This is Jazzy Wright.
Bloomingdale Bites
Developers Join Grassroots Advocacy
Documents surfaced in February showing that the pro-development advocacy group Neighbors for McMillan was crafted by Vision McMillan Partners, the development team selected by the city to rebuild the fenced-off sand filtration site. According to grassroots campaign files, developers assisted with the creation of Neighbors for McMillan to increase local support for the current redevelopment plan and provide “continuous political cover to local elected officials,” among other goals.
Leaders of the Neighbors for McMillan project say the group was designed to educate Bloomingdale and Stronghold residents about the Vision McMillan Partners plan. “Our relationship with Vision McMillan Partners was never a secret,” said Jamie Fontaine, president of Fontaine & Company, a Baltimore-based grassroots advocacy firm hired by Vision McMillan Partners to educate the community about the project.
As a partner on the McMillan project, Fontaine & Company has developed messaging and marketing materials for Neighbors for McMillan such as yard signs, fact sheets, and media templates. “It's an organic organization within the community,” said Fontaine, referring to Neighbors for McMillan. “A lot of people who support the project don't have enough time to say how they feel. We're helping people organize.”
Shiv Newaldass, project manager for the DC Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, echoed Fontaine's comments, saying that many local residents have called for a community group like Neighbors for McMillan. “People who want to support [the Vision McMillan Plan] feel intimidated,” said Newaldass. “Reasonable people who support the project stay quiet because it’s easier than being confrontational,” he said, referring to a land surplus meeting held last year where one development supporter was booed by attendees who opposed the city-backed plan.
“This effort was created to address inconsistencies and inaccurate information being spread in the community,” he added, saying that his office was not involved in the planning of Neighbors for McMillan. “It's about the ability to have a reasonable and rational conversation about the facts. It's been so hard to communicate because of the level of misinformation shared. I wish we wouldn't have this engagement if we were dealing with a group willing to have an ethical conversation.”
And by “group” Newaldass referenced Friends of McMillan, an organization of activists concerned with preserving the McMillan's history and green space. According to grassroots campaign documents made available, messaging for the Neighbors for McMillan group states that the Friends group “has been hijacked by non-local, special interests and is spreading misinformation to further its agenda.”
Said Kirby Vining, a member of the Friends of McMillan, “I’m a private citizen trying to find out what the city is doing with my tax dollars and am outraged that my tax dollars are going to [the deputy mayor for planning and economic development] to pay a political strategist in Baltimore to 'neutralize' and 'discredit' community concerns about the Mayor’s plans for McMillan.”
Mathew Bader, a Bloomingdale Civic Association representative on the McMillan Advisory Group, is also concerned that a city-backed developer would pay for a campaign to build support for the redevelopment plan. Vision McMillan Partners received $1.34 million from the city to manage the McMillan site through the 2014 fiscal year. “I personally have no qualms about folks in the neighborhood showing support for the project and have encouraged people to do so,” Bader said in an email. “However, I do take issue with a company being hired to give the impression of there being strong support for this project (which I don't believe is true) and further trying to discredit a group of people in the community who oppose the project. I don't see that as a fair discussion nor a good use of District funds (whether Vision McMillan Partners directly or indirectly paid using District funds).”
City officials and leaders on the McMillan project insist that taxpayer funds will not be used to support or fund Neighbors for McMillan. In a joint email both Newaldass and Vision McMillan Partners Project Director Anne Corbett said that the developers are paying for the “Create McMillan Park” yard signs and Fontaine & Company’s services with private funds. “We wouldn't do something that was unethical or misleading,” said Newaldass. “We've had six years of participation and engagement, so for anyone to say that we're doing things that are untrue or illegal is irresponsible.”
McMillan developers supply their own yard signs. Photo: Jazzy Wright
12 comments:
I, as a member of the community, a real resident, I'm expressing my preference for a real historic park, with real amazing urban agriculture in the 20 acres of "McMillan Underground" see this video on urban agriculture, 5 times the yield of regular farms, no pesticides, no truck transport, riper fresher food security,
(http://youtu.be/ILzWmw53Wwo
The Mayor (un-indicted) and your fake community input plan, by VMP, who will demolish the 20 acres, will rob our community of this critical opportunity. Proud?
