Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He doesn't have sole authority to direct vouchers to another part of the city, but it's his literal JOB to advocate for the residents of the ward he represents, who are being negatively impacted by a poorly-run program.

It's his literal JOB to convince, cajole, strong-arm, etc. various parties towards policies that benefit his ward. This is how our system of government works.

If he isn't willing to do his JOB, or is putting the interests of residents from other wards above the interests of the residents he represents, he should find another job.

How do you know he hasn't tried with the Mayor and Directors of the different departments? Have you asked? Or are you just complaining on a website? Because if yu were really concerned, then there should be records of calls and emails to his office for action. Have you done that?

NP, when I wrote to his office, he didn't write back. Stop making excuses for him. You're either him, married to him or you work for him.

I’ve sent a few emails to him. Sometimes I get a response and sometimes I don’t. I’ve emailed a few CMs over the past few years and he is the only one I’ve ever received a response from. Often I find that I get a quicker response by emailing his staff and is responding to constituents is their primary job, but it can be hit or miss. In any case, his office likely receives many more emails than they have the resources to respond to in the course of a day, so I would recommend not drawing too broad a conclusion from a single non-response.

He's been good about responding to me, too. I have rented in DC for 20 years and I don't think that it makes me less of a citizen than those who own property.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He doesn't have sole authority to direct vouchers to another part of the city, but it's his literal JOB to advocate for the residents of the ward he represents, who are being negatively impacted by a poorly-run program.

It's his literal JOB to convince, cajole, strong-arm, etc. various parties towards policies that benefit his ward. This is how our system of government works.

If he isn't willing to do his JOB, or is putting the interests of residents from other wards above the interests of the residents he represents, he should find another job.

How do you know he hasn't tried with the Mayor and Directors of the different departments? Have you asked? Or are you just complaining on a website? Because if yu were really concerned, then there should be records of calls and emails to his office for action. Have you done that?

NP, when I wrote to his office, he didn't write back. Stop making excuses for him. You're either him, married to him or you work for him.

I’ve sent a few emails to him. Sometimes I get a response and sometimes I don’t. I’ve emailed a few CMs over the past few years and he is the only one I’ve ever received a response from. Often I find that I get a quicker response by emailing his staff and is responding to constituents is their primary job, but it can be hit or miss. In any case, his office likely receives many more emails than they have the resources to respond to in the course of a day, so I would recommend not drawing too broad a conclusion from a single non-response.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean he was a clown professonally? He was a practicing international law attorney for decades.

That’s a pretty generous interpretation of his bio. Another person might conclude he was also an estate planning attorney. It’s not exactly clear what his profession was.

According to his bio, he has been a practicing attorney for 30 years with different practice areas. Personally, I have known him as someone work worked in international law and with international organizations. if he did some estate planning then that just means he has even more experience to weigh in on DC tax law. I still don't understand how that is a "clown" professionally.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean he was a clown professonally? He was a practicing international law attorney for decades.

That’s a pretty generous interpretation of his bio. Another person might conclude he was also an estate planning attorney. It’s not exactly clear what his profession was.

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean he was a clown professonally? He was a practicing international law attorney for decades.

Anonymous wrote:I am a PP on this three but not the one who made the renter/marital status quip above and agree with the pp- those are not valid criticisms.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see he has two challengers now? Any thoughts?

One is a Chevy Chase NIMBY, the other is a very young YIMBY urbanist. Both will draw from core constituencies if they can get their messages out, but Frumin is the incumbent and is a centrist compared to both of these challengers, who could not be more diametrically opposite from each other.

I don't know if I'd say early-30s is "very young", bur maybe "younger" which is not necessarily a bad thing.

I’m no Frumin fan, but I’m having a hard time seeing the case for a young, single, lightly employed, apartment renter seeking to be on the Council. I appreciate his passion for service but maybe go start a family, get a real career, buy some property and then come back in 20 years when he has some actual life experience that could inform him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see he has two challengers now? Any thoughts?

One is a Chevy Chase NIMBY, the other is a very young YIMBY urbanist. Both will draw from core constituencies if they can get their messages out, but Frumin is the incumbent and is a centrist compared to both of these challengers, who could not be more diametrically opposite from each other.

I don't know if I'd say early-30s is "very young", bur maybe "younger" which is not necessarily a bad thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see he has two challengers now? Any thoughts?

One is a Chevy Chase NIMBY, the other is a very young YIMBY urbanist. Both will draw from core constituencies if they can get their messages out, but Frumin is the incumbent and is a centrist compared to both of these challengers, who could not be more diametrically opposite from each other.

I don't know if I'd say early-30s is "very young", bur maybe "younger" which is not necessarily a bad thing.

His experience is a, what, 2 term ANC commissioner who advocated for bike lanes and helped the Main Street on his single member district. Frumin was on ANC 3E for years and was its chair for a stretch. He also was the head of the Tenley Main Street board, as well as several education and housing boards with results. He advocated for bike lanes and the mayor changed her mind because of f downtown and ward 3 business complaints. But he has a win in getting dmped moving with the Chevy Chase project.

Is he the best Ward Councilmemebr ever? No. Does his seniority and committee oversight of dmped give Ward 3 some advantages if he stays in office? Most likely. A freshmen council member doesn’t get a committee chair. Is it worth losing that for an aging NIMBY or a ‘young’ ANC commissioner who has less experience and contacts in the ward and city? Not to my eye.

