Nine districts for MoCo

[Anonymous]

If you are a FB user and are interested in learning more about 9 districts join the group:

https://www.facebook.com/ninedistrictsformoco/

[Anonymous]

“A respected voice in Montgomery, Leggett has mostly shied away from weighing in on local politics since retiring in 2018. But he recently joined with former Republican congresswoman Connie Morella, businessman David Blair and tech executive Carmen Ortiz Larsen to campaign against the nine-district proposal.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/montgomery-ballot-initiatives/2020/09/25/6e030512-fd7e-11ea-8d05-9beaaa91c71f_story.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“A respected voice in Montgomery, Leggett has mostly shied away from weighing in on local politics since retiring in 2018. But he recently joined with former Republican congresswoman Connie Morella, businessman David Blair and tech executive Carmen Ortiz Larsen to campaign against the nine-district proposal.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/montgomery-ballot-initiatives/2020/09/25/6e030512-fd7e-11ea-8d05-9beaaa91c71f_story.html

I'm kind of surprised that Blair is against it.

[Anonymous]

I really don't get why the downcounty Democrats are so afraid of giving the upcounty people a couple more seats. They'll still have a solid majority on the council, and the upcounty districts will generally vote Democrat anyway.

Leggett's example is absurd. Is there a more rational explanation that I'm not seeing besides being afraid of proportional representation for upcounty interests?

[Anonymous]

The Parent Coalition is for this ridiculous plan. Anyone with half a brain knows that is enough of a reason to be against it (just like anything Ficker is for).

[Anonymous]

Here is an interview by Patch on nonie district. The leader is a woman of color. https://patch.com/maryland/rockville/nine-districts-moco-demanding-fair-representation-all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really don't get why the downcounty Democrats are so afraid of giving the upcounty people a couple more seats. They'll still have a solid majority on the council, and the upcounty districts will generally vote Democrat anyway.

Leggett's example is absurd. Is there a more rational explanation that I'm not seeing besides being afraid of proportional representation for upcounty interests?

It won't get Republicans elected, if that's what people are hoping for (or fear). It will likely get some more moderate Democrats elected.

[Anonymous]

I don't see a problem with there being 9 districts. I despise the Republican Party and all it stands for but I don't think this is a particularly dangerous proposal. Term limits was also opposed by local leaders and supported by Ficker, and it's been great for the Council IMO.

Just don't expand the Council to 11. That has a lot of added costs (there is not office space for 2 more members). And it will make Council sessions impossibly long.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't see a problem with there being 9 districts. I despise the Republican Party and all it stands for but I don't think this is a particularly dangerous proposal. Term limits was also opposed by local leaders and supported by Ficker, and it's been great for the Council IMO.

Just don't expand the Council to 11. That has a lot of added costs (there is not office space for 2 more members). And it will make Council sessions impossibly long.

There is not. And we just spent a bunch of $$ renovating the Council offices on two floors of the building.

~ Council staffer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't get why the downcounty Democrats are so afraid of giving the upcounty people a couple more seats. They'll still have a solid majority on the council, and the upcounty districts will generally vote Democrat anyway.

Leggett's example is absurd. Is there a more rational explanation that I'm not seeing besides being afraid of proportional representation for upcounty interests?

It won't get Republicans elected, if that's what people are hoping for (or fear). It will likely get some more moderate Democrats elected.

Agreed. That seems the most likely outcome. Are the downcounty Democrats really that afraid of moderate Democrats? I don't understand why so many of them view this as an existential threat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't get why the downcounty Democrats are so afraid of giving the upcounty people a couple more seats. They'll still have a solid majority on the council, and the upcounty districts will generally vote Democrat anyway.

Leggett's example is absurd. Is there a more rational explanation that I'm not seeing besides being afraid of proportional representation for upcounty interests?

It won't get Republicans elected, if that's what people are hoping for (or fear). It will likely get some more moderate Democrats elected.

Agreed. That seems the most likely outcome. Are the downcounty Democrats really that afraid of moderate Democrats? I don't understand why so many of them view this as an existential threat.

Navarro is done - term limited. So her district is open. I think Hucker wants to run for higher office. So his might be available as well, next go round.

I don't know where Will Jawando, Evan Glass, and Gabe Albornoz live. They are the ones with the most to lose. So that leaves those three to fight out district changes that may pit them against one another, depending on where they live.

I will be sad if Albornoz is squeezed out somehow. Neutral on the other two.

[Anonymous]

We really need to get rid of at-large members. More than half the council lives in Silver Spring or Takoma Park. More than half the county does not live in Silver Spring or Takoma Park.
Every part of the county should be proportionally represented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't get why the downcounty Democrats are so afraid of giving the upcounty people a couple more seats. They'll still have a solid majority on the council, and the upcounty districts will generally vote Democrat anyway.

Leggett's example is absurd. Is there a more rational explanation that I'm not seeing besides being afraid of proportional representation for upcounty interests?

It won't get Republicans elected, if that's what people are hoping for (or fear). It will likely get some more moderate Democrats elected.

Agreed. That seems the most likely outcome. Are the downcounty Democrats really that afraid of moderate Democrats? I don't understand why so many of them view this as an existential threat.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Parent Coalition is for this ridiculous plan. Anyone with half a brain knows that is enough of a reason to be against it (just like anything Ficker is for).

The County Council is against it. They are so against it, they added their own ballot initiative (Question C) to counteract it. Instead of just letting the question stand on its own and allowing voters to decide, they added their own question to confuse people.

Therefore, I'm in favor of it. If the Council is opposing this so much, then I'll vote for it.

[Anonymous]

9 districts make sense as of council have to ask for permission and are disasters and are clueless idiots. You keep on voting for morons from the same areas who accomplish nothing in life but giving contracts to their friends and back gazing- you moco ppl that want the same are the problem