i wonder how they got the original Beall's Grant (not to mention the MoCo jail) on the "right side of the tracks". that might be the key to this. Is Marcuccio opposed to any other development?

by Rich on Nov 11, 2009 12:27 pm • link • report

I'm glad someone else noticed this. I have to admit, I live just inside the Rockville city limits near the Twinbrook station. I planned on voting, but a business trip took me out of the state at the last minute and I didn't bother absentee voting. Why? Because everyone I know in Rockville described Marcuccio as the crazy lady that's opposed to everything. I really didn't think she had a chance. The problem is, I think a lot of my fellow residents thought the same thing and didn't bother voting.

Municipal elections don't really give you an accurate view of the thoughts of residents. Far more so than other elections they attract the people that feel really strongly about issues, or people with nothing else to do. And, although I supported Beall's Grant II, I think it's probably much easier to get really upset over the project than to get really excited supporting it. And to make matters worse, retirees are greatly over-represented in voters in municipal elections and, although I know this is a gross generalization and totally non-PC, they tend to be more of curmudgeons opposed to development than the rest of the population.

That being said, I don't think Marcuccio and Newton can do too much damage. First of all, Mayors in cities like Rockville aren't terribly powerful. I think Town Center is too far along to stop the next phase of the project. In the near term, I don't think anyone would have been successful pushing through major projects anywhere else. The Twinbrook Commons project might slow down some more, but that probably was going to happen anyway because of the economy. And a lot of that project falls outside of the Rockville city limits anyway.

Certainly I think this election was a disaster for Rockville, but as long as Rockville residents come to their senses next time we'll probably be OK.

by Andy R on Nov 11, 2009 12:43 pm • link • report

David, you said, "Do Marcuccio and the new City Council support continuing that project, or do they prefer to maintain the Pike as it is?" It seems to me as though a third option is possible: support changes to the Pike but not the White Flint Master Plan. (I can't imagine ANYONE preferring to maintain the Pike as it is, though this is probably a failure of imagination.) I don't know anything about the specific issues in Rockville, but what I hear is that Marcuccio is anti-developer, not anti-change. If the only Smart Growth you ever saw was stuff that isn't really Smart Growth, but dumb growth the developers claim (wrongly) to be Smart Growth (for example, Science City), it's not surprising that you would say you were against Smart Growth.

by Miriam on Nov 11, 2009 3:11 pm • link • report

Thanks for highlighting this very local issue, David. It's what makes GGW great. I'm a Rockville resident and I voted for Hoffman. I can't say that I really like her that much. I think she is in the bag of developers too much, but the anti sentiment coming from Marcuccio and others was too much for me. It seemed to me that the antis were mainly an anti-spending movement, but smart growth got packaged in there too.

In answer to your question regarding the Rockville Pike plan, I did get one mailing from Marcuccio complaining about the money spent on the consultants used for the plan and how nothing was going to come of it anyway. So, it wasn't necessarily anti-smart growth, but if you aren't spending money studying change on Rockville Pike and building awareness that the Pike can change, not much change is going to happen. And good lord it needs to happen.

I agree with Andy in that I don't think the new Mayor and council can do that much damage, but I certainly hope that there is an alternative with real leadership --something more than "Don't spend money" -- in the next election.

by doug on Nov 11, 2009 7:16 pm • link • report

I worry about Marcuccio too, and point out that, at one of the televised debates (WECA, maybe?) she repeatedly questioned why the city was spending money on Rockville Pike, since 355 is a state, not a city, road. She made me nervous then, and she still makes me nervous. If she honestly thinks the city has no stake in the future of the Pike, I'm worried about her (non?) vision for Rockville.

by Becky on Nov 11, 2009 8:44 pm • link • report

another person I've questioned about the Rockville pike plan is Mackie A. Barch from the Kensington board. She also claimed that there is nothing they can do about Rockville pike or any other road, that only the state can do anything about roads. She didn't seem to think the city had any stake in the future of the pike or any other road either. I thought that was kind of odd considering she is from Boulder, CO where there are bike lanes everywhere, and she has a clotting condition because of a car accident which happened on the streets in question.

