Funny, funny stuff. You MoCo leftists are a hilarious bunch.

"No homeless shelters in our neighborhoods!" "No tax hikes on our millionaires!"

Are you sure you guys aren't really Republicans? In your heart, you know we're right.

We just got a property tax increase of 14%. Why is it necessry to raise property taxes while gasoline is $4 a gallon in order to pay $1.92 million an acre for parkland?

Why Hillmead residents feel the slightest bit of discomfort about opposing a homeless shelter in their nice neighborhood is beyond me! Their property values are high because they don't have homeless shelters and Section 8 housing. I say we put the homeless shelters in the absolute lowest cost settings and forget about all the social engineering nonsense that underlies the argument for putting homeless people in Bethesda. I mean really.

This was not a plan to build a homeless shelter which would help many people... this was a plan to house ONE low-income family in a mansion which cost 2.5 million dollars. Is it compassion to provide housing to ONE low-income family, if you *could* have provided for at least TEN families at the same price elsewhere? Is it compassion to have one random family hit the lottery and NINE others left homeless? No that's just wasting OUR money. If anyone was wondering WHY our property taxes were just increased by 14%, it is projects like this that are the real reason.

Since this house was originally purchased for park improvements, I presume that it was included under the Parks and Recreations portion of the budget. There is not a line item in the budget for "government waste". It is hidden in other items, and this is an example. Are there other wasteful projects like this one buried in the county budget? Who authorized this apparently overpriced purchase in the first place, and who PROFITED from it? Those are the questions we need to be asking if we don't want to see another massive tax increase next year with no corresponding improvement in county services.

Well, Robin, If you are THE Robin Ficker, that's a very good question. As Miranda says, 2 activists worked pretty much by themselves to have the county acquire the land. One of them is a Republican Committeeperson. About 20-30 people took an active part in fighting the homeless proposal. Not everyone in Hillmead is opposed to helping the homeless. Many of us objected to the waste of money in the first place, but we were not heard in the council.

So now we have a park we don't need, and a reputation we don't want.

And be aware, it's going to continue. Here's something posted on the Hillmead Civic Association website - apparently they think it's important for the County to help the needy, and charity starts at home:
________________________________________________
Thanks for all your hard work. You deserve a big round of applause. That was really close.

Now that this battle is finally resolved, I would like to volunteer my time and serve on an ad-hoc committee that I suspect will be formed to work with the parks department on our wish list for the new park addition.

As you know, one of my pet projects was the improvement of the open area off of Valley Rd.

One of the things that I personally would love to see is a light installed to illuminate the Hillmead sign that faces Bradley. This is a low-cost improvement that will really make the entrance to our neighborhood look great at night and would provide a fail safe marker for people coming to visit that don't know the way. When the house is torn down, power could easily and cheaply be run from that location down to the sign. Having power at the sign also allows us to have an outlet that could be useful for other things.

The other thing that I want to mention is how many great things we can use the new space for. That new area must have power outlets too for us to use for picnics movie nights whatever. Possibilities are endless.

Thanks again folks!

Dear (alleged) Hillmead -

You state that "About 20-30 people took an active part in fighting the homeless proposal." The activism in Hillmead was not about fighing the homeless, but rather addressing the County's fiscal irresponsibility, lack of process and procedure throughout and response to laughable arguments from Councilmembers like Leventhal, Ervin and Floreen who insisted you could have a Park and keep the house too. Park and Planning bought the property to expand the park - plain and simple. They did not buy the property to use the house for any purpose. This does not make it a fight against the homeless. If you really are from Hillmead, then you know that this neighborhood provides incredible support to the homeless.

Part of the reason you have a reputation that you don't need is because of your misinformed and inaccurate statements such as the "fight against the homeless." in your posting. Your comments contribute to the reputation that you don't want.

It's time for Hillmead to heal - postings like this just pour salt on an open wound.

Was Leventhal trying to punish Hillmead because some of its residents had interfered with the sale of the land to a developer?

Google "Leventhal" and "developers," and you will find allegations that Leventhal, Floreen, and Knapp were elected as pro-growth candidates and take the most money from developers (compared to other council members). Elrich, Trachtenberg, and Andrews are slow-growth advocates and do not take money from developers (Berliner takes some). Elrich and Trachtenberg are also the most consistently progressive council members (NOT Leventhal, despite how he tried to portray himself as dedicated to the poor).

Could this entire bizarre episode be explained by corrupt politicians and big-money special interests? Washington Post--some investigative reporting, please.

Please provide one example of Elrich actually voting like a progressive on the County Council. Forget rhetoric. What are his actual votes?