Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some, at least 1, council member probably wants to be voted out. They can then say they stood up for "attainable" (for developers and people with inherited $$$ etc.) housing and get paid by some developer friends to lobby or be on a board.

Another odd conspiracy fantasy.

The simpler explanation is that the council members sincerely believe they are supporting a good policy.

Um, not infantilizing them here. They're not that stupid. Hard to understand the mind of a politician, I know.

Harder to understand whatever you mean by this

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 2026 comes, vote out Friedman, Glass, and Fani Gonzalez.

I wonder about Mink. She often claims to support the vulnerable, so we will see if she supports this gentrification.

Curious about this too. She is the council member for the Woodmoor area which is vehemently against this proposal. So many people are.

So many affluent homeowners are. (All affluent homeowners are people, but many people are not affluent homeowners.)

As noted three pages back, characterizing those with concerns about the AHS as "affluent homeowners" is a strawman description supporting a red herring deflection. It ignores the socioeconomic diversity of those who have spoken against it, including at the listening sessions in the two locations most proximate to Mink's district, where, again, one would think, of any, those would be the most likely to show a preponderance of support for the AHS if it was broadly/majority based, yet at each that was not the case.

I don't even know what a "strawman description supporting a red herring deflection" would be.

The loudest, most vocal, most vehement opposition comes from homeowners in Bethesda and Chevy Chase. That is just a plain statement of fact.

How do you know? Plenty of people are against this in my neighborhood in silver spring. Interestingly, the council hasn’t done much outreach to Spanish speakers - if any. I think this has affected awareness in my community.

First of all, because the loudest, most vocal, most vehement opposition always comes from affluent people.

And second of all, because that's who's signing the petition, and writing indignant letters to the editor, and so forth.

This is 100% your unsubstantiated option, but that’s par for the YIMBY course, so it’s already understood.

Well, no. That is 100% facts. It is a fact that the loudest, most vocal, most vehement opposition always comes from affluent people - who are also always overrepresented at public meetings. It is also a fact that the petition is being signed by affluent homeowners, and affluent homeowners are the ones writing indignant letters to the editor.

A third of Montgomery County households rent. Are you claiming that the renters are vehemently against this proposal? Maybe you could explain why you think that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some, at least 1, council member probably wants to be voted out. They can then say they stood up for "attainable" (for developers and people with inherited $$$ etc.) housing and get paid by some developer friends to lobby or be on a board.

Another odd conspiracy fantasy.

The simpler explanation is that the council members sincerely believe they are supporting a good policy.

Um, not infantilizing them here. They're not that stupid. Hard to understand the mind of a politician, I know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 2026 comes, vote out Friedman, Glass, and Fani Gonzalez.

I wonder about Mink. She often claims to support the vulnerable, so we will see if she supports this gentrification.

Curious about this too. She is the council member for the Woodmoor area which is vehemently against this proposal. So many people are.

So many affluent homeowners are. (All affluent homeowners are people, but many people are not affluent homeowners.)

As noted three pages back, characterizing those with concerns about the AHS as "affluent homeowners" is a strawman description supporting a red herring deflection. It ignores the socioeconomic diversity of those who have spoken against it, including at the listening sessions in the two locations most proximate to Mink's district, where, again, one would think, of any, those would be the most likely to show a preponderance of support for the AHS if it was broadly/majority based, yet at each that was not the case.

I don't even know what a "strawman description supporting a red herring deflection" would be.

The loudest, most vocal, most vehement opposition comes from homeowners in Bethesda and Chevy Chase. That is just a plain statement of fact.

How do you know? Plenty of people are against this in my neighborhood in silver spring. Interestingly, the council hasn’t done much outreach to Spanish speakers - if any. I think this has affected awareness in my community.

First of all, because the loudest, most vocal, most vehement opposition always comes from affluent people.

And second of all, because that's who's signing the petition, and writing indignant letters to the editor, and so forth.

This is 100% your unsubstantiated option, but that’s par for the YIMBY course, so it’s already understood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 2026 comes, vote out Friedman, Glass, and Fani Gonzalez.

I wonder about Mink. She often claims to support the vulnerable, so we will see if she supports this gentrification.

Curious about this too. She is the council member for the Woodmoor area which is vehemently against this proposal. So many people are.

So many affluent homeowners are. (All affluent homeowners are people, but many people are not affluent homeowners.)

As noted three pages back, characterizing those with concerns about the AHS as "affluent homeowners" is a strawman description supporting a red herring deflection. It ignores the socioeconomic diversity of those who have spoken against it, including at the listening sessions in the two locations most proximate to Mink's district, where, again, one would think, of any, those would be the most likely to show a preponderance of support for the AHS if it was broadly/majority based, yet at each that was not the case.

I don't even know what a "strawman description supporting a red herring deflection" would be.

The loudest, most vocal, most vehement opposition comes from homeowners in Bethesda and Chevy Chase. That is just a plain statement of fact.

How do you know? Plenty of people are against this in my neighborhood in silver spring. Interestingly, the council hasn’t done much outreach to Spanish speakers - if any. I think this has affected awareness in my community.

First of all, because the loudest, most vocal, most vehement opposition always comes from affluent people.

And second of all, because that's who's signing the petition, and writing indignant letters to the editor, and so forth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some, at least 1, council member probably wants to be voted out. They can then say they stood up for "attainable" (for developers and people with inherited $$$ etc.) housing and get paid by some developer friends to lobby or be on a board.

Another odd conspiracy fantasy.

The simpler explanation is that the council members sincerely believe they are supporting a good policy.

They know they aren’t because this isn’t a good policy and it doesn’t reflect the interests of homeowners and others who have invested in the community. It doesn’t ensure affordable housing. All it does ensure is developers make $$$$.

