Bethesda news, restaurants, nightlife, events and openings, real estate, crime reports and more - the way only a lifelong Bethesda resident like Robert Dyer can bring it to you. Everything you want and need to know about Bethesda, plus special investigative reports you won't find anywhere else. The must-read blog for breaking Bethesda news, when you want to be the first to know.
▼
Friday, April 13, 2018
Signage installed at Righttime urgent care clinic
Signage has been installed at Righttime Medical Care, a new urgent care clinic opening at 4507 Stanford Street in downtown Bethesda. This was formerly Mark Keshishian and Sons rug shop, which moved to Rockville after 50 years in Bethesda.
Something's gotta give. We have the long-standing MedOne on Old Georgetown Road, then the new one at Glen Echo, and now this. I'm not sure 3 of these places can stay in business -- not enough sick people.
They should open one for pets. The one in Tenleytown makes a mint.
Three days later, Robert Dyer's Tuesday Morning Argle-Bargle still requires debunking.
-The proposed Independent Transit Agency would have had no powers to levy taxes. Only the Council can do that. The legislation listed several taxes that would have been earmarked towards the ITA.
-The bill relating to eminent domain and the BRT pertained to only very small takings such as those needed for new bus shelters.
-The so-called "Uber Tax" did not increase costs for Uber or Lyft drivers - the 25-cent tax is paid by passengers. It is significantly lower than proposed tax on "not-a-taxi" services in the District of Columbia. Dyer has not substantiated his claim that "drivers lost income and/or rides" due to this tax. As other readers noted, no funds from this tax actually went to Barwood.
-It's really funny seeing Dyer (and his surrogates) claim that redirecting a tax which they vehemently opposed is somehow "stealing public funds designated for the elderly and disabled".
Noun: "A reserve of money used for illicit purposes, especially political bribery."
Bill 13-18 "would remove the existing requirements in the law that limit the purposes and uses of the Fund to offsetting additional costs associated with providing accessible transportation and providing incentives to improve or expand. transportation options for eligible senior citizens and persons of limited income. It would instead allow use of the fund for any transportation purpose in the County."
The County Council will set the rates, answerable to the voters of the County and subject to affordability. There is no specific requirement for new tax rates associated with establishing the Authority
Q. Who will set the transit fares?
Fares will be set by the Transit Authority Board, following required public participation processes established for transit agencies under Federal guidelines.
It says nothing about the Independent Transit Authority having the power to levy taxes. Only the County Council would be able to do that, on behalf of the ITA.
5:15: Levying the tax would have only been a formality. That, again, was the whole reason they were creating the ITA. The unelected ITA was going to create a new tax and set the rate. As clearly stated in the text of the bill, that rate had no cap at all on it - it was an infinite taxing authority.
The Council, which under the bill, would have had no authority to approve the capital and operating budgets of the ITA, was going to say, "This is the tax that was set by the ITA" so they could try to evade responsibility.
The ITA had so much power, including the unlimited power to take on "ANY OTHER MATTERS THE COUNTY DEEMS NECESSARY AND PROPER RELATING TO THE TRANSIT AUTHORITY AS THE COUNTY MAY DETERMINE."
Wow - that was an infinite checkbook of blank checks for all kinds of devious taxing schemes.
Try reading the bill (as anyone can do using the link you've provided), rather than resorting to Saul Alinsky diversions.
Saith Dyer: "The ITA had so much power, including the unlimited power to take on 'ANY OTHER MATTERS THE COUNTY DEEMS NECESSARY AND PROPER RELATING TO THE TRANSIT AUTHORITY AS THE COUNTY MAY DETERMINE.'"
"As the County deems necessary.
"As the County may determine."
Also, omitted from the beginning of the quote is
"THE GOVERNING BODY OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, BY LOCAL LAW, MAY...(7) SPECIFY..."
So the County Council has the sole authority to determine the powers and duties of the ITA.
Just as it has the sole authority to levy taxes that would be earmarked to it.
Something's gotta give. We have the long-standing MedOne on Old Georgetown Road, then the new one at Glen Echo, and now this. I'm not sure 3 of these places can stay in business -- not enough sick people.
ReplyDeleteThey should open one for pets. The one in Tenleytown makes a mint.
Three days later, Robert Dyer's Tuesday Morning Argle-Bargle still requires debunking.
ReplyDelete-The proposed Independent Transit Agency would have had no powers to levy taxes. Only the Council can do that. The legislation listed several taxes that would have been earmarked towards the ITA.
