Term limit for Montgomery County Executive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, Elrich just released a video today about how awful and stupid the upzoning is. I have no idea how much of a say he has in it, but I am thankful he's speaking out against it.

He has no say in it. Some of what he says about it is right and some of what he says about is wrong. The proposal he outlined for housing would make housing prices even higher than the Planning proposal would.

Get specific about what Elrich proposes that will make housing even more expensive. There’s nothing.

But more importantly, he makes two key points:

There is enough housing planned for development ALREADY in Montgomery County. We don’t have an issue is scarcity that developers want us to think warrants ruining SFH communities to ensure they make $$$ hassle free.

There is nothing in the “attainable housing plan” that ensures affordability- NOTHING. It’s just a plan to make it easier for developers to build quadplexes without having the “annoyance” of worrying about the impact on the community, including schools and infrastructure.

Moratoria, for example, would make housing more expensive.

Yes. But they work towards ensuring adequate infrastructure, which, if left unaddressed, would make the housing created less valuable (not just the consequent price, but the intrinsic value to each resident and to society, collectively), along with all of the existing housing.

Please come up with solutions that do both, and among which full detail and robust comparative evaluations are made available for publicly available for comment for an extended period prior to plans being put forth.

We don't build infrastructure until we have the population that needs it.

That’s a pretty stupid way to go about it. You don’t have to dig the holes, but you need to have a comprehensive plan, especially if it’s such a “crisis.”

Plan. PLAN. Planning.

Is this a foreign concept to the PLANNING Board?

Is just giving up, seeing what sticks, and then playing infrastructure catchup for the next several decades really a plan?

Yes, it is. That is how Montgomery County has been doing it for the entire history of development in Montgomery County. Montgomery County has never, ever built the infrastructure before the population that needs it.

Well, that seems pretty correctable. However, not by speeding up the pace of decline via this attainable housing “plan.”

It does? How?

I would think by making sure that, in the future, the infrastructure met the coincident need of the population. With planning.

-- DP

Oh, how silly of the entire Montgomery County land use process to have been doing it wrong for over 100 years, when they could have solved their problems by simply ... planning.

Certainly, there is nothing to be learned from the past. Or from meaningful dialog. Or from comprehensive research. Or...

There is plenty to be learned from the past, and I suggest you start doing it. One good book you could read is Suburb, by Royce Hanson.

Royce Hanson has expressed nuanced views on upzoning, which refers to changing zoning regulations to allow for increased density, such as permitting taller buildings or more housing units on a given parcel of land. In general, Hanson supports thoughtful, strategic upzoning, especially when it aligns with broader goals like affordable housing and smart growth, but he emphasizes the importance of doing so in a way that preserves the quality of life, community character, and environmental sustainability.

Hanson has been critical of blanket upzoning approaches that lack consideration for infrastructure, school capacity, and the preservation of green spaces. He advocates for context-sensitive upzoning that balances growth with community needs, often pointing to Montgomery County’s Agricultural Reserve as an example of how growth can be managed in a way that protects certain areas while allowing for urban development in others.

In his writings and public statements, Hanson has underscored the importance of planning and public input when it comes to zoning changes. He tends to argue for a comprehensive approach to zoning reform, one that includes considerations for affordable housing, transportation, and environmental impacts, rather than piecemeal changes that could lead to negative outcomes like congestion or loss of community identity.

Where did you get these many words from?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, Elrich just released a video today about how awful and stupid the upzoning is. I have no idea how much of a say he has in it, but I am thankful he's speaking out against it.

He has no say in it. Some of what he says about it is right and some of what he says about is wrong. The proposal he outlined for housing would make housing prices even higher than the Planning proposal would.

Get specific about what Elrich proposes that will make housing even more expensive. There’s nothing.

But more importantly, he makes two key points:

There is enough housing planned for development ALREADY in Montgomery County. We don’t have an issue is scarcity that developers want us to think warrants ruining SFH communities to ensure they make $$$ hassle free.

There is nothing in the “attainable housing plan” that ensures affordability- NOTHING. It’s just a plan to make it easier for developers to build quadplexes without having the “annoyance” of worrying about the impact on the community, including schools and infrastructure.

Moratoria, for example, would make housing more expensive.

Yes. But they work towards ensuring adequate infrastructure, which, if left unaddressed, would make the housing created less valuable (not just the consequent price, but the intrinsic value to each resident and to society, collectively), along with all of the existing housing.

Please come up with solutions that do both, and among which full detail and robust comparative evaluations are made available for publicly available for comment for an extended period prior to plans being put forth.

We don't build infrastructure until we have the population that needs it.

That’s a pretty stupid way to go about it. You don’t have to dig the holes, but you need to have a comprehensive plan, especially if it’s such a “crisis.”

Plan. PLAN. Planning.

Is this a foreign concept to the PLANNING Board?

Is just giving up, seeing what sticks, and then playing infrastructure catchup for the next several decades really a plan?

