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.

Guys, I know the housing proposal is a big deal right now. But it is a mistake to confuse the two issues. The County Executive does not have a say in that.

Elrich is being smart, if a little deceptive, to capitalize on the opposition to boost his popularity right now. But whether the executive personally supports the policies passed by the Council is irrelevant. When considering who to support for executive, think about the services you are getting from the county and whether you think they are administered well.

Didn't the similar Arlington plan just get shot down by the courts?

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elrich is against the upzoning, right?

He is. But it doesn't matter. He doesn't have a say in it. So that shouldn't be a reason to vote for or against him or the term limits. That would be like voting for school board based on how they feel about upzoning...

He still has a platform that allows him to voice his awful opinions. That's a good enough reason on its own to get him out of office.

You mean that he’s the voice of reason?

Even more of a fan of Elrich given is rebuke of the awful “attainable housing strategy” which calls out what an absurd handout to developers this the farce is.

More integrity in this man than Fani-Gonzalez, Glass, and Friedson combined.

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.

Surely in a county of 1mln, we can find plenty of good leaders. Just looking at the Council, I think Friedson would make a good county exec.

Andrew, is that you? Go back to playing footsie with your developer friends, ‘kay?

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.

+1
I will vote no to keep his as he brings balance and truly IS the most reasonable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elrich is against the upzoning, right?

He is. But it doesn't matter. He doesn't have a say in it. So that shouldn't be a reason to vote for or against him or the term limits. That would be like voting for school board based on how they feel about upzoning...

He still has a platform that allows him to voice his awful opinions. That's a good enough reason on its own to get him out of office.

You mean that he’s the voice of reason?

Haha!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elrich is against the upzoning, right?

He is. But it doesn't matter. He doesn't have a say in it. So that shouldn't be a reason to vote for or against him or the term limits. That would be like voting for school board based on how they feel about upzoning...

He still has a platform that allows him to voice his awful opinions. That's a good enough reason on its own to get him out of office.

You mean that he’s the voice of reason?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The upcoming election ballot for Montgomery County MD has a proposal to reduce the term limit for the County Executive position from three terms to two.
Given what I read about the current County Executive, I would be inclined to replace him - end his reign. But I am reluctant to set a low term limit for his hopefully better replacement.
Any thoughts from others on this?

His reign (if he wins) will end before any new term limit takes effect. Leave the term limit at 3 terms, same as the county council.

No, I believe that, if the measure passes, Elrich will be prohibited from running for a 3rd term.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elrich is against the upzoning, right?

He is. But it doesn't matter. He doesn't have a say in it. So that shouldn't be a reason to vote for or against him or the term limits. That would be like voting for school board based on how they feel about upzoning...

Except that acrually would be a thing. The BOE interacts with the County Council on budget, both operational and capital. If upzoning would create additional strain on the system, especially in your area, you might want a BOE candidate that understands that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elrich is against the upzoning, right?

He is. But it doesn't matter. He doesn't have a say in it. So that shouldn't be a reason to vote for or against him or the term limits. That would be like voting for school board based on how they feel about upzoning...

He still has a platform that allows him to voice his awful opinions. That's a good enough reason on its own to get him out of office.

Anonymous wrote:Elrich is against the upzoning, right?

He is. But it doesn't matter. He doesn't have a say in it. So that shouldn't be a reason to vote for or against him or the term limits. That would be like voting for school board based on how they feel about upzoning...

Sorry - that should be snake oil salesman