Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I am hearing that several former Council staffers are interested in the temporary spots. They may or may not be good choices, but the optics suck.

More of the same, more of the same.

Every council staffer, Planning Board member and Planning Department staffer fancies themselves a politician.

A lot of these people, like Jill Ortman-Fouse and Aaron Kraut, don’t know their *ss from their elbow.

That’s assuming the council can even make “temporary” appointments to the board. The law has procedures for filling vacancies that occur during a commissioner’s term, and those procedures only allow for filling a seat for the remainder of a term. The law also requires a lengthier process than the one the council has announced. There’s no exception for when the whole board implodes because the council failed to provide any oversight whatsoever and tried to sweep misconduct under the rug.

When has law or policy ever stopped them?

Sad but true. It would be very on-brand for the council to create another mess and more uncertainty by not following the law.

In order to stop them two things would need to happen. First, someone would need to care enough to challenge these temporary appointments in county. And second, that person would need to have standing to sue. However, these people are super sleazy.

Glass is tweeting that there is some overarching State law that provides for temporary appointments in general to ensure government operations continue to function? I don't see it in the Land Use Article but I don't know where else to look in Maryland law for that.

I saw his tweet and he seem to imply that they are using post-911 continuity of operations legislation designed for terrorism attacks in order to claim legal basis for their decision to recruit a temporary Board by firing the current Board by their own decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I am hearing that several former Council staffers are interested in the temporary spots. They may or may not be good choices, but the optics suck.

More of the same, more of the same.

Every council staffer, Planning Board member and Planning Department staffer fancies themselves a politician.

A lot of these people, like Jill Ortman-Fouse and Aaron Kraut, don’t know their *ss from their elbow.

That’s assuming the council can even make “temporary” appointments to the board. The law has procedures for filling vacancies that occur during a commissioner’s term, and those procedures only allow for filling a seat for the remainder of a term. The law also requires a lengthier process than the one the council has announced. There’s no exception for when the whole board implodes because the council failed to provide any oversight whatsoever and tried to sweep misconduct under the rug.

When has law or policy ever stopped them?

Sad but true. It would be very on-brand for the council to create another mess and more uncertainty by not following the law.

In order to stop them two things would need to happen. First, someone would need to care enough to challenge these temporary appointments in county. And second, that person would need to have standing to sue. However, these people are super sleazy.

Glass is tweeting that there is some overarching State law that provides for temporary appointments in general to ensure government operations continue to function? I don't see it in the Land Use Article but I don't know where else to look in Maryland law for that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I am hearing that several former Council staffers are interested in the temporary spots. They may or may not be good choices, but the optics suck.

More of the same, more of the same.

Every council staffer, Planning Board member and Planning Department staffer fancies themselves a politician.

A lot of these people, like Jill Ortman-Fouse and Aaron Kraut, don’t know their *ss from their elbow.

That’s assuming the council can even make “temporary” appointments to the board. The law has procedures for filling vacancies that occur during a commissioner’s term, and those procedures only allow for filling a seat for the remainder of a term. The law also requires a lengthier process than the one the council has announced. There’s no exception for when the whole board implodes because the council failed to provide any oversight whatsoever and tried to sweep misconduct under the rug.

When has law or policy ever stopped them?

Sad but true. It would be very on-brand for the council to create another mess and more uncertainty by not following the law.

In order to stop them two things would need to happen. First, someone would need to care enough to challenge these temporary appointments in county. And second, that person would need to have standing to sue. However, these people are super sleazy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I am hearing that several former Council staffers are interested in the temporary spots. They may or may not be good choices, but the optics suck.

More of the same, more of the same.

Every council staffer, Planning Board member and Planning Department staffer fancies themselves a politician.

A lot of these people, like Jill Ortman-Fouse and Aaron Kraut, don’t know their *ss from their elbow.

That’s assuming the council can even make “temporary” appointments to the board. The law has procedures for filling vacancies that occur during a commissioner’s term, and those procedures only allow for filling a seat for the remainder of a term. The law also requires a lengthier process than the one the council has announced. There’s no exception for when the whole board implodes because the council failed to provide any oversight whatsoever and tried to sweep misconduct under the rug.

When has law or policy ever stopped them?

Sad but true. It would be very on-brand for the council to create another mess and more uncertainty by not following the law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I am hearing that several former Council staffers are interested in the temporary spots. They may or may not be good choices, but the optics suck.

More of the same, more of the same.

Every council staffer, Planning Board member and Planning Department staffer fancies themselves a politician.

A lot of these people, like Jill Ortman-Fouse and Aaron Kraut, don’t know their *ss from their elbow.

That’s assuming the council can even make “temporary” appointments to the board. The law has procedures for filling vacancies that occur during a commissioner’s term, and those procedures only allow for filling a seat for the remainder of a term. The law also requires a lengthier process than the one the council has announced. There’s no exception for when the whole board implodes because the council failed to provide any oversight whatsoever and tried to sweep misconduct under the rug.

When has law or policy ever stopped them?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I am hearing that several former Council staffers are interested in the temporary spots. They may or may not be good choices, but the optics suck.

More of the same, more of the same.

Every council staffer, Planning Board member and Planning Department staffer fancies themselves a politician.

A lot of these people, like Jill Ortman-Fouse and Aaron Kraut, don’t know their *ss from their elbow.

That’s assuming the council can even make “temporary” appointments to the board. The law has procedures for filling vacancies that occur during a commissioner’s term, and those procedures only allow for filling a seat for the remainder of a term. The law also requires a lengthier process than the one the council has announced. There’s no exception for when the whole board implodes because the council failed to provide any oversight whatsoever and tried to sweep misconduct under the rug.

Anonymous wrote:Not sure what the WaPo editorial staff were smoking when they wrote some of this, but it’s rather insulting to say the least. Maybe they are the beneficiary of Anderson’s stocked bar.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/10/14/planning-board-meltdown-montgomery-county/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I am hearing that several former Council staffers are interested in the temporary spots. They may or may not be good choices, but the optics suck.

More of the same, more of the same.

Every council staffer, Planning Board member and Planning Department staffer fancies themselves a politician.

A lot of these people, like Jill Ortman-Fouse and Aaron Kraut, don’t know their *ss from their elbow.

Anonymous wrote:So I am hearing that several former Council staffers are interested in the temporary spots. They may or may not be good choices, but the optics suck.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read this article:

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2022/10/13/the-tuesday-night-massacre/?fbclid=IwAR06ZpXuJK2YjxJ5p5_SSs3MILtmnHiGU4TBje92yP3FxpZc1SPUAcIY5hk&fs=e&s=cl

Other idiocy in that article.

Continued dysfunction at the board might have provided an opportunity for Elrich to make a move. And he is VERY interested in Park and Planning.

I voted for Blair, whose failed campaign the author worked on, and this is an idiotic statement. Can you not imagine a reason why Elrich is interested in Parks and Planning?

Maybe because it’s vital for economic development?

Maybe because Casey Anderson used it as a political perch to basically run the organization as an opposition party against him?

Maybe because Elrich has responsibility for confirming the appointees?

Maybe because he thinks this episode has been disgraceful?

Elrich has confirmed a few people were fired/left in a disgrace.

He says all the right buzzwords to curry the votes of certain groups, but the guy is completely incompetent and his judgement is questionable.

What are you talking about? Parks and Planning is under the responsibility of the County Council and not the County Executive. It is not a mess that Elrich is in any way responsible for.

In fact, one of the few things I firmly agree with Elrich on is his opposition to the same group of insiders, and their hive mind on this. We need some diversity of thought on the board.