Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I lived EOTP, it was common for me and neighbors to drive kids to Forest Hills Playground or to Rose Park or Palisades. That SHOOTERS ran across this playground at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon blows my mind. And basically crickets from the political class and somewhat of a shrug from residents. No community meeting scheduled as of yet...

https://dgs.dc.gov/page/dgs-forest-hills-park--play-dc-playground-project

3 shots were fired, 1 hit the victim, what do people think will protect you or your kids on the sidewalk from the other 2 as you go to the park, tennis courts, BreadFurst or Politics & Prose in broad daylight on a weekend?

If the provisions limiting the criminal background screenings and evictions were changed and landlords were held responsible for results or become ineligible for program, things would change. Too much money being made from status quo, I suppose. The WP series on Sedgewick Gardens laid out how disruptive tenants can be used to clear buildings of below market rent stabilized tenants and those who have the resources to exercise TOPA.

Curious- why didn’t you walk to your local playground? Or drive to one closer to your home?

Not PP, but open air drug market adjacent to the closest playground to my home in DC and two shootouts during the daytime in about an 18-month span. Continuing to go there seemed like an unforced error if anything happened when safe parks were a 15 minute drive away.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are tenants convicted of a crime allowed to participate in the voucher program? Like, including dependents? I know in Charleston SC, when they lifted that restriction after the Floyd protests, the formerly safe public housing devolved really quickly into an absolute sh*tshow, and they have now backtracked.

Subsidized housing is a privilege. It's reasonable to impose some basic conditions like not committing felony crimes.

No, I think housing is now considered a right, see UDHR.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I lived EOTP, it was common for me and neighbors to drive kids to Forest Hills Playground or to Rose Park or Palisades. That SHOOTERS ran across this playground at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon blows my mind. And basically crickets from the political class and somewhat of a shrug from residents. No community meeting scheduled as of yet...

https://dgs.dc.gov/page/dgs-forest-hills-park--play-dc-playground-project

3 shots were fired, 1 hit the victim, what do people think will protect you or your kids on the sidewalk from the other 2 as you go to the park, tennis courts, BreadFurst or Politics & Prose in broad daylight on a weekend?

If the provisions limiting the criminal background screenings and evictions were changed and landlords were held responsible for results or become ineligible for program, things would change. Too much money being made from status quo, I suppose. The WP series on Sedgewick Gardens laid out how disruptive tenants can be used to clear buildings of below market rent stabilized tenants and those who have the resources to exercise TOPA.

Curious- why didn’t you walk to your local playground? Or drive to one closer to your home?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I live around the same block as the Brandywine and Saratoga. We moved out of our last apt. building (the infamous Sedgwick Gardens) because the voucher recipients had started filling the majority of the units and it was too unsafe to live there anymore, especially with a baby on the way. We specifically chose to move north up Connecticut to try to avoid another building being overrun with voucher recipients. I fear we may need to move again if this continues to get worse.

You should leave DC, most voucher recipients are people who are working hard but cannot afford the rising costs of living while raising a family. City living is not for you, it's okay to tap out to the suburbs. I mean you obviously want to do so anyway, given your mindset and stereotypes about lower income peoples.

Already left. VA resident (and Younkin voter - first R vote ever). Enjoy your decaying city, high taxes, and rising violence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are tenants convicted of a crime allowed to participate in the voucher program? Like, including dependents? I know in Charleston SC, when they lifted that restriction after the Floyd protests, the formerly safe public housing devolved really quickly into an absolute sh*tshow, and they have now backtracked.

Subsidized housing is a privilege. It's reasonable to impose some basic conditions like not committing felony crimes.

No, I think housing is now considered a right, see UDHR.

The challenge of what social workers sometimes call “door control” is common among the newly housed. They often find it hard to say no to friends looking for a place to crash or use drugs. Over time, a program participant can lose control of the property.

Rachel Cook, who lives nearby, emailed D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D) in January. “Currently, people with mental health and substance abuse issues are living in the same building with drug dealers and sex traffickers with no accountability or oversight,” Cook wrote. “This is truly appalling and inhumane. I can’t imagine a worse scenario for a person battling drug addiction, and the constant overdoses clearly demonstrate the urgency of this situation.”

Even when tenants are arrested, they’re quickly released and able to return to the building, Derosa said during the meeting, because neither the Housing Authority nor the District’s Department of Human Services will revoke their vouchers or otherwise hold them accountable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are tenants convicted of a crime allowed to participate in the voucher program? Like, including dependents? I know in Charleston SC, when they lifted that restriction after the Floyd protests, the formerly safe public housing devolved really quickly into an absolute sh*tshow, and they have now backtracked.

Subsidized housing is a privilege. It's reasonable to impose some basic conditions like not committing felony crimes.

Anonymous wrote:Are tenants convicted of a crime allowed to participate in the voucher program? Like, including dependents? I know in Charleston SC, when they lifted that restriction after the Floyd protests, the formerly safe public housing devolved really quickly into an absolute sh*tshow, and they have now backtracked.

Anonymous wrote:Are tenants convicted of a crime allowed to participate in the voucher program? Like, including dependents? I know in Charleston SC, when they lifted that restriction after the Floyd protests, the formerly safe public housing devolved really quickly into an absolute sh*tshow, and they have now backtracked.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I lived EOTP, it was common for me and neighbors to drive kids to Forest Hills Playground or to Rose Park or Palisades. That SHOOTERS ran across this playground at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon blows my mind. And basically crickets from the political class and somewhat of a shrug from residents. No community meeting scheduled as of yet...

https://dgs.dc.gov/page/dgs-forest-hills-park--play-dc-playground-project

3 shots were fired, 1 hit the victim, what do people think will protect you or your kids on the sidewalk from the other 2 as you go to the park, tennis courts, BreadFurst or Politics & Prose in broad daylight on a weekend?

If the provisions limiting the criminal background screenings and evictions were changed and landlords were held responsible for results or become ineligible for program, things would change. Too much money being made from status quo, I suppose. The WP series on Sedgewick Gardens laid out how disruptive tenants can be used to clear buildings of below market rent stabilized tenants and those who have the resources to exercise TOPA.

Curious- why didn’t you walk to your local playground? Or drive to one closer to your home?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frumin is a disaster. At least Trayon White shows up when there are shootings. You know what’s up with vouchers? A real estate scam. Step 1: Drive old people and young families out of Connecticut Avenue buildings by putting in voucher holders who make life uncomfortable with crime and untreated mental illness. Step 2: Screw the poor voucher holders by sunsetting the program. Step 3: Real estate companies redo the empty buildings as Luxury Condo$ and make a lot more $$$$. Tell me I am wrong in 10 years!

Everyone is saying this now, but he's the one that the majority of people in Ward 3 voted for. And this board completely eviscerated candidates like Goulet and Monte.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I lived EOTP, it was common for me and neighbors to drive kids to Forest Hills Playground or to Rose Park or Palisades. That SHOOTERS ran across this playground at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon blows my mind. And basically crickets from the political class and somewhat of a shrug from residents. No community meeting scheduled as of yet...

https://dgs.dc.gov/page/dgs-forest-hills-park--play-dc-playground-project

3 shots were fired, 1 hit the victim, what do people think will protect you or your kids on the sidewalk from the other 2 as you go to the park, tennis courts, BreadFurst or Politics & Prose in broad daylight on a weekend?

If the provisions limiting the criminal background screenings and evictions were changed and landlords were held responsible for results or become ineligible for program, things would change. Too much money being made from status quo, I suppose. The WP series on Sedgewick Gardens laid out how disruptive tenants can be used to clear buildings of below market rent stabilized tenants and those who have the resources to exercise TOPA.

Curious- why didn’t you walk to your local playground? Or drive to one closer to your home?