We support, a real park, like the rich folks get in upper NW,, not your McPark, a lawn in front of your Billion dollar development Shiv. That is disinformation, really? Grasp at straws guys in DMPED, and I'm not required to be ethical. I just AM ETHICAL. Your the one who says the fake group is “It's an organic organization within the community,” BULLSHIT! Fontaine, is a VMP "gun for hire" doing a TOTALLY UNETHICAL, POLLUTING of objective fair, and sincere community input. Only in this cesspool of corruption, Federal Investigations, fraudulent "Shadow Campaigns" and dictatorship of a Patriarchal, Mayor and his appointees, like Jeff Miller , former VP at Trammel Crow with conflict of interest, could you get away with this,,,so far.
Your plan is destructive to the community, destructive to the environment, destructive to DC historic preservation,, and it is your agency that keeps up the fence, Jazzy, it didn't sprout there like the trees they have been eradicating since 1986.
We support and will create a community based Eco-Campus, like Glen Echo with amazing underground urban agriculture,, when we force your unethical process to collapse. Obviously you have rationalization, for everything,, but it's absurd. Look in the mirror, are you really proud of faking, and manipulating "community input". What else unethical crap are you pulling?
Why is this necessary Shiv, not getting enough enthusiasm out of you "coalition for smart growth"? Smallest coalition in the world! DC govt institutional corruption and racism kept the fence up,,what a miserable record,,, proud Shiv, Jeff, BARRY? Fence could have been down since 1986, or even 1945,,,what a pathetic waste!Gray could have taken the fence down 10 years ago, Mendelson could have taken the fence down 19 years ago..Had McMillan been in upper NW we would have been going to music festivals there for years. Proud of that Shiv, Jeff Miller Tonya Jackson, Clint? You would have all been fired years ago in an ethical govt.
By the way, the DC Water Flooding project is not to help Bloomingdale residents, they ignored for 30 years,, it''s to crowd the entire area, of our parks with mega-urbanization,, get ready to CHOKE!
The corrupt, developer/govt. clique are building an unethical "new" city on top of the failed infrastructure, they ignored for over a century, the failed infrastructure we call Home. What your doing is not ethical, not smart, but it continues a destructive process, be proud!
This is a very interesting article. Thanks for bringing this information to light. It puts the city and the developer in a none-too flattering light. I guess if you need to hire a marketing firm to convince people they want development, maybe the city should rethink their plans to develop an office park where McMillan Park now stands.
It's also very interesting that city officials believe that the Friends of McMillan Park has been hijacked by non-local special interest groups. I wonder just how that works? Who are these special interest groups? Non-local special interest groups must have bused in people to attend the standing room only meeting to surplus McMillan Park. Perhaps these non-local special interest groups are paying people to place yard signs advocating the preservation of McMillan Park. This development is all about making money, not giving the people what they are asking for.
VMP GRASSROOTS PLAN - Curious about the birth of a grassroots organization? Here is a blub -
GOALS
• Facilitate the passage of all necessary approvals from the Mayors Agent, Zoning
Commission and City Council;
• Shift community dialogue and general perception to that of majority local support for
VMP plans;
• Provide continuous political cover to local elected officials;
• Nurture and grow deep grassroots support among a wide variety of local stakeholders
and residents by strengthening existing and creating new relationships.
STRATEGY
• Mobilize grassroots supporters to communicate with the above listed decision-making
bodies and the media;
• (Re) educate residents on elements of VMP plans;
• (Re) energize current supporters and identify/mobilize new supporters;
• Neutralize opposition;
• Engage and leverage the support of third-party validators (thought/faith/institution
leaders).
