Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 folks love to argue that they live on the city and not in the suburbs. Well, now you’re really a part of us. Welcome!

It’s remarkable how 30 years of progress could be dismantled so quickly.

If Bowser had made a campaign pledge to spread crime "equitably" to all areas of the District, then she could announce "Mission Accomplished!"

Ward 3 “burden sharing” for equity has been a pretty explicit policy priority throughout Bowser’s time in office. Not sure why folks decided not to pay attention.

Do you think Bowser would have been transparent and said "I'm going to spread violent crime, thefts, disorder, vagrancy and other social problems to your neighborhood and then keep raising your taxes to pay for the "burden sharing"?

I’m honestly curious what people thought Bowser was doing. It’s not like she was hiding anything.

There was the 2016 shelter plan. The 2018 affordable housing production goals. DHCA in 2019 intentionally setting policy to over-estimate fair market rent for housing choice vouchers with the double whammy of undercutting rent control. All of this stuff individually and in totality was done with the express purpose of increasing Ward 3 “burden sharing”.

People can just read the reports themselves.
https://housing.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/housingdc/page_content/attachments/Housing%20Equity%20Report%2010-15-19.pdf

When they see talk of “fair share” and projections that put 2/3 of new affordable housing in wards 2, 3 and 4, it’s just not clear how people could not understand what this meant. What do people think they are talking about when they see the world “vibrant”?

It was all extremely transparent, if you bothered to pay attention.

Does “vibrant” mean vouchers? We thought it meant Urbanist, sustainable, gentle dense-mixed use that also yields affordable housing.

According to the Comp Plan that I am sure that you supported, it meant:

“locating special needs housing more equitably so that all neighborhoods accept their fair share”

Where “special needs housing” includes group homes and housing for “homeless, troubled youth, elderly, foster children, ex-offenders”.

That’s the vibrant, mixed use urbanism that folks fought for and congratulations, you got it.
https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/op/Vision%20for%20Inclusive%20CIty%202004.pdf

W3 already had PIW, multiple shelters and multiple halfway houses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 folks love to argue that they live on the city and not in the suburbs. Well, now you’re really a part of us. Welcome!

It’s remarkable how 30 years of progress could be dismantled so quickly.

If Bowser had made a campaign pledge to spread crime "equitably" to all areas of the District, then she could announce "Mission Accomplished!"

Ward 3 “burden sharing” for equity has been a pretty explicit policy priority throughout Bowser’s time in office. Not sure why folks decided not to pay attention.

Do you think Bowser would have been transparent and said "I'm going to spread violent crime, thefts, disorder, vagrancy and other social problems to your neighborhood and then keep raising your taxes to pay for the "burden sharing"?

I’m honestly curious what people thought Bowser was doing. It’s not like she was hiding anything.

There was the 2016 shelter plan. The 2018 affordable housing production goals. DHCA in 2019 intentionally setting policy to over-estimate fair market rent for housing choice vouchers with the double whammy of undercutting rent control. All of this stuff individually and in totality was done with the express purpose of increasing Ward 3 “burden sharing”.

People can just read the reports themselves.
https://housing.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/housingdc/page_content/attachments/Housing%20Equity%20Report%2010-15-19.pdf

When they see talk of “fair share” and projections that put 2/3 of new affordable housing in wards 2, 3 and 4, it’s just not clear how people could not understand what this meant. What do people think they are talking about when they see the world “vibrant”?

It was all extremely transparent, if you bothered to pay attention.

Does “vibrant” mean vouchers? We thought it meant Urbanist, sustainable, gentle dense-mixed use that also yields affordable housing.

According to the Comp Plan that I am sure that you supported, it meant:

“locating special needs housing more equitably so that all neighborhoods accept their fair share”

Where “special needs housing” includes group homes and housing for “homeless, troubled youth, elderly, foster children, ex-offenders”.

That’s the vibrant, mixed use urbanism that folks fought for and congratulations, you got it.
https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/op/Vision%20for%20Inclusive%20CIty%202004.pdf

Not CityRidge?

No, City Ridge came in under the plan to build ugly, dark caverns with chain retail. The only thing good about that development is they retained the Fannie Mae facade and lawn. The rest is dark and soulless.

Couldn’t agree more. What a shitty complex of hideous design and why must all new construction in DC be so unappealing?

Read DC’s new development guidelines for Wisconsin Ave. City Ridge and the big building next to it are DC’s vision for the avenue from Glover Pk to the Maryland line, only taller.

Meaning DC wants to build taller than that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 folks love to argue that they live on the city and not in the suburbs. Well, now you’re really a part of us. Welcome!

It’s remarkable how 30 years of progress could be dismantled so quickly.

If Bowser had made a campaign pledge to spread crime "equitably" to all areas of the District, then she could announce "Mission Accomplished!"

