Anonymous wrote:Please I beg you to write a letter to the editor of the Washington Post to share this opinion with the world with your name attached.

I'll get right on that. You think they will print it?

Please I beg you to write a letter to the editor of the Washington Post to share this opinion with the world with your name attached.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s funny is that I have never in my life key in real life someone who would say something so silly. The idea that an individuals record of public service for the most vulnerable should be impugned or cast in a negative light because you disagree with them about sidewalks in your neighborhood is an absolute joke. It’s also why you are sharing these opinions online because you’d never dare to say something like this to actual real people. I honestly don’t know if I could contain myself from laughing if someone said something so stupid to me.

You are certainly free to hold that opinion. But I definitely would question someone's dedication to expanding housing and other developments who spends so much time advocating that other people not be able to safely walk near his house. I don't want someone on this type of board who would only vote for affordable housing as long as it didn't affect his own neighborhood.

You bring up a good point. Bill Slover advocates for the poor until someone puts a section 8 house on his street. Then he will give you the Bill Slover fog.....a million reasons why its a bad idea.

There are people in this thread judging him from afar via the media and there are people in the neighborhood who would love for him to move somewhere else in the city.

Anonymous wrote:What’s funny is that I have never in my life key in real life someone who would say something so silly. The idea that an individuals record of public service for the most vulnerable should be impugned or cast in a negative light because you disagree with them about sidewalks in your neighborhood is an absolute joke. It’s also why you are sharing these opinions online because you’d never dare to say something like this to actual real people. I honestly don’t know if I could contain myself from laughing if someone said something so stupid to me.

You are certainly free to hold that opinion. But I definitely would question someone's dedication to expanding housing and other developments who spends so much time advocating that other people not be able to safely walk near his house. I don't want someone on this type of board who would only vote for affordable housing as long as it didn't affect his own neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we talk about how the mayor and her developer cronies are failing low-income households? Do we think this new setup will be any more successful?

It will be successful because the Federal government will take over it they arent' successful. That will look bad on the Mayor. When watchdogs are watching you, things tend to get better in government.

The federal government wants nothing to do with this. The mayor has kicked the can down the road at least 2 more years and created a board stuffed with cronies who now won’t embarrass her.

What’s funny is that I have never in my life key in real life someone who would say something so silly. The idea that an individuals record of public service for the most vulnerable should be impugned or cast in a negative light because you disagree with them about sidewalks in your neighborhood is an absolute joke. It’s also why you are sharing these opinions online because you’d never dare to say something like this to actual real people. I honestly don’t know if I could contain myself from laughing if someone said something so stupid to me.

Anonymous wrote:Can we talk about how the mayor and her developer cronies are failing low-income households? Do we think this new setup will be any more successful?

It will be successful because the Federal government will take over it they arent' successful. That will look bad on the Mayor. When watchdogs are watching you, things tend to get better in government.

Can we talk about how the mayor and her developer cronies are failing low-income households? Do we think this new setup will be any more successful?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow -, this is why we don't get good people in public positions. Bill is trying to help people being hurt by the mayor. And he is being subject to personal attacks just for doing his job. Noone is perfect and I don't think silly neighborhood squabbles should distract from housing reform.

Will the needy residents of DC be better off without him as an advocate? Guess y'all think so. You must be a bunch of developers.

It's not "silly neighborhood squabbles". He has actively lobbied against a trail that would make it a million times safer to get around the neighborhood by bike or by walking. Instead, students must risk their lives on one of the busiest streets in NW DC if they want to bike to the new high school. All this because he and his neighbors didn't want to deal with the indignity of people actually using public land behind their houses? WTF?

I'm not a member of the housing board and so can't speak to his behavior there. I guess it is possible that there are people who act completely selfishly on some issues - as he and his fellow NIMBYs have done on the trolley trail - and completely magnanimously on others. But those people are not common and I'm not inclined therefore to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It’s incredible that you can reduce everyone to your own metric of YIMBY/NIMBY good/bad. What a sad way to live.

Imagine that someone could launch a campaign to selfishly deny their neighbors' kids a safe way to get to school and then, horror of all horrors, be judged on the basis of those actions! What a world we live in!

Imagine someone who thinks their pet cause of a neighborhood sidewalk is more important than ensuring adequate housing for tens of thousands of highly vulnerable people.

Whatever takes someone to that conclusion should probably take a step back to recalibrate their priorities.

You seem to have completely missed the point, so let me sharpen it for you. No one is saying that low-income housing is more important than road safety or vice versa. What is being said is that those involved in the "Save Don't Pave" campaign - and especially those who lobbied government for the cause - have spread misinformation in service of naked self-interest, which they prioritized over the safety of children in the community. Such behavior undermines claims that they can be trusted to act benevolently on other public issues and reinforces claims that their character may not be suited to the position to which they had been appointed.

LOL. Apparently it not only makes no difference to you and also whatever accomplishments the only person on the DCHA Board that was actually trying to ensure that the agency was living up to its obligations to house people has done because you disagree with them about a sidewalk in your neighborhood. As I was saying, you seriously need to step back and get a grip.

LOL? LOL??? Will you be laughing when some kid gets killed on MacArthur Boulevard when they could have been using the Palisades Trolley Trail had Bill and his neighbors not blocked it? I won’t be laughing and I doubt the kid’s family will be either.

And all for what? So Bill and his neighbors don’t have people walking and biking on the public land behind their house? So that Bill and his neighbors can continue to enjoy near-guaranteed parking in the Rec Center lot?

Bill and his neighbor’s actions have worsened the safety and quality of life of others in the neighborhood. It’s not a great surprise to learn that some of his colleagues on the DCHA feel the same way about his contribution there.

The PP won't LOL, they will shrug and say "Accidents happen" and blame the kid.

+1.
They have absolutely no idea of the harm from blocking that trail, calling it "a sidewalk". They're in some seriously deep "not my struggle" mode, and their asking PP to "step back and get a grip" is pretty ironic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow -, this is why we don't get good people in public positions. Bill is trying to help people being hurt by the mayor. And he is being subject to personal attacks just for doing his job. Noone is perfect and I don't think silly neighborhood squabbles should distract from housing reform.

Will the needy residents of DC be better off without him as an advocate? Guess y'all think so. You must be a bunch of developers.

It's not "silly neighborhood squabbles". He has actively lobbied against a trail that would make it a million times safer to get around the neighborhood by bike or by walking. Instead, students must risk their lives on one of the busiest streets in NW DC if they want to bike to the new high school. All this because he and his neighbors didn't want to deal with the indignity of people actually using public land behind their houses? WTF?

I'm not a member of the housing board and so can't speak to his behavior there. I guess it is possible that there are people who act completely selfishly on some issues - as he and his fellow NIMBYs have done on the trolley trail - and completely magnanimously on others. But those people are not common and I'm not inclined therefore to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It’s incredible that you can reduce everyone to your own metric of YIMBY/NIMBY good/bad. What a sad way to live.

Imagine that someone could launch a campaign to selfishly deny their neighbors' kids a safe way to get to school and then, horror of all horrors, be judged on the basis of those actions! What a world we live in!

Imagine someone who thinks their pet cause of a neighborhood sidewalk is more important than ensuring adequate housing for tens of thousands of highly vulnerable people.

Whatever takes someone to that conclusion should probably take a step back to recalibrate their priorities.

You seem to have completely missed the point, so let me sharpen it for you. No one is saying that low-income housing is more important than road safety or vice versa. What is being said is that those involved in the "Save Don't Pave" campaign - and especially those who lobbied government for the cause - have spread misinformation in service of naked self-interest, which they prioritized over the safety of children in the community. Such behavior undermines claims that they can be trusted to act benevolently on other public issues and reinforces claims that their character may not be suited to the position to which they had been appointed.

LOL. Apparently it not only makes no difference to you and also whatever accomplishments the only person on the DCHA Board that was actually trying to ensure that the agency was living up to its obligations to house people has done because you disagree with them about a sidewalk in your neighborhood. As I was saying, you seriously need to step back and get a grip.

LOL? LOL??? Will you be laughing when some kid gets killed on MacArthur Boulevard when they could have been using the Palisades Trolley Trail had Bill and his neighbors not blocked it? I won’t be laughing and I doubt the kid’s family will be either.

And all for what? So Bill and his neighbors don’t have people walking and biking on the public land behind their house? So that Bill and his neighbors can continue to enjoy near-guaranteed parking in the Rec Center lot?

Bill and his neighbor’s actions have worsened the safety and quality of life of others in the neighborhood. It’s not a great surprise to learn that some of his colleagues on the DCHA feel the same way about his contribution there.

The PP won't LOL, they will shrug and say "Accidents happen" and blame the kid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow -, this is why we don't get good people in public positions. Bill is trying to help people being hurt by the mayor. And he is being subject to personal attacks just for doing his job. Noone is perfect and I don't think silly neighborhood squabbles should distract from housing reform.

Will the needy residents of DC be better off without him as an advocate? Guess y'all think so. You must be a bunch of developers.

It's not "silly neighborhood squabbles". He has actively lobbied against a trail that would make it a million times safer to get around the neighborhood by bike or by walking. Instead, students must risk their lives on one of the busiest streets in NW DC if they want to bike to the new high school. All this because he and his neighbors didn't want to deal with the indignity of people actually using public land behind their houses? WTF?

