> The County Executive may have indirect power via the budgeting process.... Has the County Executive or anyone from his Administration said anything about this decision or his opinion of it...? Is Elrich in fact interested at all in reversing the PB vote?

The BAC Expansion Amendment Act (isn't that redundant?) bill is B23-0242. Meanwhile, sitting in on the July BAC meeting last week it occurred to me, it might be useful/worthwhile to have DFHV included as well, since so much of the bad behaviour occurring in the bike lanes is from folks they regulate... Also, I note that the existing statute includes Parks & Rec as a member. I admit I don't come to BAC meetings very often, but I can't say I've ever seen a DPR rep at one...

sorry i missed this until now... it's interesting that one of the 'koncerns' was that "protected, safe bike lanes already exist in our neighborhood on non-residential streets...K Street is 90% residential", especially considering how many complaints cities get when they attempt to install bike lanes or other bike-related infrastructure on non-residential streets saying people should be riding on residential roads...

Re Richard B's comment: According to MPD, that intersection _has_ a red light camera, or at least did when they last updated the list on their website (six months ago).

> the Brookland to Fort Totten section [of the MBT]…will be finished by this time next year. Assuming they manage to get started on time next month, it's supposed to be finished by the end of next year (I've seen both November and December mentioned in different materials).

> "I've seen no evidence of new bike infra on 20th" The reference to "They've also started work the Western Downtown cycletracks on 20th and 21st Streets" is to planning work. Per https://www.dccycletrack.com/20th21st22ndstnw they're going to be presenting the 10% design at the meeting in late May.