I got a really bad impression of JAwando a few years ago when he was in either cnn or msnbc discussing that upsetting video of the MCPD who had responded to a small child that ran away from school. I had watched the entire video because I cared about the issue. It was really apparent to me in the interview that Jawando had not watched the whole video because he had made some assumptions about what had happened that were incorrect. He’d gone on national television and was bad mouthing what is usually a pretty decent police department without even knowing what had happened. (What happened was not good and not professional but I really did not like an elected rep talking on national tv without taking the time to educate himself). He seemed like he just wanted the big press attention.

I think he also let the charge against SROs in schools which has turned out to be short sighted. PG, a majority Black county, kept SROs because they understood that safety in school is actually an equity issue. I felt like Jawando was again grand standing without actually figuring out the policy questions, which are complicated.

I don’t know if that’s typical for him and if the others are better or worse, but those two incidents made me a little nervous about him.

I don’t know if any of them has better people or administrative skills—CE is an admin position and has to coordinate a lot of different agencies in an efficient way, and manage issues when/if the agencies are dysfunctional. That’s probably a bigger part of the job than the policy stuff—don’t know if any of them would be better or worse at that part of the job.

Anonymous wrote:They are all aholes. Friedson and Glass will build more housing than Jawando. Jawando will be like Elrich - pushing performative and wasteful progressive priorities while supporting nimbyism

Sounds like Jawando is my guy. We've built enough housing (fueled by handouts to developers), and prices don't come down despite there being ample supply. And paradoxically enough, the push to give housing handouts (euphemistically called "vouchers") to moochers has resulted in prices going up for people who actually need help the most. I'm a liberal, but the housing market is one where government intervention (in the form of handouts to developers and moochers) has caused more harm than good.

I know it's a tough message for people to hear, but median salaries in this area are 170K for a household, so housing is going to be expensive, and so people need to save up (no more $10 beers and $20 margaritas, plus weekly outings to $200 concerts and $100 dinners) or move further out if they don't like their options.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are all aholes. Friedson and Glass will build more housing than Jawando. Jawando will be like Elrich - pushing performative and wasteful progressive priorities while supporting nimbyism

Genuinely curious — which housing policy would you prefer of the two? And what do you think makes them “aholes”?

They are aholes because they are totally driven by their ambition. There have been elected officials with more commitment to doing the right thing. These guys have sold their souls to politics.

As far as housing policy goes I want more housing so my child's generation can afford to live here and so our businesses can survive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would anyone want to get a low paying job in the government like this? Unless they see it as a stepping stone? Like Alsobrook who became a fed senator.

The county exec makes close to $210k, more than US representatives and senators.

PP here, thanks for letting me know, that's a good salary!

Anonymous wrote:They are all aholes. Friedson and Glass will build more housing than Jawando. Jawando will be like Elrich - pushing performative and wasteful progressive priorities while supporting nimbyism

Genuinely curious — which housing policy would you prefer of the two? And what do you think makes them “aholes”?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jawando.

Glass only cares about rich people who can bike to work or eat vegan.

Jawando doesn’t want to build houses. Also Glass made the RideOn free, so maybe he doesn’t only care about bikers, he cares about our world not overheating.

Jawando does want to build houses. He just votes against nonsensical subsidies for $5k apartments and zoning plans that have no infrastructure or strategic vision to back them up. It’s ridiculous to paint him as anti-housing. The YIMBYs dislike him because he’s pro-consumer.

Not sure I quite agree with your framing of the issue here, my friend. MoCo is facing a housing affordability crisis — young people, teachers, and firefighters, among other crucial groups, are being priced out of the county — and the solution to a housing affordability crisis is to build more smart and affordable housing. That’s Econ 101, supply and demand. Now, does this mean promoting feckless, unsustainable, and unaffordable housing development every which way? Of course not. But it does mean supporting common-sense proposals like Bill 29-20 (which Jawando was one of two councilmembers to vote against) to build more affordable housing along transit corridors. I have concerns with Jawando’s track record on affordable housing.

DP. We don't agree on the approach suggested. The Econ 101 reference supplies more rhetorical support than robust, given complex issues at hand varied stakeholders and highly differential impacts.

