Reply to Montgomery County At-Large

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Montgomery County At-Large - help me choose"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Erlich is horrible. Just horrible. The fact he will likely be back on the Council is a testament to the ignorance for voters [/quote]

Maybe, just maybe, you should try to understand why Elrich appeals to so many voters. It has nothing to do with those voters being ignorant.[/quote]
Can you explain it to me? I’m a lifelong Montgomery County resident and a liberal Democrat and I have never understood it.[/quote]

Sure. Lots of Montgomery County voters don't want upzoning. Sure, if there's a big empty plot of land near a metro station, go ahead and build an apartment building there (see White Flint). But in neighborhoods full of single family homes, people don't want a bunch of quadplexes and townhouses on their street. And they don't understand how demolishing SFHs that cost $600K, and building townhomes that cost $900K, helps the affordability problem. Finally, they understand that our roads and schools are already stressed, and so we need to be careful about the development that happens.

Just read through Elrich's newsletters, and you'll see that Elrich thoughtfully addresses everything I mentioned above (and much more):
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/news?search=&fromDate=&toDate=&category=&department=&newsType=257&page=0

The YIMBYs can yell, scream and belittle the Elrich supporters all they want. It is not going to change the fact that it's a significant voting block. And no they're not ignorant just because they believe that unchecked development and endless incentives to developers are not good for the county.[/quote]

This is a common NIMBY talking point. [b]Nobody is actively trying to demolish all single-family housing in the county.[/b] The kind of development you mentioned above as good development is development that YIMBYs on the council support and NIMBYs on the council oppose.[/quote]

This is a common YIMBY disingenuous misdirection.  PP did not talk about demolishing all single family housing.  PP [i]did[/i] talk about allowing higher densities, the undesirability of that for [i]existing resident neighbors[/i] and the infrastructure problems increased by that development, with individual lower-cost SFHs sacrificed for those builds and effective giveaways from the common wealth (incentives mentioned, but could simply be the socialization of burden to privatize benefit represented by such allowances).

And who are these NIMBYs on the council, anyway?  Has anyone successfully defended any of Elrich's positions as CE against the YIMBY crowd?[/quote]

Jawando and Mink. Possibly Katz?[/quote]

Laughable.  Anti-giveaway isn't exactly NIMBY, and none of what they ever did involved more than signaling.  Mink was pretty much against only the U Blvd plan, which is where her district was vocally in opposition.

And Katz never seemed to do anything either way on the subject besides throw up his hands and ask, "What else are we supposed to do?" when always voting with the more aggressive/vocal YIMBY majority.[/quote]

Before I engage with you further, could you please explain if you consider yourself generally a NIMBY or if you wouldn’t necessarily say that but merely have problems with implementation on a local level?[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics