Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cheh succeeded in getting this thread moved to oblivion.

I won't ascribe that to Professor Cheh. It's clear that she doesn't care much about public opinion.

Wow you immediate neighbors are dumb or naive - politically this is an absolute no brainer for Cheh - an outdoor pool in Ward 3 will be hugely popular. I believe there are currently 2 pro pool petitions out there - one has over 800 signatures and the other has over 200. The anti pool folks had 67 signatures last time I checked and oddly a lot of them were from folks who don't even live in the neighborhood anymore.

Anonymous wrote:Cheh succeeded in getting this thread moved to oblivion.

I won't ascribe that to Professor Cheh. It's clear that she doesn't care much about public opinion.

Cheh succeeded in getting this thread moved to oblivion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The field doesn't need to be high school quality. It never has been. Frankly, the biggest use of the field is for 4 team to practice on it during the week and for the kiddie games to be played on it for the weekend.

Comparing it to the regulation size Sidwell field is a useless exercise. It can be the size of the field at Mann and be fine.

This season, the field is being used for high school games, 11 on 11.

.

What high school team is playing their games at Hearst? It isn't Wilson and it's not any of the area privates - I call BS on this unless you can name the team(s) so we can verify.

Not a high school team, the high school division of Stoddert Soccer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The field doesn't need to be high school quality. It never has been. Frankly, the biggest use of the field is for 4 team to practice on it during the week and for the kiddie games to be played on it for the weekend.

Comparing it to the regulation size Sidwell field is a useless exercise. It can be the size of the field at Mann and be fine.

This season, the field is being used for high school games, 11 on 11.

.

What high school team is playing their games at Hearst? It isn't Wilson and it's not any of the area privates - I call BS on this unless you can name the team(s) so we can verify.

Anonymous wrote:No it isn't. The majority of the people (outside of the very local neighborhood bubble) support an outdoor pool. There are no politics involved at this point.

Yup. The same way I would probably support construction of an interstate highway through your neighborhood. As long as I didn't live close to it, it would be all upside benefit to me, with no costs, loss of local parkland or other negative impacts. What's not to like?

Mary Cheh hates ward 3 . She is pushing so much developmen, destruction of green space. She is literally ruining it. Time for her to go!!!!

No it isn't. The majority of the people (outside of the very local neighborhood bubble) support an outdoor pool. There are no politics involved at this point.

The politics forum covers local politics too. This is fundamentally a political question.

It should be in the real estate forum, but that is the site owner's call.

Cheh wins again.

Why did this get moved out of the Public school thread? This is a pool that is right next to a public school? This is of critical importance to the parents and neighbors of that school for a wide variety of reasons including the discussion of public school property, the playground and traffic.

Answer Mary Cheh's folks fooled DCUM into moving it because they don't like this debate. It's not good for her. The only political aspect of this thread is the on and off again discussion of Cheh.

Shame on Cheh, bigger shame on DCUM.

Myopic view.

Anonymous wrote:"You realize for every person that opposes a pool at Hearst, there are 20 that favor it"

No. That's not actually true. Neighbors seem at least evenly divided in my conversations. When it comes to people who actually care, public meetings are overwhelmingly anti-pool.

This is an immediate neighborhood issue. Ward 3 people I talk to who live outside the six block radius don't seem to care at all.

This makes sense. If you have to get in your car and drive anyway, what difference does it make whether you have to cross an invisible ward boundary line? For many people in Ward 3 a pool at Hearst would not be the closest outdoor DPR pool to their home. For many others, a pool at Hearst would not meaningfully cut the travel time. So it makes sense that it's only really an issue for people who live within walking distance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You realize for every person that opposes a pool at Hearst, there are 20 that favor it.

Just saying it doesn't make it so. Would most people favor spending all this money on an itty-bitty pool that still will result in loss of part of the field, tennis courts and tree cover?

Then maybe the solution is to make it a big pool, as was suggested by some close by neighbors at the DPR meeting.

Then the Hearst field would be even smaller than the little kiddiie astroturf field. The fact is, DPR just can't fit everything at Hearst, even with a mini-pool. Too much program, too little space. Many people see that, perhaps even Mary Cheh now. But she is even more reluctant than Trump is to admit error.

Maybe she is trump.