If Alexandria were some place in the midwest with closed factories, foreclosed homes, and long lines at the unemployment office, I would be the first to congratulate the elected leaders, and former elected leaders running for office and even vote for them, just based on their ability to maintain city services. City services are the only thing Ms. Hampton mentions as reasons to vote for the candidates endorsed by Securing Alexandria's Future.

But Alexandria is not such a place. Considering what homeowners and renters through their rent payments pay to the city for property taxes, we have paid for those good services. We are entitled to a responsive, caring local government. We need new Democratic councilmembers not associated with the recent poor decisions. To name those I have only to say: waterfront plan, Beauregard Corridor Plan and the invitation to locate the massive BRAC facility anywhere in the city.
Alexandrians are entitled to elected leaders who bring a new attitude to public service -- questioning the need for ever more massive developments, being more open to listening and acting on the stated desires of the citizens and never deciding in secret to issue the BRAC invitation or anything like it. To get that kind of local government, vote for Victoria Menjivar, Sammie Moshenberg, Arthur Peabody, Allison Silberberg and Boyd Walker.

You take for granted that the city's leaders have delivered - that is why so many prople of all classes and ethnicities want to live here. This has required wise decision making and allocation of resources.

As for development, Alexandria has not seen "massive" development, with the unfortunate exception of BRAC. Carlyle and Potomac Yards were not developed in established neighborhood, but on former industrial/rail sites. In fact, if anything, Alexandria has had less large scale development than other close-in jurisdictions.
People who don't like the vibrancy density brings need to consider other residential options in Alexandria's more suburban areas.

I find this anti-development attitude odd given that George Washington was a developer among other things. Developers make money in good times and loose in bad ones. They are not charities but most are not ogres either.

Alexandria spends far less on attracting business and development than other jurisdictions. Fairfax, for example, has offices in several foreign countries while we do little to attract foreign business.

Jon, step aside from the computer. Take a walk outside: it's gorgeous tonight. We're lucky to have such glorious weather in June. You needn't fixate on every story this little blog puts out. I promise you'll feel better if you replace just half your comments with walks around your block.

Joseph, I wasn't speaking to you. Is Jon incapable of handling himself?

I couldn't disagree more with Ms. Hampton (and not only on her remarks about our schools, especially considering the latest issues.)

The candidates she supports all want over-development in our city that favors business over residents - not smart, fair and moderate development, in Alexandria. I will not vote for any of them, and instead support Menjivar, Moshenberg, Peabody, Walker and Silberberg, all those endorsed by Alexandrians for a Livable City.

Actually, Leigh, John Chapman stated he would have voted to postpone the vote on the Beauregard plan. He grew up in public housing and is very sensitive to the displacement of lower income residents. In addition, Jon R is right - it took good decision maing in the past to ensure our services. Note that the SAF PAC (of which I am NOT a member) also endorsed two candidates who are new and gave a shout out to other newcomers. As for Ms Cannady's PAC, it apparently did not vet Arthur Peabody at all. When I spoke to one of the PAC members on Sunday morning, he was completely unaware of Peabody's record on the school board and the fact I sued Peabody for dereliction of duty. I'm willing to bet the not a single candidate endorsed by Cannady gets through the primary.

After attending the Democratic Debate last night, Gail I hope you are right. There should be a concern that the candidates endorsed by Katy have lots to spend and no where to get money. That means lower debt ratings and higher taxes. You would think Leigh, as she touts herself as a financial person, might understand fiscal responsibility.

Lynn, Victoria has said to a few people that even she knows she can't win and she's only running to raise the issue of affordable housing, which is fine. I think Sammie is actually running to win, and I respect her work, but she came off as strident in the debates and alienated some voters. I also respect Alison, but she didn't do as well as she could have, especially in the debate last night. She has been criticized for mentioning her book too much too. She started strong though and anything can happen in a field like this. Boyd has alienated a lot of voters, he failed to pay taxes on time, he got a big fine from the city for tearing down a building, he's sought Republican votes, etc. Few Dems will vote for him. Arthur has a terrible record on school board and comes across as arrogant. He is not a contender and never was. As for all the "visonary" ideas that some candidates speak of, you're right - they must be paid for, and none of those candidates has come out with a solid plan for doing so.

"I find this anti-development attitude odd given that George Washington was a developer among other things."

He was also a slave owner. Do you find people opposed to the notion of owning other human beings equally odd?

Exactly.

This why I love Alexandria. Phrases like "reductio ad absurdum" get tossed around in casual conversation and everyone knows exactly what they mean. Res ipsa loquitir and all that to you all.