which is an urgent priority.

We really need to look for an alternative to Foxhall, not forsake the funding, but the Mayor already is suggesting it will be years before it happens and we should use those years to explore alternatives. Certainly it should not be 550 seats.

If the relevant funds in the Capital Improvement Plan are not used fully by these two projects, they should be used elsewhere in the Ward to address overcrowding.

And, an urgent priority is to give Stoddert as large of an addition as the community seeks to address overcrowding there. I know sounds have been made that all that can be done is to take Stoddert to something like 516, but clearly there are ways to add more capacity and if it is needed to fully serve the existing Stoddert boundary, it should be delivered ASAP.

In my blog post, I outline some of the work I have done in this area and how it informs my thinking on these subjects. Again, see here“

That seems like a reasonable response. What is your objection to it?

"The Hardy community and the neighbors should play important roles in shaping the program and how it relates to the fabric of the community. "

That is pandering. One of the things that the Foxhall neighbors have insisted on is that the people who live closest -- them -- should have a greater voice. I'm sorry that's not how democracy works, every voice is equal. And the Foxhallers have already shown themselves unwilling to engage in good faith. Build the school that needs to be built, not the one the neighbors want. And as to the neighbors having a say in the program? Are you kidding me?

I disagree. I think the bigger issue is DCPS wants to siphon families who are in the Stoddert zone to the new school That is untenable from a logistics standpoint. It would take kids who are walkable to their neighborhood school and force their families to drive. That is stupid. Frumin seems to be more concerned about that, and rightly so. Just because it fits the Foxhall NIMBY narrative doesn't mean it is wrong.

The idea that there would be three schools focus on a two bloc area in a transit poor location is really a bad idea. Yes, the school overcrowding needs to be addressed, but it also needs to be done in a smart manner. What the Mayor is proposing for lower Palisades simply doesn't make any sense.

I think you both are misreading what Frumin is saying. When talking about the Hardy community shaping the program, he talking about the high school at MacArthur, not the ES at Foxhall.

He wrote: "The Hardy community and the neighbors should play important roles in shaping the program and how it relates to the fabric of the community."

Hardy community? Of course. Neighbors? Hell no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I don't expect anything until after the election. Should be fun to watch the people running for the Ward 3 council seat try to please everyone while saying nothing.

On queue with the above prediction, Frumin responded as follows:

“Thank you [name redacted]. See my website here for responses to many of the questions you raise.

In short, I think MacArthur should be renovated promptly in its existing envelope where it likely will serve 700 students and without a 500 seat set aside for citywide seats. The Hardy community and the neighbors should play important roles in shaping the program and how it relates to the fabric of the community. It can and should be a great school and have the benefit of helping to relieve overcrowding at Wilson which is an urgent priority.

We really need to look for an alternative to Foxhall, not forsake the funding, but the Mayor already is suggesting it will be years before it happens and we should use those years to explore alternatives. Certainly it should not be 550 seats.

If the relevant funds in the Capital Improvement Plan are not used fully by these two projects, they should be used elsewhere in the Ward to address overcrowding.

And, an urgent priority is to give Stoddert as large of an addition as the community seeks to address overcrowding there. I know sounds have been made that all that can be done is to take Stoddert to something like 516, but clearly there are ways to add more capacity and if it is needed to fully serve the existing Stoddert boundary, it should be delivered ASAP.

In my blog post, I outline some of the work I have done in this area and how it informs my thinking on these subjects. Again, see here“

That seems like a reasonable response. What is your objection to it?

"The Hardy community and the neighbors should play important roles in shaping the program and how it relates to the fabric of the community. "

That is pandering. One of the things that the Foxhall neighbors have insisted on is that the people who live closest -- them -- should have a greater voice. I'm sorry that's not how democracy works, every voice is equal. And the Foxhallers have already shown themselves unwilling to engage in good faith. Build the school that needs to be built, not the one the neighbors want. And as to the neighbors having a say in the program? Are you kidding me?

I disagree. I think the bigger issue is DCPS wants to siphon families who are in the Stoddert zone to the new school That is untenable from a logistics standpoint. It would take kids who are walkable to their neighborhood school and force their families to drive. That is stupid. Frumin seems to be more concerned about that, and rightly so. Just because it fits the Foxhall NIMBY narrative doesn't mean it is wrong.

The idea that there would be three schools focus on a two bloc area in a transit poor location is really a bad idea. Yes, the school overcrowding needs to be addressed, but it also needs to be done in a smart manner. What the Mayor is proposing for lower Palisades simply doesn't make any sense.

I think you both are misreading what Frumin is saying. When talking about the Hardy community shaping the program, he talking about the high school at MacArthur, not the ES at Foxhall.