VMP and the Deputy Mayor for Economic Development are reaching a new low. Fabricating this entire scheme,,,maybe Jeffrey Thompson has a job for them. Maybe they'll go to Hollywood and write fiction for a living. Incredible that Muriel Bowser and her committee at City Council allow this atriocious abuse of our citizens. We need to do anything we can to get rid of this crew who have made their mediocre careers on McMillan, and will assault this community with massive construction for years to make their corporate handlers millions. For EYA, Trammel Crowe, Lessard, Byrd,and the rest of this conglomerate feeding on our city. Trammel Crow itself is doing $2 billion in this city,,,and their own VP of Real Estate, Jeff Miller is running the show for them at Deputy Mayor,, what a racket. Will he be rewarded when he quits our govt.? No referendum, no democratic process, and now the community input charade is polluted by the very developers themselves,,,SICK!
I have lived in the 2300 block of First Street, NW (two blocks from the McMillan Sand Filtration Site) since 1985. I served as President of the Bloomingdale Civic Association from 1988 through 1990. In 1990 the civic association adopted a resolution supporting development of the site. The resolution supports development of the park, community facility, housing for senior citizens, a day-care facility for seniors and children, a library, police substation, and affordable housing for low-and moderate-income families.
My family and many of our neighbors have watched this community grow and change over time, and have considered many proposals for McMillan through the years. While there have been many different ideas for the site, one thing has remained constant: the fences have stood as a permanent barrier for decades.
Since 2007, this community has been working with the Vision McMillan Partners (VMP) team to create a development that will benefit the entire community – and I think we have gotten pretty close. Of course, we can’t always make everyone happy, and as we are all well aware, this has been a contentious issue over the years. But I must say that the overwhelming majority of my neighbors are excited to finally have open, usable and walkable space. We are excited for a much-needed grocery store and other local retail. We look forward to walking with our children and grandchildren in the park and appreciate the citywide housing needs that will be partially addressed with new, affordable residential buildings. And we are eager to benefit from the significant local investment that this development will bring.
While I understand that this project can ignite passions, it bothers me to see our neighbors verbally attacking each other in community meetings, and accusing others of being “paid off” because they support the project. This article from Jazzy Wright talks about supporters as if they didn’t exist before VMP enlisted troops to help us organize. I find it offensive that people would think that my opinion isn’t real or valid because I can’t attend every meeting or respond to every blog posting. What happened to reasonable, respectful conversation? It is a shame that because of this behavior, I have seen many neighbors feel threatened or intimidated to express their feelings at community meetings and events. There are neighbors who want to put the “Create McMillan Park” sign in their yard but are reluctant.
Neighbors for McMillan isn’t a shadow campaign created to trick the community into supporting the project. We are as genuine of a group as Friends of McMillan is, but our tactics may be a little different. Our goals are to stay positive and just ask others who support the project to make their voices heard in a way that is most comfortable to them. I hope moving forward we can keep the conversation positive on both sides. And most importantly I look forward to celebrating with everyone the day those fences come down and we’re able to enjoy the new park and amenities as a united community.
Completely agree with you George. The "save McMillian" folks are very abusive. I had one of them just put a sign of theirs in my front yard without my permission. I have a create McMillian sign so it was just a rude overly aggressive act.
George,
Thank you for that post. I wholeheartedly agree that any conversation gong forward should be civil and respectful. There's no point otherwise.
Hopefully my comments in that article were not offensive to you.In case they were, please allow me to elaborate.
My personal opinion is that there is some support for the project but I also believe that there is more opposition to the project than support in the neighborhood. The inherent difficulty in this is that the civic association is the only recognized body in our neighborhood to show either support or opposition. Both the Stronghold and Bloomingdale civic associations have never given the impression that there is strong support for the project.
My personal issue with Fontaine & Company is simply that I believe the company, in addition to rallying genuine support for the project, is also trying to create the impression that there is more support for the project than there actually is. When I read about a grassroots campaign where one of the core messages is to discount a group of opponents to the project, that in my mind is disingenuous. As you said Neighbors for McMillan isn't a shadow campaign, neither is Friends of McMillan Park a group of outsiders spreading misinformation and being hostile. Further, not everyone who opposes the development is a member of Friends of McMillan Park, they just somehow get lumped in. Yes, some members of the group may be aggressive. So too are some members of Neighbors for McMillan. It is just the nature of people feeling passionate about this project but it is not indicative of either group as a whole.
