On the calendar: Hear from at-large candidates, learn to write for blogs, talk Reservation 13 with Mayor Gray

Events

On the calendar: Hear from at-large candidates, learn to write for blogs, talk Reservation 13 with Mayor Gray

by David Alpert • March 13, 2012 11:56 am

Interested in the at-large DC Council race? Watch the forum I'm moderating tonight. Want to write for Greater Greater Washington or another blog? I'm giving a free seminar Monday on writing for blogs.

Want to stop DC from giving away valuable land to the Redskins for practice fields? There's an important community meeting on March 22.

Photo by tanakawho on Flickr.

At-large forum, tonight

Tonight is the Urban Neighborhood Alliance's forum with the at-large candidates for DC Council. I'm moderating the forum, and Greater Greater Washington is a cosponsor.

Come watch it at the Black Cat, 1811 14th Street, NW. Doors open at 6:30, and the forum begins at 7. The Black Cat is 21+ and you need to bring an ID. There is limited seating just for seniors and persons with disabilities.

If you can't make it in person, I have arranged for someone to video record and webcast the forum. I'll post the live stream here on Greater Greater Washington, and then we'll have the archived video later this week.

How to write [blog posts] well, on Monday

Would you be interested in writing for Greater Greater Washington? We're always looking for people interested in becoming contributors, especially folks to write about issues in Northern Virginia, about education in DC or elsewhere, or many other topics. Or, perhaps you write, or want to write, for another blog.

Writing for a blog is not the same as writing a planning document, academic transportation paper, or many other things. Blog posts need to be short, to the point, and attention-grabbing. Greater Greater Washington editors work with many of our contributors to take raw material of posts and make them into good blog posts.

I'm giving a free talk on Monday, March 19th on how to write for blogs (and some lessons which help with other types of writing, as well). It's 6:30-8 pm at the West End Library, in the small meeting room.

If you're interested in contributing to Greater Greater Washington but can't attend, email us at info@ggwash.org. Thank you!

Reservation 13 public meeting

Mayor Gray promised residents on both sides of the Anacostia that he would come to a public meeting and hear from residents about his plan to give away DC's best opportunity for a new mixed-use neighborhood to a cranky and litigious billionaire football team owner for practice fields closed to the public.

He's just rescheduled that meeting to Thursday, March 22 at 7 pm. Local leaders are working on finalizing a location (they had a site for the original date, the following week). Check back on the Greater Greater Washington calendar for updates.

There's also an information meeting on Monday, March 19 to inform residents about the history of Reservation 13 and what the master plan actually says (which isn't necessarily the same as what Jack Evans says).

And more...

Downtown DC Kids is having a meeting to organize for a downtown playground on Wednesday, March 14 at 6 pm.
The forum on sexual harassment on Metro is on Thursday, March 22 at 7 pm.
3 local planners will discuss federal design at NCPC on Thursday, March 29 at 6:30 pm.
There's more on our complete calendar.

Have an event for the calendar? Email it to info@ggwash.org.

14 comments

Tags: 2012 primary, events, meta, politics, Reservation 13

Become a contributor, write about interesting events (Aug 15, 2011)
Want to be a daytime or Thursday night editor? (Dec 22, 2011)
Write about architecture for Greater Greater Washington (Jan 8, 2010)
What would you ask the at-large DC Council candidates? (Mar 7, 2012)
Gray administration holding up Reservation 13 for Redskins (Feb 16, 2012)

David Alpert is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Greater Greater Washington and Greater Greater Education. He worked as a Product Manager for Google for six years and has lived in the Boston, San Francisco, and New York metro areas in addition to Washington, DC. He loves the area which is, in many ways, greater than those others, and wants to see it become even greater.

Comments
Add a comment »

There could very well be an exception for tonight. But the black cat is usally all ages, and they're proud of that fact as well.

by Canaan on Mar 13, 2012 12:23 pm • link • report

http://www.blackcatdc.com/about.html

Their policy for admission.

by Canaan on Mar 13, 2012 12:29 pm • link • report

The Facebook page for the Metro sexual harassment forum says it's from 5:30 to 7, not starting at 7.

by pagodat on Mar 13, 2012 1:30 pm • link • report

Vienna Metro Access Ramps

A citizen information meeting is scheduled for this project for Tuesday, March 13 from 6 to 8 p.m. at Oakton High School in Vienna.

http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/northernvirginia/vienna_metro_access_ramps.asp

http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/resources/NorthernVirginia/Vienna_Metro_Ramps_PIM_presentation.pdf

by mcs on Mar 13, 2012 2:20 pm • link • report

I would be more interested in attending the meeting had it not been advertised as a meeting to "stop DC from giving away valued land." Doesn't sound like a "discussion" is in the minds of those planning this event.

More anti-anti-anti..follow me because i'm anti...

by HogWash on Mar 13, 2012 2:48 pm • link • report

@HogWash, I know it must be quite a surprise what GGW's position on this issue is. No one's following anyone because they're anti-, as you well know. We're trying to ensure productive use of this land so it benefits everyone in the city, as opposed to use that benefits a handful of millionaires. You clearly don't agree with it, but it's disingenuos to pretend that the vast majority of people are opposed just to be "anti".

by Joe on Mar 13, 2012 3:35 pm • link • report

@Joe, no GGW's position is not surprising. As a reader of the site, I would prefer that the advocacy here encourages actual dialogue rather than telling us to come out to a community event and just say no...or yes.