OK. The neighbors have made it clear that they are steadfastly opposed to OOBers at MacA. Should such preferences be given extra weight when planning for the new school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I don't expect anything until after the election. Should be fun to watch the people running for the Ward 3 council seat try to please everyone while saying nothing.

On queue with the above prediction, Frumin responded as follows:

“Thank you [name redacted]. See my website here for responses to many of the questions you raise.

In short, I think MacArthur should be renovated promptly in its existing envelope where it likely will serve 700 students and without a 500 seat set aside for citywide seats. The Hardy community and the neighbors should play important roles in shaping the program and how it relates to the fabric of the community. It can and should be a great school and have the benefit of helping to relieve overcrowding at Wilson which is an urgent priority.

We really need to look for an alternative to Foxhall, not forsake the funding, but the Mayor already is suggesting it will be years before it happens and we should use those years to explore alternatives. Certainly it should not be 550 seats.

If the relevant funds in the Capital Improvement Plan are not used fully by these two projects, they should be used elsewhere in the Ward to address overcrowding.

And, an urgent priority is to give Stoddert as large of an addition as the community seeks to address overcrowding there. I know sounds have been made that all that can be done is to take Stoddert to something like 516, but clearly there are ways to add more capacity and if it is needed to fully serve the existing Stoddert boundary, it should be delivered ASAP.

In my blog post, I outline some of the work I have done in this area and how it informs my thinking on these subjects. Again, see here“

That seems like a reasonable response. What is your objection to it?

"The Hardy community and the neighbors should play important roles in shaping the program and how it relates to the fabric of the community. "

That is pandering. One of the things that the Foxhall neighbors have insisted on is that the people who live closest -- them -- should have a greater voice. I'm sorry that's not how democracy works, every voice is equal. And the Foxhallers have already shown themselves unwilling to engage in good faith. Build the school that needs to be built, not the one the neighbors want. And as to the neighbors having a say in the program? Are you kidding me?

I disagree. I think the bigger issue is DCPS wants to siphon families who are in the Stoddert zone to the new school That is untenable from a logistics standpoint. It would take kids who are walkable to their neighborhood school and force their families to drive. That is stupid. Frumin seems to be more concerned about that, and rightly so. Just because it fits the Foxhall NIMBY narrative doesn't mean it is wrong.

The idea that there would be three schools focus on a two bloc area in a transit poor location is really a bad idea. Yes, the school overcrowding needs to be addressed, but it also needs to be done in a smart manner. What the Mayor is proposing for lower Palisades simply doesn't make any sense.

I think you both are misreading what Frumin is saying. When talking about the Hardy community shaping the program, he talking about the high school at MacArthur, not the ES at Foxhall.

OK. The neighbors have made it clear that they are steadfastly opposed to OOBers at MacA. Should such preferences be given extra weight when planning for the new school?

I'll go further. I was at a FCCA meeting where the president said he opposed any public school in the area because public schools are a by-right use of land, and don't have to go through the zoning variance process as a private school would. Should someone who is fundamentally opposed to public schools be given a seat at the table?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I disagree. I think the bigger issue is DCPS wants to siphon families who are in the Stoddert zone to the new school That is untenable from a logistics standpoint. It would take kids who are walkable to their neighborhood school and force their families to drive. That is stupid. Frumin seems to be more concerned about that, and rightly so. Just because it fits the Foxhall NIMBY narrative doesn't mean it is wrong.

The idea that there would be three schools focus on a two bloc area in a transit poor location is really a bad idea. Yes, the school overcrowding needs to be addressed, but it also needs to be done in a smart manner. What the Mayor is proposing for lower Palisades simply doesn't make any sense.

Yes, this is where Frumin is overwhelmingly correct. The solution, currently planned, is to build a school for Foxhall children, and fill it mainly with kids from Stoddert/Glover Park. That's not right! The posts here about Foxhall children are also correct: they have to travel far to school.

The working group, without Glover Park representation, agreed to hurt Glover Park to help Foxhall/Palisades. That's pretty easy to do if you don't consider the costs to others. As a small example of this, check how they calculated distance to the new school from Glover Park: on the rutted Glover Archbold park path that wouldn't be walkable for kids, nor bright enough to walk on for part of the school year. That's a hike, not a walk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I disagree. I think the bigger issue is DCPS wants to siphon families who are in the Stoddert zone to the new school That is untenable from a logistics standpoint. It would take kids who are walkable to their neighborhood school and force their families to drive. That is stupid. Frumin seems to be more concerned about that, and rightly so. Just because it fits the Foxhall NIMBY narrative doesn't mean it is wrong.