I'm not a member of the housing board and so can't speak to his behavior there. I guess it is possible that there are people who act completely selfishly on some issues - as he and his fellow NIMBYs have done on the trolley trail - and completely magnanimously on others. But those people are not common and I'm not inclined therefore to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It’s incredible that you can reduce everyone to your own metric of YIMBY/NIMBY good/bad. What a sad way to live.

Imagine that someone could launch a campaign to selfishly deny their neighbors' kids a safe way to get to school and then, horror of all horrors, be judged on the basis of those actions! What a world we live in!

Imagine someone who thinks their pet cause of a neighborhood sidewalk is more important than ensuring adequate housing for tens of thousands of highly vulnerable people.

Whatever takes someone to that conclusion should probably take a step back to recalibrate their priorities.

You seem to have completely missed the point, so let me sharpen it for you. No one is saying that low-income housing is more important than road safety or vice versa. What is being said is that those involved in the "Save Don't Pave" campaign - and especially those who lobbied government for the cause - have spread misinformation in service of naked self-interest, which they prioritized over the safety of children in the community. Such behavior undermines claims that they can be trusted to act benevolently on other public issues and reinforces claims that their character may not be suited to the position to which they had been appointed.

LOL. Apparently it not only makes no difference to you and also whatever accomplishments the only person on the DCHA Board that was actually trying to ensure that the agency was living up to its obligations to house people has done because you disagree with them about a sidewalk in your neighborhood. As I was saying, you seriously need to step back and get a grip.

LOL? LOL??? Will you be laughing when some kid gets killed on MacArthur Boulevard when they could have been using the Palisades Trolley Trail had Bill and his neighbors not blocked it? I won’t be laughing and I doubt the kid’s family will be either.

And all for what? So Bill and his neighbors don’t have people walking and biking on the public land behind their house? So that Bill and his neighbors can continue to enjoy near-guaranteed parking in the Rec Center lot?

Bill and his neighbor’s actions have worsened the safety and quality of life of others in the neighborhood. It’s not a great surprise to learn that some of his colleagues on the DCHA feel the same way about his contribution there.

Anonymous wrote:
LOL. Apparently it not only makes no difference to you and also whatever accomplishments the only person on the DCHA Board that was actually trying to ensure that the agency was living up to its obligations to house people has done because you disagree with them about a sidewalk in your neighborhood. As I was saying, you seriously need to step back and get a grip.

What difference did Bill Slover actually make on the DCHA board? He's been there for years and it is still horrible. He has made zero difference on that board.
One measure of success is building a consensus. Bill is a total failure in that regard because he is always "the smartest man in the room" in his own mind.

You and I can shout out loud that the DHCA stinks, but we are only pointing out the obvious. We really aren't making any difference. When its all said and done, it is still a terrible organization.
And that sums up Bill Slover. He's great at complaining. He only did half the job. The other half of the job is to work with others. He needed to convince others of his points. He never did.
And, as many of us in the Palisades observed, he's done that on the trolley trail issue. He's done that with the Palisades Rec Center. And he's done that when he was the President of the Palisades Community Association.
It's all the same thing. He complains. He doesn't know how to work with others and inspire or compromise.

DHCA. Trolley Trail. Palisades Rec Center. PCA Board. There is a running theme.
He's the type of guy that wakes up in the morning and yells at the clouds for being cloudy. At the end of the day, they are still cloudy. Bill was correct. But the sun never came out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow -, this is why we don't get good people in public positions. Bill is trying to help people being hurt by the mayor. And he is being subject to personal attacks just for doing his job. Noone is perfect and I don't think silly neighborhood squabbles should distract from housing reform.

Will the needy residents of DC be better off without him as an advocate? Guess y'all think so. You must be a bunch of developers.

It's not "silly neighborhood squabbles". He has actively lobbied against a trail that would make it a million times safer to get around the neighborhood by bike or by walking. Instead, students must risk their lives on one of the busiest streets in NW DC if they want to bike to the new high school. All this because he and his neighbors didn't want to deal with the indignity of people actually using public land behind their houses? WTF?

I'm not a member of the housing board and so can't speak to his behavior there. I guess it is possible that there are people who act completely selfishly on some issues - as he and his fellow NIMBYs have done on the trolley trail - and completely magnanimously on others. But those people are not common and I'm not inclined therefore to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It’s incredible that you can reduce everyone to your own metric of YIMBY/NIMBY good/bad. What a sad way to live.

Imagine that someone could launch a campaign to selfishly deny their neighbors' kids a safe way to get to school and then, horror of all horrors, be judged on the basis of those actions! What a world we live in!

Imagine someone who thinks their pet cause of a neighborhood sidewalk is more important than ensuring adequate housing for tens of thousands of highly vulnerable people.

Whatever takes someone to that conclusion should probably take a step back to recalibrate their priorities.

