Anonymous wrote:We are not talking about potholes. We are talking about a six acre park that was closed for two years.

Yes, but the responsibilities are the same. The Councilmember has one role, the agency another. Glad we agree.

We are not talking about potholes. We are talking about a six acre park that was closed for two years.

Anonymous wrote:PP I think you have a problem with executive function if you don’t think Cheh has ownership over a project she championed.

Also you are talking out of both sides of your mouth by saying she didn’t have any responsibility and she is wrong to blame yet she was deeply involved over the last two years.

Pick an argument - you can’t have both sides. Maybe you should talk to Cheh about developing some more substantive talking points.

Whose fault is it when a pothole isn't filled? What is the Councilmember's role?

1) Notification of pothole goes to DDOT
2) DDOT either fixes it or it doesn't.
3) If it doesn't, complain to Councilmember.
4) Councilmember nudges DDOT.
4a) Councilmember sends a series of emails
4b) Councilmember makes multiple phone calls
4c) Councilmember attends ANC and Community meetings about the pothole.
5) DDOT either fixes it or it doesn't.
6) Councilmember complains during oversight hearing to DDOT Director that the pothole still isn't fixed.

Question, whose fault is it that the pothole isn't fixed?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am your neighbor, not a spin doctor, but it is simply BS to claim a councilmember owns delays for a project they don't manage. That is the city's job. Please run for Council. I KNOW you will do a better job.

DP here but the champion of an initiative who would claim credit for its success should also deserve blame for its failure. It’s a two way street.

But more to the point, as a council member, she had a lot of responsibility with regards to oversight and if she was unhappy with implementation then you would expect that she would exercise that oversight. Has she done so? That’s the minimum you would expect of her to “do her job”.

Yes, you can actually watch footage of hearings where she uses her oversight. A lot of your neighbors testified at those same hearings. Oversight gah!

PP I think you have a problem with executive function if you don’t think Cheh has ownership over a project she championed.

Also you are talking out of both sides of your mouth by saying she didn’t have any responsibility and she is wrong to blame yet she was deeply involved over the last two years.

Pick an argument - you can’t have both sides. Maybe you should talk to Cheh about developing some more substantive talking points.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am your neighbor, not a spin doctor, but it is simply BS to claim a councilmember owns delays for a project they don't manage. That is the city's job. Please run for Council. I KNOW you will do a better job.

DP here but the champion of an initiative who would claim credit for its success should also deserve blame for its failure. It’s a two way street.

But more to the point, as a council member, she had a lot of responsibility with regards to oversight and if she was unhappy with implementation then you would expect that she would exercise that oversight. Has she done so? That’s the minimum you would expect of her to “do her job”.

Well, there is a two tier test for council member in this case.

1. Was she diligent in trying to get the project done on time?

2. Was she effective? (The answer here is clearly that she was not effective.)

I don't oppose the pool - looks great actually. I am deeply frustrated that the park was closed for more than two years. The project was a disaster when it comes to execution and Cheh does own that.

DP. You continue to expose your ignorance when you assign blame to a legislator for an executive agency implementation. Do you get mad at Eleanor Holmes Norton when the pothole in front of your house goes unfilled for a year?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am your neighbor, not a spin doctor, but it is simply BS to claim a councilmember owns delays for a project they don't manage. That is the city's job. Please run for Council. I KNOW you will do a better job.

DP here but the champion of an initiative who would claim credit for its success should also deserve blame for its failure. It’s a two way street.

But more to the point, as a council member, she had a lot of responsibility with regards to oversight and if she was unhappy with implementation then you would expect that she would exercise that oversight. Has she done so? That’s the minimum you would expect of her to “do her job”.

Well, there is a two tier test for council member in this case.

1. Was she diligent in trying to get the project done on time?

2. Was she effective? (The answer here is clearly that she was not effective.)

I don't oppose the pool - looks great actually. I am deeply frustrated that the park was closed for more than two years. The project was a disaster when it comes to execution and Cheh does own that.

Anonymous wrote:I am your neighbor, not a spin doctor, but it is simply BS to claim a councilmember owns delays for a project they don't manage. That is the city's job. Please run for Council. I KNOW you will do a better job.