If Fontaine & Company were simply going around and taking an unbiased straw poll of sentiment for the development (either for or against), that would be great. They are not.
I hope that you will come out to civic associations and MAG meeting in the future to show your support. This effort needs both sides of issue to be represented if it is going to give the neighborhood the best project it can.
Out of curiosity, if I put two projects in front of you today, one with the current development and one without the proposed medical office complex and if both were viable solutions that had District buy-in. Which plan would you support?
Mathew Bader
Bloomingdale Civic Association (BCA) McMillan Advisory Group (MAG) Representative
Please email me at mathew.bader@gmail.com. I would be happy to speak with Anne Corbett about replacing your sign.
I ran into a similar situation in which my 'Save McMillan Park' sign was stolen.
The difference is that taxpayers are paying for the "Create" signs while those who are against VMP's "vision" of pop-ups and over-development in a place not served by a Metro station have to purchase their own signs, and so are paying for both.
Mr. Bader - I am also a resident of Stronghold and a Neighbor for McMillan. It occurs to me that in your position as a MAG representative, you should refrain from openly advocating against the project. While I have not read the bylaws of MAG, I understand that the group was formed to work with the development team to create the best possible redevelopment for the site. How can we, as residents, trust that our thoughts, feelings and suggestions are being accurately relayed to the MAG and that information from the developer and others is being honestly relayed back to the community from a MAG representative who clearly and openly opposes the development? I would very much appreciate it if someone could clarify this issue. I respect Mr. Bader’s and any opponents views on this redevelopment issue. However, I think it is inappropriate for an opponent to serve on an organization created to shape the very redevelopment they oppose, and I wonder if we should not revisit the MAG’s formation and request that our community representatives are more neutral and open-minded.
As a fellow MAG member i disagree with the notion that Mr. Bader is an opponent of the VMP plan. I think all MAG members want to see a wonderful development on this site. Nevertheless, as it stands, VMP's current plan leaves alot to be desired and we at the MAG are working hard to improve the design for the benefit of the local community. We don't necessarily support the current proposal in totality nor oppose it in totality, but work to make it the good parts better and the bad parts acceptable. I don't think that Mr. Bader is implying opposition to this project, only opposition to the methods being employed by some groups involved (on either side of the issue). In reality, Mr. Bader (as i know him) is very objective and fair minded.
JL Benjamin-Young,
Your point is well taken that I refrain from openly advocating against the project. I do try and simply present facts when I can but sometimes I feel the need to qualify those facts in how I see them as relevant. For example, the development application indicates that a 6.2 acre park and community center will be built. The fact of the matter is that the city will need to come up with and commit the funds in order for both projects to happen. The creation of both the park and community center are not tied to this development (meaning the sites to be developed by VMP, LLC) or the sale of the land. This can be construed as my lobbying against the project. I see it as an inherent problem that needs to be remedied (e.g. committed funding for the community center and park are tied into the sale of the land).
To your point about thoughts, feelings and suggestions being relayed back to the MAG, developer, and ultimately back to the community, I do my best to raise what I hear from folks via email, the phone, or at community meetings. If you do not believe that I am adequately doing so, please do email me with your thoughts at mathew.bader@gmail.com. I will raise any feedback you offer. Better yet, please do attend MAG meetings.
To the idea that I oppose redevelopment, I should clarify that I am working within the MAG to try and ensure that the development reflects the wishes of the community and is also held accountable for any commitments. I don't oppose redevelopment, I oppose certain aspects of this development. At the moment, the project is not reflecting the wishes that I have heard from the community.
In writing this I think it might make sense to simply ask Scott to post some very specific points about the project that I object to in my capacity as a MAG representative.
Thank you for the feedback and I apologize if I'm not perceived as objective and unbiased.
Mathew Bader
BCA MAG Representative
Post a Comment