<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>One of the most unpleasant things as an elected official is to read postings that indicate that we are not listening. I went back through my emails because I remembered a very similar posting with similar sentiments (elected officials not listening nor caring) in reference to the discussion about Jey’s Auto on 9/14 and 9/15. I apologize for the repetition but I will reemphasize what I attempted to communicate then on that issue: I am listening, I do take serious consideration of all viewpoints, and I never assume my position is the right or correct one. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Anyone who knows me understands that rather than shy away from conflict and disagreement, I welcome it. I try to surround myself with people whose viewpoints are not necessarily the same as my own. Be it my business partners who are all Republicans to friends around town whose council I sought on the Cafritz question (although I knew they were vehemently opposed to the project); voices of opposition are healthy and necessary.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>It is unfortunate that the Council’s position on this question was seen that this was a done deal – it wasn’t – at least from the single vote I cast. I had very clearly communicated to the developers what it would take to get a Yea vote and up until the last day or two before we voted that had not materialized. I voted Yes because the Developers acquiesced on key and critical components of the negotiation. I cannot speak for the rest of the Council but I saw no indication from those that voted that their positions were any different. We would have voted to support the project in November/December vs. giving up our holiday seasons to sit in almost nightly meetings and negotiations if this was all a forgone conclusion. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>As I communicated last September, what people have to say on complex issues does matter and will have an impact. The first two things you learn when sitting at the dais is that you never make everyone happy and that disagreements are healthy in a democracy. Over the last year there have been some very public and very heated arguments between myself and my colleagues. This is not because anyone is right or wrong but because we hold different viewpoints that each of us believe the facts support. We as a body however, have been very successful in arguing and defending our viewpoints while still finding paths of compromise. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>In the Cafritz question, there is no right or wrong, winners or losers. No one at this particular point knows with absolutely certainty what the outcome will be. It seems that my call for continued involvement is seen as disingenuous – it is not. I will continue to encourage skeptics to stay involved, to hold the developer accountable on the legally binding restrictions, and provide the town leadership with continued input and critiques of how the development should interface with RP. People have brought up very valid points in terms of other projects that had challenges, successes etc. One project’s success or failure does not necessitate another’s. It comes down to rudimentary execution of fundamentals and learning from, not ignoring, other projects failures. If people become disengaged from the project it has a greater chance of being a failure, something I hope none of us would wish for.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Yesterday in comments in the Washington Post article someone very clearly indicated that our Council should be investigated for taking bribes and we probably have opted out of Maryland Ethics Laws (which we haven’t). As a public figure the recourse against defamation is limited; to win a libel/slander case the statement must be made knowing it is false with reckless disregard to its truth. This one single issue however is what keeps many good people from ever seeking elected office and performing this very important public service. It is entirely inappropriate to even hint at impropriety regardless of the actions of others in the County or surrounding states. Argue a point, defend the merits of a belief, but no one should have to defend their name or have their reputation sullied through veiled accusations because of a disagreement or vote – it demeans the entire community.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I did not vote for the project because of a dearth of ethics, I voted for it because I found logic in the zoning ordinance that supports the technical arguments for rezoning ( my analysis can be seen here: <a href="http://riverdalepark.patch.com/articles/chapter-five-cafritz-district-council-hearing-picks-up-again-monday#pdf-9850200">http://riverdalepark.patch.com/articles/chapter-five-cafritz-district-council-hearing-picks-up-again-monday#pdf-9850200</a> ). I only came across the research after listening and considering the position the opposition to the project used to support their argument. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I hope many of you will either stay or get motivated to participate in the next phases. As always my door is always open for suggestions, criticism, or comments. Fair warning though, I love a good debate! <span style='font-family:Wingdings'>J</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Jonathan<o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>