Fair point, DP. But I think one could say the same about your claim that the “YIMBYs dislike [Jawando] because he’s pro-consumer.” Would you be willing to expand a little on what kind of approach you would support to the housing affordability crisis? The example provided in the post to which you most directly replied seems to be an example of Jawando rejecting an inoffensive, pragmatic suggestion to a problem that has been roiling the county for years. Track records should matter.

That DP to whom you replied. "DP" = different poster -- I did not make the claim mentioned, nor did I provide the cited example.

FWIW, I seem to agree with much of that with which another poster has responded in the interim, except the particular conclusion about Jawando and the minor Econ 101 ad hominem.

Which poster? The pro-Jawando one or the other pro-housing one?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Glass all the way, Friedson is bought and paid for and Jawando is an Elrich wannabe. Glass is endorsed by Sierra Club also. Also two way race between Jawando and Glass.

Ugh! I will not vote for anyone endorsed and bought and paid for by the Sierra Club!!!!

Oh no! Supporting the environment???

Anonymous wrote:Why would anyone want to get a low paying job in the government like this? Unless they see it as a stepping stone? Like Alsobrook who became a fed senator.

The county exec makes close to $210k, more than US representatives and senators.

Anonymous wrote:Glass all the way, Friedson is bought and paid for and Jawando is an Elrich wannabe. Glass is endorsed by Sierra Club also. Also two way race between Jawando and Glass.

Ugh! I will not vote for anyone endorsed and bought and paid for by the Sierra Club!!!!

They are all aholes. Friedson and Glass will build more housing than Jawando. Jawando will be like Elrich - pushing performative and wasteful progressive priorities while supporting nimbyism

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well Jawando just got shredded by his fellow councilmembers for treating them like *^%# on the Unmask Ice bill. He called for it to be scheduled next week, leapfrogging a committee meeting on it, and drew the ire of almost all the councilmembers. A couple were crying they were so mad. Said he never once reached out to any of them to discuss the bill.

The committee chair was dragging his feet on scheduling the work session. Three of his colleagues voted with him to advance the bill. Some people have principles, and some people are cowards who want to avoid difficult votes.

DP
Do you think they stand to lose support politically by voting for the bill and that's why they are delaying it? That doesn't make sense to me.

The county has the legal authority to regulate its own police force. The state has more authority. It makes more sense to do this right. ICE has been terrorizing people for over a year. Passing a toothless bill now versus in a month makes no difference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well Jawando just got shredded by his fellow councilmembers for treating them like *^%# on the Unmask Ice bill. He called for it to be scheduled next week, leapfrogging a committee meeting on it, and drew the ire of almost all the councilmembers. A couple were crying they were so mad. Said he never once reached out to any of them to discuss the bill.

The committee chair was dragging his feet on scheduling the work session. Three of his colleagues voted with him to advance the bill. Some people have principles, and some people are cowards who want to avoid difficult votes.

No he wasn't. He wisely wanted to see what the Maryland General Assembly was doing on their REAL bill that has teeth. You know, actual enforcement mechanisms and penalties. And that bill would apply to all law enforcement. Not just MCPD, which is the only police department the county can regulate. The county can't regulate Rockville police or Takoma park police or Gaithersburg police. They certainly cannot regulate federal police.

This bill will just result in a bunch of people calling 911 and the operators telling them there's nothing anyone can do about it

Anonymous wrote:Well Jawando just got shredded by his fellow councilmembers for treating them like *^%# on the Unmask Ice bill. He called for it to be scheduled next week, leapfrogging a committee meeting on it, and drew the ire of almost all the councilmembers. A couple were crying they were so mad. Said he never once reached out to any of them to discuss the bill.

The committee chair was dragging his feet on scheduling the work session. Three of his colleagues voted with him to advance the bill. Some people have principles, and some people are cowards who want to avoid difficult votes.

Anonymous wrote:Why would anyone want to get a low paying job in the government like this? Unless they see it as a stepping stone? Like Alsobrook who became a fed senator.

Low relative to...? It's not small, and nothing like the pittance given to the BOE.

There are considerable fringe benefits, and you get to install friends/cronies in all kinds of positions where, even if the pay is not astronomical, it's reasonably good, with fringe benefits of their own (both proper and, with incidence depending on the nature of the office holder, improper).

Why would anyone want to get a low paying job in the government like this? Unless they see it as a stepping stone? Like Alsobrook who became a fed senator.