-The bill relating to eminent domain and the BRT pertained to only very small takings such as those needed for new bus shelters.
-The so-called "Uber Tax" did not increase costs for Uber or Lyft drivers - the 25-cent tax is paid by passengers. It is significantly lower than proposed tax on "not-a-taxi" services in the District of Columbia. Dyer has not substantiated his claim that "drivers lost income and/or rides" due to this tax. As other readers noted, no funds from this tax actually went to Barwood.
-It's really funny seeing Dyer (and his surrogates) claim that redirecting a tax which they vehemently opposed is somehow "stealing public funds designated for the elderly and disabled".
"I'm not sure 3 of these places can stay in business -- not enough sick people."
ReplyDeleteThey will create new patients if they have to.
#BethesdaFever2018 - you heard it here first!
Slush Fund pronunciation /sləSH ˌfənd/
ReplyDeleteNoun: "A reserve of money used for illicit purposes, especially political bribery."
Bill 13-18 "would remove the existing requirements in the law that limit the purposes and uses of the Fund to offsetting additional costs associated with providing accessible transportation and providing incentives to improve or expand. transportation options for eligible senior citizens and persons of limited income. It would instead allow use of the fund for any transportation purpose in the County."
How is this a "slush fund"?
Daytime, nighttime, Saturday too
ReplyDeleteWe open our doors
Right Time Urgent Care Clinic
Conveniently yours.
2:16PM !!!
ReplyDeleteCitizens Bank of Maryland...haha! I remember
6:39: Read the bill! The ITA would have had unlimited tax, spending and debt-carrying authority. Read the text!
ReplyDeleteRead the quick-take bill - it places no such limits on the power along corridors.
Are you saying the Council planned all along to sit on the money and then falsely claim it wasn't being used? That would double the scandal!
The corrupt position was the Council's - using the disabled and elderly as cover for creating a new slush fund for themselves.
Q. Who will set the tax rates?
ReplyDeleteThe County Council will set the rates, answerable to the voters of the County and subject to affordability. There is no specific requirement for new tax rates associated with establishing the Authority
Q. Who will set the transit fares?
Fares will be set by the Transit Authority Board, following required public participation processes established for transit agencies under Federal guidelines.
5:34: Those statements are not from text of the original bill, which says something entirely different.
ReplyDelete"...which says something entirely different."
ReplyDeleteSure it does, Dyer. Post the actual text of the bill that supports your claim.
#DodgingDyer.
My text came from here -
ReplyDeletehttp://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/transit-authority/faq.html
Link
Here is the actual bill:
ReplyDeletehttp://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2015rs/bills_noln/hb/fhb0104.pdf
It says nothing about the Independent Transit Authority having the power to levy taxes. Only the County Council would be able to do that, on behalf of the ITA.
5:15: Levying the tax would have only been a formality. That, again, was the whole reason they were creating the ITA. The unelected ITA was going to create a new tax and set the rate. As clearly stated in the text of the bill, that rate had no cap at all on it - it was an infinite taxing authority.
ReplyDeleteThe Council, which under the bill, would have had no authority to approve the capital and operating budgets of the ITA, was going to say, "This is the tax that was set by the ITA" so they could try to evade responsibility.
The ITA had so much power, including the unlimited power to take on "ANY OTHER MATTERS THE COUNTY DEEMS NECESSARY AND PROPER RELATING TO THE TRANSIT AUTHORITY AS THE COUNTY MAY DETERMINE."
Wow - that was an infinite checkbook of blank checks for all kinds of devious taxing schemes.
Try reading the bill (as anyone can do using the link you've provided), rather than resorting to Saul Alinsky diversions.
Saith Dyer: "The ITA had so much power, including the unlimited power to take on 'ANY OTHER MATTERS THE COUNTY DEEMS NECESSARY AND PROPER RELATING TO THE TRANSIT AUTHORITY AS THE COUNTY MAY DETERMINE.'"
ReplyDelete"As the County deems necessary.
"As the County may determine."
Also, omitted from the beginning of the quote is
"THE GOVERNING BODY OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, BY LOCAL LAW, MAY...(7) SPECIFY..."
So the County Council has the sole authority to determine the powers and duties of the ITA.
Just as it has the sole authority to levy taxes that would be earmarked to it.
Does that white exterior side wall still have the tiger stencil?
ReplyDelete