Ward 3 “burden sharing” for equity has been a pretty explicit policy priority throughout Bowser’s time in office. Not sure why folks decided not to pay attention.

Do you think Bowser would have been transparent and said "I'm going to spread violent crime, thefts, disorder, vagrancy and other social problems to your neighborhood and then keep raising your taxes to pay for the "burden sharing"?

I’m honestly curious what people thought Bowser was doing. It’s not like she was hiding anything.

There was the 2016 shelter plan. The 2018 affordable housing production goals. DHCA in 2019 intentionally setting policy to over-estimate fair market rent for housing choice vouchers with the double whammy of undercutting rent control. All of this stuff individually and in totality was done with the express purpose of increasing Ward 3 “burden sharing”.

People can just read the reports themselves.
https://housing.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/housingdc/page_content/attachments/Housing%20Equity%20Report%2010-15-19.pdf

When they see talk of “fair share” and projections that put 2/3 of new affordable housing in wards 2, 3 and 4, it’s just not clear how people could not understand what this meant. What do people think they are talking about when they see the world “vibrant”?

It was all extremely transparent, if you bothered to pay attention.

Does “vibrant” mean vouchers? We thought it meant Urbanist, sustainable, gentle dense-mixed use that also yields affordable housing.

According to the Comp Plan that I am sure that you supported, it meant:

“locating special needs housing more equitably so that all neighborhoods accept their fair share”

Where “special needs housing” includes group homes and housing for “homeless, troubled youth, elderly, foster children, ex-offenders”.

That’s the vibrant, mixed use urbanism that folks fought for and congratulations, you got it.
https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/op/Vision%20for%20Inclusive%20CIty%202004.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 folks love to argue that they live on the city and not in the suburbs. Well, now you’re really a part of us. Welcome!

It’s remarkable how 30 years of progress could be dismantled so quickly.

If Bowser had made a campaign pledge to spread crime "equitably" to all areas of the District, then she could announce "Mission Accomplished!"

Ward 3 “burden sharing” for equity has been a pretty explicit policy priority throughout Bowser’s time in office. Not sure why folks decided not to pay attention.

Do you think Bowser would have been transparent and said "I'm going to spread violent crime, thefts, disorder, vagrancy and other social problems to your neighborhood and then keep raising your taxes to pay for the "burden sharing"?

I’m honestly curious what people thought Bowser was doing. It’s not like she was hiding anything.

There was the 2016 shelter plan. The 2018 affordable housing production goals. DHCA in 2019 intentionally setting policy to over-estimate fair market rent for housing choice vouchers with the double whammy of undercutting rent control. All of this stuff individually and in totality was done with the express purpose of increasing Ward 3 “burden sharing”.

People can just read the reports themselves.
https://housing.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/housingdc/page_content/attachments/Housing%20Equity%20Report%2010-15-19.pdf

When they see talk of “fair share” and projections that put 2/3 of new affordable housing in wards 2, 3 and 4, it’s just not clear how people could not understand what this meant. What do people think they are talking about when they see the world “vibrant”?

It was all extremely transparent, if you bothered to pay attention.

Does “vibrant” mean vouchers? We thought it meant Urbanist, sustainable, gentle dense-mixed use that also yields affordable housing.

According to the Comp Plan that I am sure that you supported, it meant:

“locating special needs housing more equitably so that all neighborhoods accept their fair share”

Where “special needs housing” includes group homes and housing for “homeless, troubled youth, elderly, foster children, ex-offenders”.

That’s the vibrant, mixed use urbanism that folks fought for and congratulations, you got it.
https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/op/Vision%20for%20Inclusive%20CIty%202004.pdf

Not CityRidge?

No, City Ridge came in under the plan to build ugly, dark caverns with chain retail. The only thing good about that development is they retained the Fannie Mae facade and lawn. The rest is dark and soulless.

Couldn’t agree more. What a shitty complex of hideous design and why must all new construction in DC be so unappealing?

Read DC’s new development guidelines for Wisconsin Ave. City Ridge and the big building next to it are DC’s vision for the avenue from Glover Pk to the Maryland line, only taller.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 folks love to argue that they live on the city and not in the suburbs. Well, now you’re really a part of us. Welcome!

It’s remarkable how 30 years of progress could be dismantled so quickly.

If Bowser had made a campaign pledge to spread crime "equitably" to all areas of the District, then she could announce "Mission Accomplished!"

Ward 3 “burden sharing” for equity has been a pretty explicit policy priority throughout Bowser’s time in office. Not sure why folks decided not to pay attention.

Do you think Bowser would have been transparent and said "I'm going to spread violent crime, thefts, disorder, vagrancy and other social problems to your neighborhood and then keep raising your taxes to pay for the "burden sharing"?