The problem with Frumin is he still acts like he’s on the ANC. You’d think the job came with no authority, no oversight, and no responsibility for results. A councilmember is supposed to actually get things done. I just haven’t seen much of that.

Sure, it would be tough to have a freshman councilmember again. Maybe. But right now we’ve basically got an absent one. He’s technically there, but nothing really seems to happen.

And the way you describe it sounds like you’re talking about the same person, An ANC commissioner with some Main Street experience.

There’s a difference between being a leader like Mary Cheh and being a councilmember like Frumin. Cheh understood the job, Frumin never did and never will.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see he has two challengers now? Any thoughts?

One is a Chevy Chase NIMBY, the other is a very young YIMBY urbanist. Both will draw from core constituencies if they can get their messages out, but Frumin is the incumbent and is a centrist compared to both of these challengers, who could not be more diametrically opposite from each other.

I don't know if I'd say early-30s is "very young", bur maybe "younger" which is not necessarily a bad thing.

His experience is a, what, 2 term ANC commissioner who advocated for bike lanes and helped the Main Street on his single member district. Frumin was on ANC 3E for years and was its chair for a stretch. He also was the head of the Tenley Main Street board, as well as several education and housing boards with results. He advocated for bike lanes and the mayor changed her mind because of f downtown and ward 3 business complaints. But he has a win in getting dmped moving with the Chevy Chase project.

Is he the best Ward Councilmemebr ever? No. Does his seniority and committee oversight of dmped give Ward 3 some advantages if he stays in office? Most likely. A freshmen council member doesn’t get a committee chair. Is it worth losing that for an aging NIMBY or a ‘young’ ANC commissioner who has less experience and contacts in the ward and city? Not to my eye.

The problem with Frumin is he still acts like he’s on the ANC. You’d think the job came with no authority, no oversight, and no responsibility for results. A councilmember is supposed to actually get things done. I just haven’t seen much of that.

Sure, it would be tough to have a freshman councilmember again. Maybe. But right now we’ve basically got an absent one. He’s technically there, but nothing really seems to happen.

And the way you describe it sounds like you’re talking about the same person, An ANC commissioner with some Main Street experience.

There’s a difference between being a leader like Mary Cheh and being a councilmember like Frumin. Cheh understood the job, Frumin never did and never will.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can research what it takes to produce affordable housing nationally and in the District. You can also research the history of racism west of Rock creek Park and you can research how laws are passed in DC, including the composition of the DC Council.

Then you can connect dots.

ANC 3F — which is most affected by vouchers — was not one of the racist parts of Ward 3. Forest Hills was one of the neighborhoods without a covenant prohibiting Blacks and Jews. So if Frumin is intent on righting the wrongs, he could focus on Spring Valley (which did have a covenant) or his own AU park. But he’s essentially Nimbying a d leaving other parts of Ward 3 to shoulder policies that have significantly increased crime and haven’t shown many benefits beyond enriching landlords.

Those of us who have been following this thread are still waiting for an explanation of what statutory authority the Ward 3 councilmember has to direct vouchers to one part of the city or another or to restructure or pause the implementation of the program. If we are missing something, please let us know.

Please list 10 accomplishments on behalf of his Ward 3 constituents (and only Ward 3). Otherwise, you're telling us that he's completely useless and powerless. Mary Cheh, like her or not, got stuff done on behalf of the Ward. I see no such momentum with F.

Found it! “The Council’s central role as a legislative body is to make laws.”

https://dccouncil.gov/

lol!!!

Frumin is one of 13 council members. I would hope that you could understand that it a single CM cannot unilaterally pass legislation banning the use of housing vouchers in their ward, but maybe that’s too generous of an assumption.

Maybe so, but his literal job is to represent the best interests of THIS ward. If he is too scared to do that (or worse, doesn't BELIEVE in what the majority of his constituents want), he should move to another ward and run there.

What exactly is the policy outcome you seek? What exactly do you want to happen?

If you can tell us this, we can give you feedback on whether we think it is something he could be reasonably expected to make it happen and, if so, how you might go about getting him to do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see he has two challengers now? Any thoughts?

One is a Chevy Chase NIMBY, the other is a very young YIMBY urbanist. Both will draw from core constituencies if they can get their messages out, but Frumin is the incumbent and is a centrist compared to both of these challengers, who could not be more diametrically opposite from each other.

I don't know if I'd say early-30s is "very young", bur maybe "younger" which is not necessarily a bad thing.

His experience is a, what, 2 term ANC commissioner who advocated for bike lanes and helped the Main Street on his single member district. Frumin was on ANC 3E for years and was its chair for a stretch. He also was the head of the Tenley Main Street board, as well as several education and housing boards with results. He advocated for bike lanes and the mayor changed her mind because of f downtown and ward 3 business complaints. But he has a win in getting dmped moving with the Chevy Chase project.

Is he the best Ward Councilmemebr ever? No. Does his seniority and committee oversight of dmped give Ward 3 some advantages if he stays in office? Most likely. A freshmen council member doesn’t get a committee chair. Is it worth losing that for an aging NIMBY or a ‘young’ ANC commissioner who has less experience and contacts in the ward and city? Not to my eye.