You seem to have completely missed the point, so let me sharpen it for you. No one is saying that low-income housing is more important than road safety or vice versa. What is being said is that those involved in the "Save Don't Pave" campaign - and especially those who lobbied government for the cause - have spread misinformation in service of naked self-interest, which they prioritized over the safety of children in the community. Such behavior undermines claims that they can be trusted to act benevolently on other public issues and reinforces claims that their character may not be suited to the position to which they had been appointed.

LOL. Apparently it not only makes no difference to you and also whatever accomplishments the only person on the DCHA Board that was actually trying to ensure that the agency was living up to its obligations to house people has done because you disagree with them about a sidewalk in your neighborhood. As I was saying, you seriously need to step back and get a grip.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow -, this is why we don't get good people in public positions. Bill is trying to help people being hurt by the mayor. And he is being subject to personal attacks just for doing his job. Noone is perfect and I don't think silly neighborhood squabbles should distract from housing reform.

Will the needy residents of DC be better off without him as an advocate? Guess y'all think so. You must be a bunch of developers.

It's not "silly neighborhood squabbles". He has actively lobbied against a trail that would make it a million times safer to get around the neighborhood by bike or by walking. Instead, students must risk their lives on one of the busiest streets in NW DC if they want to bike to the new high school. All this because he and his neighbors didn't want to deal with the indignity of people actually using public land behind their houses? WTF?

I'm not a member of the housing board and so can't speak to his behavior there. I guess it is possible that there are people who act completely selfishly on some issues - as he and his fellow NIMBYs have done on the trolley trail - and completely magnanimously on others. But those people are not common and I'm not inclined therefore to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It’s incredible that you can reduce everyone to your own metric of YIMBY/NIMBY good/bad. What a sad way to live.

Imagine that someone could launch a campaign to selfishly deny their neighbors' kids a safe way to get to school and then, horror of all horrors, be judged on the basis of those actions! What a world we live in!

Imagine someone who thinks their pet cause of a neighborhood sidewalk is more important than ensuring adequate housing for tens of thousands of highly vulnerable people.

Whatever takes someone to that conclusion should probably take a step back to recalibrate their priorities.

You seem to have completely missed the point, so let me sharpen it for you. No one is saying that low-income housing is more important than road safety or vice versa. What is being said is that those involved in the "Save Don't Pave" campaign - and especially those who lobbied government for the cause - have spread misinformation in service of naked self-interest, which they prioritized over the safety of children in the community. Such behavior undermines claims that they can be trusted to act benevolently on other public issues and reinforces claims that their character may not be suited to the position to which they had been appointed.

LOL. Apparently it not only makes no difference to you and also whatever accomplishments the only person on the DCHA Board that was actually trying to ensure that the agency was living up to its obligations to house people has done because you disagree with them about a sidewalk in your neighborhood. As I was saying, you seriously need to step back and get a grip.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow -, this is why we don't get good people in public positions. Bill is trying to help people being hurt by the mayor. And he is being subject to personal attacks just for doing his job. Noone is perfect and I don't think silly neighborhood squabbles should distract from housing reform.

Will the needy residents of DC be better off without him as an advocate? Guess y'all think so. You must be a bunch of developers.

It's not "silly neighborhood squabbles". He has actively lobbied against a trail that would make it a million times safer to get around the neighborhood by bike or by walking. Instead, students must risk their lives on one of the busiest streets in NW DC if they want to bike to the new high school. All this because he and his neighbors didn't want to deal with the indignity of people actually using public land behind their houses? WTF?

I'm not a member of the housing board and so can't speak to his behavior there. I guess it is possible that there are people who act completely selfishly on some issues - as he and his fellow NIMBYs have done on the trolley trail - and completely magnanimously on others. But those people are not common and I'm not inclined therefore to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It’s incredible that you can reduce everyone to your own metric of YIMBY/NIMBY good/bad. What a sad way to live.

Imagine that someone could launch a campaign to selfishly deny their neighbors' kids a safe way to get to school and then, horror of all horrors, be judged on the basis of those actions! What a world we live in!

Imagine someone who thinks their pet cause of a neighborhood sidewalk is more important than ensuring adequate housing for tens of thousands of highly vulnerable people.

Whatever takes someone to that conclusion should probably take a step back to recalibrate their priorities.

You seem to have completely missed the point, so let me sharpen it for you. No one is saying that low-income housing is more important than road safety or vice versa. What is being said is that those involved in the "Save Don't Pave" campaign - and especially those who lobbied government for the cause - have spread misinformation in service of naked self-interest, which they prioritized over the safety of children in the community. Such behavior undermines claims that they can be trusted to act benevolently on other public issues and reinforces claims that their character may not be suited to the position to which they had been appointed.