I’m honestly curious what people thought Bowser was doing. It’s not like she was hiding anything.

There was the 2016 shelter plan. The 2018 affordable housing production goals. DHCA in 2019 intentionally setting policy to over-estimate fair market rent for housing choice vouchers with the double whammy of undercutting rent control. All of this stuff individually and in totality was done with the express purpose of increasing Ward 3 “burden sharing”.

People can just read the reports themselves.
https://housing.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/housingdc/page_content/attachments/Housing%20Equity%20Report%2010-15-19.pdf

When they see talk of “fair share” and projections that put 2/3 of new affordable housing in wards 2, 3 and 4, it’s just not clear how people could not understand what this meant. What do people think they are talking about when they see the world “vibrant”?

It was all extremely transparent, if you bothered to pay attention.

Does “vibrant” mean vouchers? We thought it meant Urbanist, sustainable, gentle dense-mixed use that also yields affordable housing.

According to the Comp Plan that I am sure that you supported, it meant:

“locating special needs housing more equitably so that all neighborhoods accept their fair share”

Where “special needs housing” includes group homes and housing for “homeless, troubled youth, elderly, foster children, ex-offenders”.

That’s the vibrant, mixed use urbanism that folks fought for and congratulations, you got it.
https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/op/Vision%20for%20Inclusive%20CIty%202004.pdf

Not CityRidge?

No, City Ridge came in under the plan to build ugly, dark caverns with chain retail. The only thing good about that development is they retained the Fannie Mae facade and lawn. The rest is dark and soulless.

Couldn’t agree more. What a shitty complex of hideous design and why must all new construction in DC be so unappealing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 folks love to argue that they live on the city and not in the suburbs. Well, now you’re really a part of us. Welcome!

It’s remarkable how 30 years of progress could be dismantled so quickly.

If Bowser had made a campaign pledge to spread crime "equitably" to all areas of the District, then she could announce "Mission Accomplished!"

Ward 3 “burden sharing” for equity has been a pretty explicit policy priority throughout Bowser’s time in office. Not sure why folks decided not to pay attention.

Do you think Bowser would have been transparent and said "I'm going to spread violent crime, thefts, disorder, vagrancy and other social problems to your neighborhood and then keep raising your taxes to pay for the "burden sharing"?

I’m honestly curious what people thought Bowser was doing. It’s not like she was hiding anything.

There was the 2016 shelter plan. The 2018 affordable housing production goals. DHCA in 2019 intentionally setting policy to over-estimate fair market rent for housing choice vouchers with the double whammy of undercutting rent control. All of this stuff individually and in totality was done with the express purpose of increasing Ward 3 “burden sharing”.

People can just read the reports themselves.
https://housing.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/housingdc/page_content/attachments/Housing%20Equity%20Report%2010-15-19.pdf

When they see talk of “fair share” and projections that put 2/3 of new affordable housing in wards 2, 3 and 4, it’s just not clear how people could not understand what this meant. What do people think they are talking about when they see the world “vibrant”?

It was all extremely transparent, if you bothered to pay attention.

Does “vibrant” mean vouchers? We thought it meant Urbanist, sustainable, gentle dense-mixed use that also yields affordable housing.

According to the Comp Plan that I am sure that you supported, it meant:

“locating special needs housing more equitably so that all neighborhoods accept their fair share”

Where “special needs housing” includes group homes and housing for “homeless, troubled youth, elderly, foster children, ex-offenders”.

That’s the vibrant, mixed use urbanism that folks fought for and congratulations, you got it.
https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/op/Vision%20for%20Inclusive%20CIty%202004.pdf

Not CityRidge?

No, City Ridge came in under the plan to build ugly, dark caverns with chain retail. The only thing good about that development is they retained the Fannie Mae facade and lawn. The rest is dark and soulless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 folks love to argue that they live on the city and not in the suburbs. Well, now you’re really a part of us. Welcome!

It’s remarkable how 30 years of progress could be dismantled so quickly.

If Bowser had made a campaign pledge to spread crime "equitably" to all areas of the District, then she could announce "Mission Accomplished!"

Ward 3 “burden sharing” for equity has been a pretty explicit policy priority throughout Bowser’s time in office. Not sure why folks decided not to pay attention.

Do you think Bowser would have been transparent and said "I'm going to spread violent crime, thefts, disorder, vagrancy and other social problems to your neighborhood and then keep raising your taxes to pay for the "burden sharing"?

I’m honestly curious what people thought Bowser was doing. It’s not like she was hiding anything.

There was the 2016 shelter plan. The 2018 affordable housing production goals. DHCA in 2019 intentionally setting policy to over-estimate fair market rent for housing choice vouchers with the double whammy of undercutting rent control. All of this stuff individually and in totality was done with the express purpose of increasing Ward 3 “burden sharing”.