The idea that there would be three schools focus on a two bloc area in a transit poor location is really a bad idea. Yes, the school overcrowding needs to be addressed, but it also needs to be done in a smart manner. What the Mayor is proposing for lower Palisades simply doesn't make any sense.

Yes, this is where Frumin is overwhelmingly correct. The solution, currently planned, is to build a school for Foxhall children, and fill it mainly with kids from Stoddert/Glover Park. That's not right! The posts here about Foxhall children are also correct: they have to travel far to school.

The working group, without Glover Park representation, agreed to hurt Glover Park to help Foxhall/Palisades. That's pretty easy to do if you don't consider the costs to others. As a small example of this, check how they calculated distance to the new school from Glover Park: on the rutted Glover Archbold park path that wouldn't be walkable for kids, nor bright enough to walk on for part of the school year. That's a hike, not a walk.

If there are parents who truly believe that current (or for that matter, future) Stoddert students from GP would be forced to go to Foxhall ES, then the FCCA’s propaganda is pretty damn effective. If Frumin is profiting from that propaganda, that’s just sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I disagree. I think the bigger issue is DCPS wants to siphon families who are in the Stoddert zone to the new school That is untenable from a logistics standpoint. It would take kids who are walkable to their neighborhood school and force their families to drive. That is stupid. Frumin seems to be more concerned about that, and rightly so. Just because it fits the Foxhall NIMBY narrative doesn't mean it is wrong.

The idea that there would be three schools focus on a two bloc area in a transit poor location is really a bad idea. Yes, the school overcrowding needs to be addressed, but it also needs to be done in a smart manner. What the Mayor is proposing for lower Palisades simply doesn't make any sense.

Yes, this is where Frumin is overwhelmingly correct. The solution, currently planned, is to build a school for Foxhall children, and fill it mainly with kids from Stoddert/Glover Park. That's not right! The posts here about Foxhall children are also correct: they have to travel far to school.

The working group, without Glover Park representation, agreed to hurt Glover Park to help Foxhall/Palisades. That's pretty easy to do if you don't consider the costs to others. As a small example of this, check how they calculated distance to the new school from Glover Park: on the rutted Glover Archbold park path that wouldn't be walkable for kids, nor bright enough to walk on for part of the school year. That's a hike, not a walk.

First, it's nonsense that there was no Glover Park representation on the Working Group, every school in the Wilson feeder had representation. Second, the Working Group didn't "agree to hurt Glover Park to help Foxhall/Palisades," because the Working Group didn't decide anything, the Mayor and Chancellor Ferebee did. Third, it's not true that the plan is to "fill it mainly with kids from Stoddert/Glover Park." Here is exactly what Ferebee said in his letter announcing that the school would be built, in March, 2022: "This will require drawing a new boundary that re-assigns portions of the Key, Mann and Stoddert boundaries, and developing a phase-in approach for when these changes will go into effect for impacted schools."

[Anonymous]

I don't see a lot of FCCA donors in Frumin's reported take:

https://dcgeekery.com/dc-campaign-finance/2022/council-ward-3/frumin/points

I think that is a canard being thrown by some supporters of other candidates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't see a lot of FCCA donors in Frumin's reported take:

https://dcgeekery.com/dc-campaign-finance/2022/council-ward-3/frumin/points

I think that is a canard being thrown by some supporters of other candidates.

Campaign contributions, thankfully, are not everything. What was being referenced in this case is his response to a misleading screed by a long-time opponent of the new DCPS schools that not only failed to correct the various misrepresentations in the original e-mail but then presented proposals designed to appeal to those who harbor fears based on those misrepresentations (such as the poster above who claims that Foxhall ES will filled with "kids from Stoddert/Glover Park").

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I don't expect anything until after the election. Should be fun to watch the people running for the Ward 3 council seat try to please everyone while saying nothing.

The most vociferous opponent (an FCCA stalwart) of Foxhall ES and MacArthur HS posted the following to the Glover Park listserv on Friday (edited for brevity):

“During the Democracy for DC (D4DC) Ward-3 councilperson candidate debate last night, all candidates talked about the importance of access to high-quality public schools.
Some focused on public-school over-crowding in Ward 3 (more than others).
Some acknowledged the very large disparities in public-school quality across Wards (more than others).
Schools were also mentioned when candidates talked about reducing crime in DC (e.g. more and better after-school programs to keep kids off the streets).

We should be asking candidates for more specifics about their proposals for improving “equitable” access to high-quality public schools in DC. Schools are a really important part of a neighborhood, so they are an important issue for all elected positions (Mayor, Councilperson, and ANC commissioners)

Schools are also a reason why the ANC redistricting process currently underway in the city is very important. The local ANC is an effective way that a neighborhood can deal with issues about their schools.