So as a reminder, write / call your council member and make sure they know your concerns.

If you can't imagine that people who disagree with you are sincere in their disagreements, that's a problem with your thinking.

I am not a county council member, but in my sincere opinion

1. it is a good policy.
2. it does reflect the larger interests of homeowners and others who have invested in the community.
3. it is not intended to ensure affordable housing.
4. developers make money by building housing, for example the house you live in; if you have benefited from having the house you live in, then you should thank a developer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 2026 comes, vote out Friedman, Glass, and Fani Gonzalez.

I wonder about Mink. She often claims to support the vulnerable, so we will see if she supports this gentrification.

Curious about this too. She is the council member for the Woodmoor area which is vehemently against this proposal. So many people are.

So many affluent homeowners are. (All affluent homeowners are people, but many people are not affluent homeowners.)

As noted three pages back, characterizing those with concerns about the AHS as "affluent homeowners" is a strawman description supporting a red herring deflection. It ignores the socioeconomic diversity of those who have spoken against it, including at the listening sessions in the two locations most proximate to Mink's district, where, again, one would think, of any, those would be the most likely to show a preponderance of support for the AHS if it was broadly/majority based, yet at each that was not the case.

I don't even know what a "strawman description supporting a red herring deflection" would be.

The loudest, most vocal, most vehement opposition comes from homeowners in Bethesda and Chevy Chase. That is just a plain statement of fact.

How do you know? Plenty of people are against this in my neighborhood in silver spring. Interestingly, the council hasn’t done much outreach to Spanish speakers - if any. I think this has affected awareness in my community.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some, at least 1, council member probably wants to be voted out. They can then say they stood up for "attainable" (for developers and people with inherited $$$ etc.) housing and get paid by some developer friends to lobby or be on a board.

Another odd conspiracy fantasy.

The simpler explanation is that the council members sincerely believe they are supporting a good policy.

They know they aren’t because this isn’t a good policy and it doesn’t reflect the interests of homeowners and others who have invested in the community. It doesn’t ensure affordable housing. All it does ensure is developers make $$$$.

So as a reminder, write / call your council member and make sure they know your concerns.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 2026 comes, vote out Friedman, Glass, and Fani Gonzalez.

I wonder about Mink. She often claims to support the vulnerable, so we will see if she supports this gentrification.

Curious about this too. She is the council member for the Woodmoor area which is vehemently against this proposal. So many people are.

So many affluent homeowners are. (All affluent homeowners are people, but many people are not affluent homeowners.)

All I know is at a discussion in Spring she was away but her “land use guy” showed up?! Whatever that job title means—developer friendly is my guess.

It means she has a staffer whose areas of responsibility include land use issues.

For a supposedly educated demographic, DCUM posters seem to be incredibly ignorant about local politics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 2026 comes, vote out Friedman, Glass, and Fani Gonzalez.

I wonder about Mink. She often claims to support the vulnerable, so we will see if she supports this gentrification.

Curious about this too. She is the council member for the Woodmoor area which is vehemently against this proposal. So many people are.

So many affluent homeowners are. (All affluent homeowners are people, but many people are not affluent homeowners.)

All I know is at a discussion in Spring she was away but her “land use guy” showed up?! Whatever that job title means—developer friendly is my guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 2026 comes, vote out Friedman, Glass, and Fani Gonzalez.

I wonder about Mink. She often claims to support the vulnerable, so we will see if she supports this gentrification.

Curious about this too. She is the council member for the Woodmoor area which is vehemently against this proposal. So many people are.

So many affluent homeowners are. (All affluent homeowners are people, but many people are not affluent homeowners.)

As noted three pages back, characterizing those with concerns about the AHS as "affluent homeowners" is a strawman description supporting a red herring deflection. It ignores the socioeconomic diversity of those who have spoken against it, including at the listening sessions in the two locations most proximate to Mink's district, where, again, one would think, of any, those would be the most likely to show a preponderance of support for the AHS if it was broadly/majority based, yet at each that was not the case.

I don't even know what a "strawman description supporting a red herring deflection" would be.

The loudest, most vocal, most vehement opposition comes from homeowners in Bethesda and Chevy Chase. That is just a plain statement of fact.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 2026 comes, vote out Friedman, Glass, and Fani Gonzalez.

I wonder about Mink. She often claims to support the vulnerable, so we will see if she supports this gentrification.

Curious about this too. She is the council member for the Woodmoor area which is vehemently against this proposal. So many people are.

So many affluent homeowners are. (All affluent homeowners are people, but many people are not affluent homeowners.)

As noted three pages back, characterizing those with concerns about the AHS as "affluent homeowners" is a strawman description supporting a red herring deflection. It ignores the socioeconomic diversity of those who have spoken against it, including at the listening sessions in the two locations most proximate to Mink's district, where, again, one would think, of any, those would be the most likely to show a preponderance of support for the AHS if it was broadly/majority based, yet at each that was not the case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 2026 comes, vote out Friedman, Glass, and Fani Gonzalez.

I wonder about Mink. She often claims to support the vulnerable, so we will see if she supports this gentrification.

Curious about this too. She is the council member for the Woodmoor area which is vehemently against this proposal. So many people are.

So many affluent homeowners are. (All affluent homeowners are people, but many people are not affluent homeowners.)

Anonymous wrote:I think some, at least 1, council member probably wants to be voted out. They can then say they stood up for "attainable" (for developers and people with inherited $$$ etc.) housing and get paid by some developer friends to lobby or be on a board.

Another odd conspiracy fantasy.

The simpler explanation is that the council members sincerely believe they are supporting a good policy.

I think some, at least 1, council member probably wants to be voted out. They can then say they stood up for "attainable" (for developers and people with inherited $$$ etc.) housing and get paid by some developer friends to lobby or be on a board.