Arlingtonians for Upzoning Transparency

MMH/EHO - One Candidate So Far Opposed to EHO for County Board Election 2025 County Appeal of EHO Lawsuit Win Moving Forward Using Expensive Outside Counsel icont.ac/5102B

MMH/EHO - What the County’s One-Year EHO Report Didn’t Tell You – EHOs are Not Affordable Housing!! New EHO Lists for $5,500 Monthly Rent!! County Files Notice of Appeal icont.ac/50Y8B

MMH/EHO - COUNTY BOARD STOP WASTING MONEY ON THE EHO APPEAL - LET THE COUNTY KNOW YOUR FY26 BUDGET PRIORITIES BY JANUARY 8 icont.ac/50VXk

MMH/EHO - Year End Support for Lawsuit Against Upzoning; Need to Counter County's Appeal Please consider additional support icont.ac/50VEm

Taxpayer Dollars for Developers Instead of Helping Those Who Need Housing Assistance?! Let the County Know Your Views on Its Homeownership Study by December 4 icont.ac/50Urm

IT AIN’T OVER ’TIL IT’S OVER – COUNTY VOTES TO APPEAL - PLEASE CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE LAWSUIT AND, YET ANOTHER COUNTY HOUSING STUDY icont.ac/50U1j

Top 10 Reasons Cty lost #10 Ruling says: "None of the above inconsistencies were brought to the attention of the public at any of the public hearings."

Top 10 Reasons Cty lost #9 "Inconsistencies" include that consultant said EHO would be concentrated in certain areas, but Board said it would be spread across the County.

Top 10 Reasons Cty lost #1 Judge ruled "Board failed to consider the localized impact of EHO development upon the neighborhoods where EHO housing will be built" and is therefore VOID.

@margaretbarthel "Broader impact" of the judge's decision is that Arlington can't make up its own rules to make zoning changes. Follow AFUT to learn more.

Arlington County board officially voted tonight to appeal the ruling on 'missing middle' at their meeting this evening. Chair Garvey says there's concern that the judge's decision could have broader impact on local zoning authority.

"Inconsistencies" include that the Board's only EHO consultant tasked with advising what developers would do in Arlington "did not talk to a single developer" re: EHO.

"Inconsistencies" include that the Board's only EHO consultant "was instructed to avoid disagreement with the staff of the county" in their recommendations.

County appealing judge's ruling that the "Board failed to consider the localized impact of EHO development upon the neighborhoods where EHO housing will be built" and is therefore VOID.