Yes, it is. That is how Montgomery County has been doing it for the entire history of development in Montgomery County. Montgomery County has never, ever built the infrastructure before the population that needs it.

Well, that seems pretty correctable. However, not by speeding up the pace of decline via this attainable housing “plan.”

It does? How?

I would think by making sure that, in the future, the infrastructure met the coincident need of the population. With planning.

-- DP

Oh, how silly of the entire Montgomery County land use process to have been doing it wrong for over 100 years, when they could have solved their problems by simply ... planning.

Certainly, there is nothing to be learned from the past. Or from meaningful dialog. Or from comprehensive research. Or...

There is plenty to be learned from the past, and I suggest you start doing it. One good book you could read is Suburb, by Royce Hanson.

Royce Hanson has expressed nuanced views on upzoning, which refers to changing zoning regulations to allow for increased density, such as permitting taller buildings or more housing units on a given parcel of land. In general, Hanson supports thoughtful, strategic upzoning, especially when it aligns with broader goals like affordable housing and smart growth, but he emphasizes the importance of doing so in a way that preserves the quality of life, community character, and environmental sustainability.

Hanson has been critical of blanket upzoning approaches that lack consideration for infrastructure, school capacity, and the preservation of green spaces. He advocates for context-sensitive upzoning that balances growth with community needs, often pointing to Montgomery County’s Agricultural Reserve as an example of how growth can be managed in a way that protects certain areas while allowing for urban development in others.

In his writings and public statements, Hanson has underscored the importance of planning and public input when it comes to zoning changes. He tends to argue for a comprehensive approach to zoning reform, one that includes considerations for affordable housing, transportation, and environmental impacts, rather than piecemeal changes that could lead to negative outcomes like congestion or loss of community identity.

He should work for Elrich, I think that their visions align much more so than the lazy, unplanned trash that the council is trying to sell to the public.

Speaking of lazy, you don't know much about Montgomery County history or Montgomery County politics.

[Anonymous]

I’m against term limits for the position. Others will always have the chance to vote a candidate out. I would say this even if I weren’t concerned about Tyrone’s efforts to slither into political power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd much rather have reasonable limits on power that tend not to provide great advantage to incumbency than to have any term limit.

Thay said, I feel the opposite about the particular candidate, preferring his approach to that of anyone I've seen as a likely challenger, and I see the ballot initiative as an end-around by his detractors where they have not been able to place a more attractive overall candidate on the ballot, indicating that they simply want to ensure a choice from only that one point of view that otherwise would not have the necessary popular support.

He’s the most reasonable involved in MoCo politics. I’ll vote no just for that.

This.

+1. They are doing it to get rid of the voice of reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, Elrich just released a video today about how awful and stupid the upzoning is. I have no idea how much of a say he has in it, but I am thankful he's speaking out against it.

He has no say in it. Some of what he says about it is right and some of what he says about is wrong. The proposal he outlined for housing would make housing prices even higher than the Planning proposal would.

Get specific about what Elrich proposes that will make housing even more expensive. There’s nothing.

But more importantly, he makes two key points:

There is enough housing planned for development ALREADY in Montgomery County. We don’t have an issue is scarcity that developers want us to think warrants ruining SFH communities to ensure they make $$$ hassle free.

There is nothing in the “attainable housing plan” that ensures affordability- NOTHING. It’s just a plan to make it easier for developers to build quadplexes without having the “annoyance” of worrying about the impact on the community, including schools and infrastructure.

Moratoria, for example, would make housing more expensive.

Yes. But they work towards ensuring adequate infrastructure, which, if left unaddressed, would make the housing created less valuable (not just the consequent price, but the intrinsic value to each resident and to society, collectively), along with all of the existing housing.

Please come up with solutions that do both, and among which full detail and robust comparative evaluations are made available for publicly available for comment for an extended period prior to plans being put forth.

We don't build infrastructure until we have the population that needs it.

That’s a pretty stupid way to go about it. You don’t have to dig the holes, but you need to have a comprehensive plan, especially if it’s such a “crisis.”

Plan. PLAN. Planning.

Is this a foreign concept to the PLANNING Board?

Is just giving up, seeing what sticks, and then playing infrastructure catchup for the next several decades really a plan?

Yes, it is. That is how Montgomery County has been doing it for the entire history of development in Montgomery County. Montgomery County has never, ever built the infrastructure before the population that needs it.

Well, that seems pretty correctable. However, not by speeding up the pace of decline via this attainable housing “plan.”

It does? How?

I would think by making sure that, in the future, the infrastructure met the coincident need of the population. With planning.

-- DP

Oh, how silly of the entire Montgomery County land use process to have been doing it wrong for over 100 years, when they could have solved their problems by simply ... planning.

Certainly, there is nothing to be learned from the past. Or from meaningful dialog. Or from comprehensive research. Or...

There is plenty to be learned from the past, and I suggest you start doing it. One good book you could read is Suburb, by Royce Hanson.