People can just read the reports themselves.
https://housing.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/housingdc/page_content/attachments/Housing%20Equity%20Report%2010-15-19.pdf

When they see talk of “fair share” and projections that put 2/3 of new affordable housing in wards 2, 3 and 4, it’s just not clear how people could not understand what this meant. What do people think they are talking about when they see the world “vibrant”?

It was all extremely transparent, if you bothered to pay attention.

Does “vibrant” mean vouchers? We thought it meant Urbanist, sustainable, gentle dense-mixed use that also yields affordable housing.

According to the Comp Plan that I am sure that you supported, it meant:

“locating special needs housing more equitably so that all neighborhoods accept their fair share”

Where “special needs housing” includes group homes and housing for “homeless, troubled youth, elderly, foster children, ex-offenders”.

That’s the vibrant, mixed use urbanism that folks fought for and congratulations, you got it.
https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/op/Vision%20for%20Inclusive%20CIty%202004.pdf

Not CityRidge?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 folks love to argue that they live on the city and not in the suburbs. Well, now you’re really a part of us. Welcome!

It’s remarkable how 30 years of progress could be dismantled so quickly.

If Bowser had made a campaign pledge to spread crime "equitably" to all areas of the District, then she could announce "Mission Accomplished!"

Ward 3 “burden sharing” for equity has been a pretty explicit policy priority throughout Bowser’s time in office. Not sure why folks decided not to pay attention.

Do you think Bowser would have been transparent and said "I'm going to spread violent crime, thefts, disorder, vagrancy and other social problems to your neighborhood and then keep raising your taxes to pay for the "burden sharing"?

I’m honestly curious what people thought Bowser was doing. It’s not like she was hiding anything.

There was the 2016 shelter plan. The 2018 affordable housing production goals. DHCA in 2019 intentionally setting policy to over-estimate fair market rent for housing choice vouchers with the double whammy of undercutting rent control. All of this stuff individually and in totality was done with the express purpose of increasing Ward 3 “burden sharing”.

People can just read the reports themselves.
https://housing.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/housingdc/page_content/attachments/Housing%20Equity%20Report%2010-15-19.pdf

When they see talk of “fair share” and projections that put 2/3 of new affordable housing in wards 2, 3 and 4, it’s just not clear how people could not understand what this meant. What do people think they are talking about when they see the world “vibrant”?

It was all extremely transparent, if you bothered to pay attention.

Does “vibrant” mean vouchers? We thought it meant Urbanist, sustainable, gentle dense-mixed use that also yields affordable housing.

According to the Comp Plan that I am sure that you supported, it meant:

“locating special needs housing more equitably so that all neighborhoods accept their fair share”

Where “special needs housing” includes group homes and housing for “homeless, troubled youth, elderly, foster children, ex-offenders”.

That’s the vibrant, mixed use urbanism that folks fought for and congratulations, you got it.
https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/op/Vision%20for%20Inclusive%20CIty%202004.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 folks love to argue that they live on the city and not in the suburbs. Well, now you’re really a part of us. Welcome!

It’s remarkable how 30 years of progress could be dismantled so quickly.

If Bowser had made a campaign pledge to spread crime "equitably" to all areas of the District, then she could announce "Mission Accomplished!"

Ward 3 “burden sharing” for equity has been a pretty explicit policy priority throughout Bowser’s time in office. Not sure why folks decided not to pay attention.

Do you think Bowser would have been transparent and said "I'm going to spread violent crime, thefts, disorder, vagrancy and other social problems to your neighborhood and then keep raising your taxes to pay for the "burden sharing"?

I’m honestly curious what people thought Bowser was doing. It’s not like she was hiding anything.

There was the 2016 shelter plan. The 2018 affordable housing production goals. DHCA in 2019 intentionally setting policy to over-estimate fair market rent for housing choice vouchers with the double whammy of undercutting rent control. All of this stuff individually and in totality was done with the express purpose of increasing Ward 3 “burden sharing”.

People can just read the reports themselves.
https://housing.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/housingdc/page_content/attachments/Housing%20Equity%20Report%2010-15-19.pdf

When they see talk of “fair share” and projections that put 2/3 of new affordable housing in wards 2, 3 and 4, it’s just not clear how people could not understand what this meant. What do people think they are talking about when they see the world “vibrant”?

It was all extremely transparent, if you bothered to pay attention.

Does “vibrant” mean vouchers? We thought it meant Urbanist, sustainable, gentle dense-mixed use that also yields affordable housing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have to hope the Feds step in. The political class in DC is beyond pathetic. They will do nothing to stop the rising crime tide.

We don't needs the feds. They can't even pass a budget.

Anonymous wrote:We have to hope the Feds step in. The political class in DC is beyond pathetic. They will do nothing to stop the rising crime tide.