by Lee Watkins on Nov 12, 2009 6:56 am • link • report

marcuccio and newton can do a LOT of damage. a lot.

they can hold up BGII for another year or force the developer to abandon it altogether.

they can do the same thing to victory housing, a senior project, and anything else they personally think might negatively affect them.

newton, in particular, is a very dangerous person. manipulative, spiteful, and not too committed to the truth.

as bad as she is marcuccio is more worrisome. she isn't very smart and not at all savvy. she will be used by newton and her cronies. she will make rockville a laughing stock of the state.

by worriedinrockville on Nov 12, 2009 12:34 pm • link • report

This is a prime example of why people need to get out and vote! There was a 17% turnout, one of the lowest ever, this year. "Everyone I know in Rockville described Marcuccio as the crazy lady that's opposed to everything", but those reasonable people did not vote for her opponent, figuring a shoe-in for Hoffmann. Same with Newton--she is definitely not the best qualified candidate in the field, yet she too was elected. We will indeed be a laughingstock of the County with those two. Think last summer's video of M&C meetings was bad? You ain't seen nothin' yet!

by bob on Nov 12, 2009 2:11 pm • link • report

Glad Phyllis Marcuccio won, we don't need our city pillaged, I guess some people who are on the take don't like that the people will actually have a say in their community.

by Chris on Nov 17, 2009 10:21 am • link • report

@Chris
"some people who are on the take don't like that the people will actually have a say in their community." "On the take" implies criminal, or at least unethical, activity. I grew up in a city steeped in big machine politics and mega graft. Politicians on the take were involved with organized crime, corrupt union officials etc etc.. Very, very bad. Rockville has it's problems, but I've not been aware of corruption remotely like that. Accusing someone of "being on the take" is a serious thing.

Could you please be specific about who is "on the take", taking from whom, and what evidence you have? I, and I'm sure many other Rockvillians, would really like to know.
Freida

by freida in rockville on Nov 17, 2009 6:39 pm • link • report

Worried in rockville reads a lot like a frequent commentator on rockville central. Why revert to ad hominem attacks on people? Give the new mayor and council a chance to get started. Once they have some results to measure, then weigh in with criticism. You can write all you want about turnout, slates, associations, etc., but the fact remains a majority of voters elected Marcuccio as mayor...a great many contributed to her campaign. I think people that are fair-minded and willing to give these elected officials a chance will see positive change very soon.

by Mike on Nov 17, 2009 11:38 pm • link • report

Really, a small majority of small percentage of eligible voters voted for Marcuccio. She wasn't exactly elected with a mandate from the citizens of Rockville. But, she indeed was elected fair and square. I don't think she tricked anyone into voting for her. In fact, I'm quite confident that her values really do accurately reflect the will of those 3,311 voters that voted for her.

There does seem to be plenty of cause for concern, at least depending on ones own political views. While I had an incredibly hard time actually figuring out what she thought about specific issues (her web site and interviews were essentially content-free), I didn't like what I saw. She doesn't like development- at least not the kind that I think is important for the future of Rockville. And, she doesn't seem to be terribly realistic when it comes to taxes versus municipal services (her opposition to once-a-week trash pick-up as one example).

Certainly time will tell, though for matters that are really important its going to be awfully hard to allocate credit and blame. And certainly its going to be really hard to determine whether changes are positive or negative in the near-term. Really, we're just going to see a direction for Rockville's future, and we won't really know whether we're going someplace good or bad until we're there. It seems like Marcuccio's election is a useful data point for considering what direction we're headed (or, at least, likely headed), so I really don't think the critics are jumping the gun here.

by Andy R on Nov 18, 2009 12:34 am • link • report

Andy R said: "I had an incredibly hard time actually figuring out what she thought about specific issues (her web site and interviews were essentially content-free)"

I completely agree, and I felt that this was a problem across the council candidates as well. I watched every televised debate and the Rockville Central debate, I read candidate web sites and mailings and, in the end, I felt like I could barely distinguish among many of the candidates. All of this post-election analysis is fantastic, but where was it before the election?

by Becky on Nov 18, 2009 7:07 am • link • report