Royce Hanson has expressed nuanced views on upzoning, which refers to changing zoning regulations to allow for increased density, such as permitting taller buildings or more housing units on a given parcel of land. In general, Hanson supports thoughtful, strategic upzoning, especially when it aligns with broader goals like affordable housing and smart growth, but he emphasizes the importance of doing so in a way that preserves the quality of life, community character, and environmental sustainability.

Hanson has been critical of blanket upzoning approaches that lack consideration for infrastructure, school capacity, and the preservation of green spaces. He advocates for context-sensitive upzoning that balances growth with community needs, often pointing to Montgomery County’s Agricultural Reserve as an example of how growth can be managed in a way that protects certain areas while allowing for urban development in others.

In his writings and public statements, Hanson has underscored the importance of planning and public input when it comes to zoning changes. He tends to argue for a comprehensive approach to zoning reform, one that includes considerations for affordable housing, transportation, and environmental impacts, rather than piecemeal changes that could lead to negative outcomes like congestion or loss of community identity.

He should work for Elrich, I think that their visions align much more so than the lazy, unplanned trash that the council is trying to sell to the public.

Speaking of lazy, you don't know much about Montgomery County history or Montgomery County politics.

Ok, Zoomer.

[Anonymous]

Elrich knew what was going on way back when, and he tried his best to prevent it:

https://www.scribd.com/document/633528764/Appointment-of-James-Hedrick-to-the-Maryland-National-Capital-Park-and-Planning-Commission

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Elrich knew what was going on way back when, and he tried his best to prevent it:

https://www.scribd.com/document/633528764/Appointment-of-James-Hedrick-to-the-Maryland-National-Capital-Park-and-Planning-Commission

Wow, that was damning. Good for Elrich.

[Anonymous]

I think people have no idea how much of Elrich's support was from people who voted solely based on the fact that he was less likely to give developers what they want. I heard this from so many people. Everyone know Blair was in the developer's pockets, and Elrich was not. It doesn't surprise me one bit that the developers will do whatever they can to stop him from serving again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Hey quick question- do any of you have any thoughts o whether or not it is a good idea to have term limits for a county executive?

The people have decided that term limits are a good idea for the county executive. I think it’s arguable that the executive position has much more power than the council positions so it’s arguable that a shorter limit for the executive is appropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hey quick question- do any of you have any thoughts o whether or not it is a good idea to have term limits for a county executive?

The people have decided that term limits are a good idea for the county executive. I think it’s arguable that the executive position has much more power than the council positions so it’s arguable that a shorter limit for the executive is appropriate.

^^^^ Rapacious developer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hey quick question- do any of you have any thoughts o whether or not it is a good idea to have term limits for a county executive?

The people have decided that term limits are a good idea for the county executive. I think it’s arguable that the executive position has much more power than the council positions so it’s arguable that a shorter limit for the executive is appropriate.

^^^^ Rapacious developer

Or more likely, a Republican who is upset because the Republicans can't win elections in Montgomery County.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hey quick question- do any of you have any thoughts o whether or not it is a good idea to have term limits for a county executive?

The people have decided that term limits are a good idea for the county executive. I think it’s arguable that the executive position has much more power than the council positions so it’s arguable that a shorter limit for the executive is appropriate.

^^^^ Rapacious developer

Or more likely, a Republican who is upset because the Republicans can't win elections in Montgomery County.

Hahahahahahaha I’m the least Republican person ever and not at all a developer. WTF is wrong with you people.

[Anonymous]

I was going to vote for the term limits but now I’m going to vote against them to own the YIMBYs. I don’t even disagree with the YIMBYs but I think they’re obnoxious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hey quick question- do any of you have any thoughts o whether or not it is a good idea to have term limits for a county executive?

The people have decided that term limits are a good idea for the county executive. I think it’s arguable that the executive position has much more power than the council positions so it’s arguable that a shorter limit for the executive is appropriate.

^^^^ Rapacious developer

Or more likely, a Republican who is upset because the Republicans can't win elections in Montgomery County.

Hahahahahahaha I’m the least Republican person ever and not at all a developer. WTF is wrong with you people.

Whether or not you're a Republican, the fact remains that the county Republicans are the force behind the ballot measure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hey quick question- do any of you have any thoughts o whether or not it is a good idea to have term limits for a county executive?

The people have decided that term limits are a good idea for the county executive. I think it’s arguable that the executive position has much more power than the council positions so it’s arguable that a shorter limit for the executive is appropriate.

^^^^ Rapacious developer

Or more likely, a Republican who is upset because the Republicans can't win elections in Montgomery County.

Hahahahahahaha I’m the least Republican person ever and not at all a developer. WTF is wrong with you people.

Whether or not you're a Republican, the fact remains that the county Republicans are the force behind the ballot measure.

^^^in fact I think they were the force behind the previous term limits ballot measure too. Specifically Robin Ficker for that one, as I recall.