I also have no problem w/those who believe that there is a better way to use the land. The problem is, the anti's are convinced that their way is the only way to use the land and anything outside of their narrow stream of vision amounts to a "no" vote..on pretty much any issue. The don't encourage dialogue. Instead they issue, "if you don't agree you must be..." reprimands.

I have no idea whether the facility will only benefit a "handful of millionaires" and I imagine most people don't. What they do have is the anti's starting a campaign against something resulting in the same talking points. How is it that "benefiting millionaires" is one of THE main talking points? It's because the anti's started that and the rest of the anti's followed suit. They apparently have little to no knowledge on any actual details..but the talking points are yet the same.

Again, don't have a problem w/being against any proposed Redskins deal. Just don't attempt to say (w/a straight face) that you're interested in participating in a "discussion" because it most certainly isn't being advertised in that way...at least not here.

by HogWash on Mar 13, 2012 4:34 pm • link • report

field of view

by HogWash on Mar 13, 2012 4:37 pm • link • report

You can still go to the meeting to hear viewpoints but its disingenuous to say that no one has yet discussed the facts at all when there are a few posts and countless comments of people demonstrating why they think its a bad idea or providing alternatives (like the post on moving the practice facility to the old pepco site). Some people who are against it may change their mind presented with other details but that doesn't mean that they can't have an opinion on it as it stands now and those opinions are largely built on more than just "it'll help millionaires" as well.

by Canaan on Mar 13, 2012 4:55 pm • link • report

@Canaan, you're absolutely right.

It's ridiculous of me to constantly harp about the myopic view many people have here and how it prevents them from seeing/appreciating another pov, while at the same time stating that the manner in which DAl decided to advertise the event makes me less likely to be interested in attending. It's ridiculous because its not his event. Therefore, it shouldn't matter to me what anyone else's position on the subject is. If it interests me...go.

WRT the rest, the majority position here is the anti-position. Granted, it's an anti-position based on the facts as we know them...which isn't much at this point. But the intelligent discussion usually leads to characterizing the players involved and those either open to the idea or at least the discussion, as scoundrels and the antipathy oozes throughout the discussion.

That should have no bearing on me deciding whether to attend the meeting.

by HogWash on Mar 13, 2012 6:40 pm • link • report

I'm half joking with you right now but it may be the anti-redskins position but pro-housing position. Is it anti just because it's counter to what the mayor/certain council members want? Granted it's a little bit of bizarro ggw world but if the question was just between building housing or keeping it vacant then everyone on the anti side would be labeled the pro side.

by Canaan on Mar 13, 2012 7:28 pm • link • report

'm half joking with you right now but it may be the anti-redskins position but pro-housing position. Is it anti just because it's counter to what the mayor/certain council members want?

Joking aside, I think it's a mixture of a few.

There are those w/in this community who are against the Redskins because they either don't like Snyder, football, or simply because "natives" are attached to the team

There are others who are surely "pro-housing" at heart but their narrow views won't allow them to consider anything other than whatever it is they suggest...which is always "best" for those who don't know better.

Then there are those who are against much of anything the mayor/council (save Saint Wells) suggests and "NO" is usually the starting point.

Then the smallest group are the sincere ones who would have the same "pro-housing/development" position irrespective of who suggested it, under which administration, and what team/sport.
All three groups converge w/in this space.

by HogWash on Mar 14, 2012 9:53 am • link • report

@Hogwash -- you seem to be ignoring the fact that there is decades of empirical data that demonstrates that public investment in pro-sports facilities is a *bad* investment and the returns do go to a handful of millionaires. To public finance professionals this is pretty much a settled question.

You may not like the data, you might not believe the data, but it exists. There is little empircal evidence to support the opposite. So unless someone is proposing some kind of novel arrangement that has never been tried in the history of public support of pro-sports, there are a number of people who believe that it is well demonstrated to be a bad idea.

It's my impression that you seem to think people should disregard everything they feel has been sufficiently proven numerous times in the interest of discussion. I feel the burden of proof lies on people who support this to make the case that some how this is different than all other previous attempts at publically financing pro-sports.

by Kate W on Mar 14, 2012 10:18 am • link • report

So unless someone is proposing some kind of novel arrangement that has never been tried in the history of public support of pro-sports, there are a number of people who believe that it is well demonstrated to be a bad idea.

And that's the problem, no one seems to know what idea is in the works. So whatever "background" information people have on the "not yet worked out idea" is for the most part irrelevant to whether the idea warrants a discussion. Even based on what you just wrote, there is no point in having such discussion because of the "empirical" data which already exists. So it's still a matter of, "we have all the facts," let's not discuss this any further.

No I do not at all think that people should disregard whatever they feel has been sufficiently proven. Just don't feign surprise when all-out anti efforts such as this leaves a bad taste in the mouths of many. Might not even be warranted but we know how "perception" colors everything. And this particular anti-movement of the past 4 or so years, while great for this small segment, hasn't seemed to be an advantage to the city we call home.

But I don't necessarily blame the group..I blame Fenty as well.

by HogWash on Mar 14, 2012 11:03 am • link • report