DP here but the champion of an initiative who would claim credit for its success should also deserve blame for its failure. It’s a two way street.

But more to the point, as a council member, she had a lot of responsibility with regards to oversight and if she was unhappy with implementation then you would expect that she would exercise that oversight. Has she done so? That’s the minimum you would expect of her to “do her job”.

I am your neighbor, not a spin doctor, but it is simply BS to claim a councilmember owns delays for a project they don't manage. That is the city's job. Please run for Council. I KNOW you will do a better job.

1. Thank you for letting me to continue to post here. I’m so grateful that Ms. Cheh allows political dissent in Ward 3.

2. This was Cheh’s project and the park was closed to children and families for two years.

3.please stop trying to shift the blame. Cheh owns this. She will be there at the ribbon opening claiming success.

4. By any measure she was ineffective here.

5.I understand how government works. I also understand how spin doctors like you work to protect the online reputations of your boss.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The pool is going to raise real estate values for some homes and reduce them for others. It’s much better than I thought it would turn out. I feel bad for some of the houses directly across because of the obnoxious building they added. But I think other houses will see the pool as a selling point. Still Cheh should be ashamed by the way it dragged on for two years. This was all her idea - she should have taken more ownership.

Because she is the one pouring the concrete?

Please.

How long did it take for Cathedral Commons to get built? 13 years? Is that her fault too?

No Cathedral Commons isn’t Cheh’s fault. But why are you resistant to holding a public official accountable - especially one who spearhead fed the project? She pushed it forward and then went silent while itanguished for two years. Isn’t it our job as citizens to hold people in public office responsible?

You really woke up at 4:45 to post this? This is what keeps you up at night?

So here is the thing. She didn't go radio silent. She held meetings. She used her oversight to ask questions in formal settings. If members of the public couldn't get answers, her staff fielded questions and got answers of DGS. I am not sure why you claim she went radio silent for 2 years. She did what any Councilmember could do to keep the project moving. But as has been posted here already, the Council has one role, the Executive Branch and Agencies have another. If you are upset about the delay, that is on the Executive Branch. Understanding how government works and where the responsibilities are, make it easier to assign blame when and where warranted. Assigning blame to Cheh for the delay or execution is unwarranted, as that is not the Councilmember's role.

But you can keep on posting here your (misplaced) ire, or, if you think you can do a better job, then you should run for Council yourself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The pool is going to raise real estate values for some homes and reduce them for others. It’s much better than I thought it would turn out. I feel bad for some of the houses directly across because of the obnoxious building they added. But I think other houses will see the pool as a selling point. Still Cheh should be ashamed by the way it dragged on for two years. This was all her idea - she should have taken more ownership.

Because she is the one pouring the concrete?

Please.

How long did it take for Cathedral Commons to get built? 13 years? Is that her fault too?

No Cathedral Commons isn’t Cheh’s fault. But why are you resistant to holding a public official accountable - especially one who spearhead fed the project? She pushed it forward and then went silent while itanguished for two years. Isn’t it our job as citizens to hold people in public office responsible?

Anonymous wrote:The pool is going to raise real estate values for some homes and reduce them for others. It’s much better than I thought it would turn out. I feel bad for some of the houses directly across because of the obnoxious building they added. But I think other houses will see the pool as a selling point. Still Cheh should be ashamed by the way it dragged on for two years. This was all her idea - she should have taken more ownership.

Because she is the one pouring the concrete?

Please.

How long did it take for Cathedral Commons to get built? 13 years? Is that her fault too?

The pool is going to raise real estate values for some homes and reduce them for others. It’s much better than I thought it would turn out. I feel bad for some of the houses directly across because of the obnoxious building they added. But I think other houses will see the pool as a selling point. Still Cheh should be ashamed by the way it dragged on for two years. This was all her idea - she should have taken more ownership.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The pool is soooo tiny and has nothing fun for kids (water feature etc). Next to it are massive tennis courts, knowing that the previous ones were rarely used before. Makes no sense. All this fuss for a whimper of a pool.

It's the same size as almost all of the other DPR pools.

Why no fun water feature? It's so small and boring

Ask DGS.