Anonymous wrote:Recall Frumin.
He is supposed to advocate for his ward but won’t even respond to email from constituents.
He needs to go.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The voucher policy has to be one of the worst policies the city has implemented. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars to give permanent free apartments to thousands of people, turning apartment buildings into homeless shelters (The Washington Post has a good job documenting this). From D.C.'s site, there isn't even a residency requirement. Why wouldn't homeless people move here if the city is handing out free apartments in the best parts of the city?

Just about every homeless advocate will talk about the danger and violence in homeless shelters. If you read the now deleted thread about the homeless man who died across from Pete's Pizza, you see plenty of people saying that the homeless don't sleep in shelters because they're too dangerous.

But then when a apartment building is turned into a de facto shelter (or a shelter is built next to people's houses), the same people suddenly say it's ridiculous and bigoted to think there's any risk of danger.

These people aren't honest, they're bullies who tall you to believe A is true one moment and then A is false the next moment, under threat of social ostracization. And a lot of people here honestly lack the courage to stand up to them, and meekly follow along.

But people keep voting for this. As far as I can tell, everyone on the Council is supportive of the program. Goulet said there should be a pause until the problems were worked out, and was labelled a racist. People voted for Frumin, who said the only problem was that Ward 3 residents weren't be welcoming enough.

So I guess the only option is to vote with your feet at this point.

This is so obvious what would happen, it boggles the mind that people like Frumin and his enablers could expect any other outcomes.

Anonymous wrote:The voucher policy has to be one of the worst policies the city has implemented. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars to give permanent free apartments to thousands of people, turning apartment buildings into homeless shelters (The Washington Post has a good job documenting this). From D.C.'s site, there isn't even a residency requirement. Why wouldn't homeless people move here if the city is handing out free apartments in the best parts of the city?

Just about every homeless advocate will talk about the danger and violence in homeless shelters. If you read the now deleted thread about the homeless man who died across from Pete's Pizza, you see plenty of people saying that the homeless don't sleep in shelters because they're too dangerous.

But then when a apartment building is turned into a de facto shelter (or a shelter is built next to people's houses), the same people suddenly say it's ridiculous and bigoted to think there's any risk of danger.

These people aren't honest, they're bullies who tall you to believe A is true one moment and then A is false the next moment, under threat of social ostracization. And a lot of people here honestly lack the courage to stand up to them, and meekly follow along.

But people keep voting for this. As far as I can tell, everyone on the Council is supportive of the program. Goulet said there should be a pause until the problems were worked out, and was labelled a racist. People voted for Frumin, who said the only problem was that Ward 3 residents weren't be welcoming enough.

So I guess the only option is to vote with your feet at this point.

Anonymous wrote:The voucher policy has to be one of the worst policies the city has implemented. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars to give permanent free apartments to thousands of people, turning apartment buildings into homeless shelters (The Washington Post has a good job documenting this). From D.C.'s site, there isn't even a residency requirement. Why wouldn't homeless people move here if the city is handing out free apartments in the best parts of the city?

Just about every homeless advocate will talk about the danger and violence in homeless shelters. If you read the now deleted thread about the homeless man who died across from Pete's Pizza, you see plenty of people saying that the homeless don't sleep in shelters because they're too dangerous.

But then when a apartment building is turned into a de facto shelter (or a shelter is built next to people's houses), the same people suddenly say it's ridiculous and bigoted to think there's any risk of danger.

These people aren't honest, they're bullies who tall you to believe A is true one moment and then A is false the next moment, under threat of social ostracization. And a lot of people here honestly lack the courage to stand up to them, and meekly follow along.

But people keep voting for this. As far as I can tell, everyone on the Council is supportive of the program. Goulet said there should be a pause until the problems were worked out, and was labelled a racist. People voted for Frumin, who said the only problem was that Ward 3 residents weren't be welcoming enough.

So I guess the only option is to vote with your feet at this point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What she's done is squeeze out the middle. We now have higher income folks who live in SFHs and the new glossy apartments like CIty Ridge and we have voucher holders. The apartments where families with fewer resouces used to live have either been redeveloped or inundated with voucher holders. That's the reality in Ward 3.

There are quite a few voucher holders in City Ridge too.

I hope not. I'm over voucher holders. Rent control is fine--it attracts the working poor or middle class. Voucher holders have not been good neighbors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What she's done is squeeze out the middle. We now have higher income folks who live in SFHs and the new glossy apartments like CIty Ridge and we have voucher holders. The apartments where families with fewer resouces used to live have either been redeveloped or inundated with voucher holders. That's the reality in Ward 3.

There are quite a few voucher holders in City Ridge too.

I hope not. I'm over voucher holders. Rent control is fine--it attracts the working poor or middle class. Voucher holders have not been good neighbors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What she's done is squeeze out the middle. We now have higher income folks who live in SFHs and the new glossy apartments like CIty Ridge and we have voucher holders. The apartments where families with fewer resouces used to live have either been redeveloped or inundated with voucher holders. That's the reality in Ward 3.

There are quite a few voucher holders in City Ridge too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What she's done is squeeze out the middle. We now have higher income folks who live in SFHs and the new glossy apartments like CIty Ridge and we have voucher holders. The apartments where families with fewer resouces used to live have either been redeveloped or inundated with voucher holders. That's the reality in Ward 3.

There are quite a few voucher holders in City Ridge too.

Anonymous wrote:What she's done is squeeze out the middle. We now have higher income folks who live in SFHs and the new glossy apartments like CIty Ridge and we have voucher holders. The apartments where families with fewer resouces used to live have either been redeveloped or inundated with voucher holders. That's the reality in Ward 3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because nobody would deign to vote for a Republican in the midst of MAGA craziness. It was extremely misguided.

The funny thing is, D.C. voters pay so little attention to politics that as soon as the (D) and (R)'s are removed from the ballot, they start voting for Trump supporters. That's how Ashley Carter, a Trump supporter, unseated incumbent Mary Lord on the school board (the vote was non-partisan with no (D)s and (R)s next to the names).

But even if they wanted a solid Democrat, people still had Goulet as an option. He's been a solid supporter of traditional Democratic ideas, but also said we should do something about crime, shouldn't fill up the Connecticut and Wisconsin apartments with criminals, and should have Ward 3 get the same access to Pre-K as other wards do (it's the most underserved ward for Pre-K at the moment). But voters opted for Frumin, who said his goal was for Ward 3 residents to sacrifice more on behalf of people outside of the ward.

Really insane that people voted him in. And he's done about as well as expected, ignoring every e-mail his constituents send him about crime while his Twitter account is full of photo-ops.

Anonymous wrote:When is DC going to add several floors of affordable family units on top of the Tenkeytown library? The building was reinforced to add 5-8 more floors in the future. With Janney right next door, this makes much sense.