Two New Schools in the very southwestern corner of Ward 3

Two capital expenditure proposals that have been in the budget since July of 2020 are two new schools that will be located in the very southwestern corner of Ward 3. The first of these new schools is the new 1000-student high school at the MacArthur Blvd and Q-street location . . .

The second new school will be a 550-student elementary school (the Foxhall School), to be built across the street from the new high school on Hardy Park. Chancellor Ferebee recently announced that the proposed Foxhall School will be populated by moving students from Key Elementary and Stoddert Elementary schools to the new school. [ED: Source???]

The proposed location of the new elementary school has been controversial as a solution to over-crowding in Ward 3 schools. FS Key elementary School enrollment has been declining since 2017 and enrollment for the 2021-2022 school year is 319 students. It currently has the smallest enrollment of Ward 3 elementary schools . . .

Residents in ANC 3B (the home of Stoddert Elementary School) do not want to have to drive their kids to the Foxhall school when they have a wonderful school within walking distance. As a result of their engagement, funds for the expansion of Stoddert Elementary School were reinstated in the FY 2022 budget. Moreover, the western part of Ward 3 (ANC 3D) grew by very little during the past 10 years (compared to other parts of Ward 3 and other parts of DC). This is especially true when one excludes population growth at the two universities in ANC 3D (AU and the GW Mt Vernon Campus).

So why is the mayor so committed to putting a new elementary school in this particular location? Who will have to attend the Foxhall School? Why isn't DCPS trying to locate a new elementary school in a part of Ward 3 where elementary schools currently have very large enrollments? Why isn’t the city doing more to improve the quality of public schools in the parts of DC where there has been a lot of population growth? Is the most equitable solution to access to quality education one that expands Ward 3 capacity and then make students in other Wards travel long distances to attend these schools?

Schools are really important. The coming election represents a great opportunity for DC residents to ask candidates for more specifics about their solutions to improving “equitable” access to high-quality local public schools in DC”

The Foxhallers have polished their rhetoric while still promoting the same short sighted, self serving agenda. Complaining about traffic didn’t get them much sympathy. Now they say instead “Schools are really important!”. But building Foxhall ES is not equitable. Never mind Foxhall kids may be stuck in trailers at Key ES.. Is that equitable (even though the kids involved are UMC) ? The same school which the lowest enrollment in the city, an enrollment that has been declining for years. I bet the FCCA hope the overcrowding at Key may resolve on its own if we wait long enough.

[Anonymous]

Foxhall ES would draw from parts of Key, Stoddert, and Mann, according to our school’s principal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't see a lot of FCCA donors in Frumin's reported take:

https://dcgeekery.com/dc-campaign-finance/2022/council-ward-3/frumin/points

I think that is a canard being thrown by some supporters of other candidates.

Bing! Bing! Bing! Bing! We have a winner!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
First, it's nonsense that there was no Glover Park representation on the Working Group, every school in the Wilson feeder had representation. Second, the Working Group didn't "agree to hurt Glover Park to help Foxhall/Palisades," because the Working Group didn't decide anything, the Mayor and Chancellor Ferebee did. Third, it's not true that the plan is to "fill it mainly with kids from Stoddert/Glover Park." Here is exactly what Ferebee said in his letter announcing that the school would be built, in March, 2022: "This will require drawing a new boundary that re-assigns portions of the Key, Mann and Stoddert boundaries, and developing a phase-in approach for when these changes will go into effect for impacted schools."

A representative from Stoddert is not a representative from Glover Park. We have ANCs for a reason. As was brought up at the time, all the other affected ANCs had representation. This was a major unforced error by Cheh/DCPS that was the first clue she was headed out the door.

Obviously if you build an ES for the Palisades, they're going to have to get kids to fill the school from somewhere. That somewhere, by every working group 'study', is Glover Park.

It's funny, and obvious politically, why no one mentions Burleith in the proposed shuffle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see a lot of FCCA donors in Frumin's reported take:

https://dcgeekery.com/dc-campaign-finance/2022/council-ward-3/frumin/points

I think that is a canard being thrown by some supporters of other candidates.

Campaign contributions, thankfully, are not everything. What was being referenced in this case is his response to a misleading screed by a long-time opponent of the new DCPS schools that not only failed to correct the various misrepresentations in the original e-mail but then presented proposals designed to appeal to those who harbor fears based on those misrepresentations (such as the poster above who claims that Foxhall ES will filled with "kids from Stoddert/Glover Park").

I think the point is, one can have a view that is sound, that isn't because of the FCCA. In this case, it is clear Mr. Frumin has basically zero donations from the Foxhall area, despite taking the largest amount of donations in the race. So the idea of cynically ascribing his view as pandering to the Foxhall NIMBYs is a false narrative.