leggett for east county (what about the rest?)
"This area [Burtonsville] was not Rockville or Silver Spring. We were an outcast area, and people thought, 'We need people to run who reflect this general area.' - Ike Leggett on his first campaign
The Montgomery Sentinel has an interview with Ike Leggett today. I have a better understanding of Ike than I had before, but I'm very disappointed by the lack of passion about the Purple Line:
"Now, we've had the benefit of studies, and I've looked at [the Purple Line plans] and said, 'OK. If you do all these things plus what I've described, I'll support it.' So I'm not running from my record. What they've done is come closer to what I wanted. They've changed it, and they've changed it in my direction."
That's not encouraging. What is Leggett's ideal for the Purple Line? And how far is he willing to carry the study out before he gets exactly what he wants?
"[Steve Silverman] says that because he wants to commingle our positions because he realizes his position is not acceptable. I think he's trying to generate discussion about the Purple Line in order to detract from growth issue and to make it appear there's not a difference."
Why would Silverman make the Purple Line an issue? Because he does support a faster pace of development and is interested in making the necessary road and transit improvements to accomodate it. I should support Ike Leggett because I see him at Giant - but if he's not committed to projects outside of our immediate community, what good is he to the rest of Montgomery County?
Crossposted at Just Up The Pike
The Montgomery Sentinel has an interview with Ike Leggett today. I have a better understanding of Ike than I had before, but I'm very disappointed by the lack of passion about the Purple Line:
"Now, we've had the benefit of studies, and I've looked at [the Purple Line plans] and said, 'OK. If you do all these things plus what I've described, I'll support it.' So I'm not running from my record. What they've done is come closer to what I wanted. They've changed it, and they've changed it in my direction."
That's not encouraging. What is Leggett's ideal for the Purple Line? And how far is he willing to carry the study out before he gets exactly what he wants?
"[Steve Silverman] says that because he wants to commingle our positions because he realizes his position is not acceptable. I think he's trying to generate discussion about the Purple Line in order to detract from growth issue and to make it appear there's not a difference."
Why would Silverman make the Purple Line an issue? Because he does support a faster pace of development and is interested in making the necessary road and transit improvements to accomodate it. I should support Ike Leggett because I see him at Giant - but if he's not committed to projects outside of our immediate community, what good is he to the rest of Montgomery County?
Crossposted at Just Up The Pike
posted by Dan Reed at 5:21 PM
3 Comments:
What? A politician who is not bravely pledging his fervent support for the Purple Line?
--Gilbert
East County should, by common sense, have a rail corridor down the median of 29 with stops perhaps at Four Corners, New Hampshire Avenue. Briggs Chaney, Randolph Road and MD 198, perhaps with an extension as far to downtown Columbia or at least to the Applied Physics Lab or east to Laurel. But that rail corridor is politically if not physically impossible.
The Purple Line might actually worsen East County's problems without additional upgrades; drivers may drive down 29 to Silver Spring to pick up the line, further cramping transit and auto traffic down 29. I support the Purple Line strongly, but I get why Leggett is lukewarm.
http://newsuburb.tripod.com/29line.jpg
I've been thinking about that for a long, long time, but I've been told a number of times it's just not going to happen.
Post a Comment
<< Home