Shooting at Brandywine & Connecticut Ave NW This Afternoon

[Anonymous]

The provision of the law he is talking about relates to targeted, agreed to searches of people released under supervision for a gun crime, whether as part of a plea or pending trial. He thinks that would be good and that it is Constitutional.

Pinto has scheduled hearings re: her new public safety bill, that provision is sure to be discussed. Her staff worked with the USAO when drafting the bill and based that particular provision on a CA law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Eric Goulet also ran for W3 CM, he would have been a much better pick, imo.

Yep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The provision of the law he is talking about relates to targeted, agreed to searches of people released under supervision for a gun crime, whether as part of a plea or pending trial. He thinks that would be good and that it is Constitutional.

Pinto has scheduled hearings re: her new public safety bill, that provision is sure to be discussed. Her staff worked with the USAO when drafting the bill and based that particular provision on a CA law.

I'm not a lawyer.

Having to 'agree' to warrantless searches feels weird to me. How can defendants 'agree', unless the threat is being held? Why not have it ordered by a judge directly, akin to being held without bond?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surely Bowser and the Council are aware of the numbers?

These salaries are likely leaving the city due to affordability not crime. This is basically middle class people looking for more space and bang for their buck. I bet those making $250k and above aren't leaning as frequently because they've got disposable income!

We make more than $250k and left due to crime. We know four other families who left for the same reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eric Goulet also ran for W3 CM, he would have been a much better pick, imo.

Yep.

Lol. Goulet would have been more of a disaster than Frumin.

We need an adult. Goulet has proven repeatedly that he is not one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone interpret what he means by this?

What are these magical “services” that Frumin keeps hiding behind? Does he even know?

I mean, if someone aloud me to live in a luxury building like the Saratoga for free in perpetuity I would be a model citizen. I’d be out picking up trash along Connecticut Ave and helping old ladies across the street and spend the rest of my time thanking my lucky stars. I’d need no other incentives. But no, I pay 1/3 of my salary to live in a 1950’s building that probably should just be torn down. It kills me that I’m partially paying for these people to live better than me. It’s completely unfair and dystopian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone interpret what he means by this?

“Non life threatening injuries”. Gee. Seems to me that being on life support for a couple days and needing surgery is kinda life threatening. MPD looking to erase or dampen crime stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone interpret what he means by this?

“Non life threatening injuries”. Gee. Seems to me that being on life support for a couple days and needing surgery is kinda life threatening. MPD looking to erase or dampen crime stats.

Frumin is tone deaf. What a disaster. I miss Cheh and Carol!

[Anonymous]

Hearing many sirens and an ambulance at Saratoga today. What's that about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The provision of the law he is talking about relates to targeted, agreed to searches of people released under supervision for a gun crime, whether as part of a plea or pending trial. He thinks that would be good and that it is Constitutional.

Pinto has scheduled hearings re: her new public safety bill, that provision is sure to be discussed. Her staff worked with the USAO when drafting the bill and based that particular provision on a CA law.

I'm not a lawyer.

Having to 'agree' to warrantless searches feels weird to me. How can defendants 'agree', unless the threat is being held? Why not have it ordered by a judge directly, akin to being held without bond?

it’s a condition of their parole or release from jail. just like drug testing etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eric Goulet also ran for W3 CM, he would have been a much better pick, imo.

Yep.

Lol. Goulet would have been more of a disaster than Frumin.

We need an adult. Goulet has proven repeatedly that he is not one.

Monte! I hope she runs again.

[Anonymous]

Anyone hear anything about this? Summer is over.

The city has created a work group to examine “whether or not we are providing the appropriate level of service and accountability” for participants, Turnage said. It aims to provide recommendations on that and other questions by the end of the summer.

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

Since the non-resident shooter walked into The Saratoga with an electronic key, guess they also have some "door control" issues, eh? Not unique to EoTP. Fob/key cards and cameras don't seem to actually move the needle re: safety, just document after the fact.

If people and landlords understood that they could be removed from the voucher program, that would incentivize other behaviors. Now it's just a slush fund and shell game with evicted voucher holders just moving around.

The rents at The Saratoga and Chesapeake House next door are eye watering, at regular rates. Vouchers have really exerted upward pressure on rents that otherwise were becoming more affordable in 2019. Lots of units available at Saratoga, if not private public housing this month, the shooting is accelerating the tip. Feel bad for the nearby condo and co-op owners who have been expressing concerns for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone interpret what he means by this?

“Non life threatening injuries”. Gee. Seems to me that being on life support for a couple days and needing surgery is kinda life threatening. MPD looking to erase or dampen crime stats.

Frumin is tone deaf. What a disaster. I miss Cheh and Carol!

Same. What does Frumin's coded language mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone interpret what he means by this?

What are these magical “services” that Frumin keeps hiding behind? Does he even know?

I mean, if someone aloud me to live in a luxury building like the Saratoga for free in perpetuity I would be a model citizen. I’d be out picking up trash along Connecticut Ave and helping old ladies across the street and spend the rest of my time thanking my lucky stars. I’d need no other incentives. But no, I pay 1/3 of my salary to live in a 1950’s building that probably should just be torn down. It kills me that I’m partially paying for these people to live better than me. It’s completely unfair and dystopian.

The fact that there is no requirement to participate in services or even open the door to the one sw visit a month makes it a ludicrous argument.

I'm still stuck on what he means by keeping communities "whole?" The community around The Saratoga has changed radically in the past 5 years. Look at MPD crime cards if you don't believe me. At the community meeting, both Frumin and MPD acknowledged that crime has risen in the Connecticut and Wisconsin corridors at the same time the number of vouchers has soared to over 3,000 permanent supportive housing vouchers in those buildings. If crime cards showed drug related activity bet that would be eye opening. Yet Van Ness Main Street is jonesing for a dispensary. More and more businesses are closing, how are more low income people going to help that? Dispensaries have a lot of cash and a valuable product, they attract crime. The agenda of VNMS and DC seems to be to clear regular paying people out, esp those paying under market rent, ie, the elderly, most afraid of crime, followed by families and single women.

[Anonymous]

The Saratoga is charging just under $2k/month for a 500 sq foot studio and there are such serious safety issues? It used to be that living less safe areas was cheaper. Are any paying tenants leasing at those rates? They were offering a month free if moved in by 9/20. It's not even an all utilities included building. That seems like a LOT of money. But maybe it's just a placeholder number that justifies the $1k more that vouchers pay and is in no way linked to paying tenant market conditions?