DC Watch Home

Council Period 12

Council Period 13

Council Period 14

Council Period 15

Election 1998

Election 2000

Election 2002

themail

Search DCWatch

Dear District of Columbia Voter:

The D.C. City Council Environmental Report Card was prepared by Friends of the Earth Action and the Sierra Club, organizations dedicated to a healthy environment and a livable city. The report card presents a tabulation of selected pro-environmental and anti-environmental votes, or other actions, that the silting members of the D.C. City Council have recorded over the past four years. We hope that you will find it useful in determining how your elected representatives have voted on these issues.

The votes or other Council actions chosen for this report card reflect a broad range of environmental I concerns that are linked to the health and well-being of City residents, and the conservation of our natural resources. We picked issues that affect a broad geographic area, that could impact a specific ecosystem, or that could set a precedent for future decisions. We looked for issues that promote a livable city, provide clean air and clean water, demonstrate good development practices to protect the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers and retain open space and safeguard our park lands.

The range of grades issued in the report card shows that some members of the Council are more concerned about the environment than others. It is our hope that all members will take action to improve their environmental voting records in the future.

We invite you to share this report card with others and to bring forward suggested issues for future report cards. By working together, we can ensure that the City Council strives to protect our environment, our health, and our neighborhoods.

RECYCLING LAW REPEAL

Issue #1: Weakening of D.C.'s Recycling Law

Recycling saves raw materials and reduces resources consumed during production. It also reduces materials that are burned in incinerators, leading to a reduction in toxic air pollution that sweeps downwind toward D.C. Recycling means that more of our tax dollars support jobs in the city, instead of incineration fees charged by Fairfax County.

In March of 1995 the City's curbside recycling program was terminated by Mayor Barry after 26 months of full operation. The Sierra Club won two injunctions in Superior Court requiring the restoration of the service. Councilmember Frank Smith introduced legislation that would have made curbside recycling optional, not mandatory. On June 6, 1995, his bill was defeated by the Council, 7-6. The environmental vote was NO.

BARNEY CIRCLE HIGHWAY

Issue #2: Barney Circle Highway

For 15 years, community advocates and environmental groups had opposed the proposed construction of a new, interstate-grade bridge across the Anacostia River just upstream from the Sousa Bridge. The highway would have increased air pollution and polluted runoff; destroyed 20 acres of Anacostia Park; and, according to Department of Public Works figures, would have actually increased traffic in adjacent neighborhoods. In October of 1996, Mayor Barry decided to submit the first of several highway contracts to the City Council for its approval. Councilmember Chavous, with support from Councilmember Mason, introduced a bill to disapprove. On December 3, 1996, the Council disapproved the contract by a vote of 12-1. The environmental vote was YES.

CHILDREN’S ISLAND

Issue #3: Children's Island (Kingman and Heritage Islands)

Since 1983, Contessa Bina Sella de Monteluce and associates have sought to build an amusement park on two islands occupying 46 acres of Anacostia River parkland. A federal court decision requiring additional environmental reviews was circumvented by federal legislation, introduced by Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton, transferring the land to the City. Mayor Barry negotiated a sweetheart deal with the Contessa (granting a 99-year lease for 30 years without rent or royalties) that was submitted to the Council for approval in October of 1997. On December 16, 1997, on Council Chairman Cropp's motion, the Council approved the lease by a vote of 7-6. The Control Board later rejected the lease on multiple grounds. The environmental vote was NO.

D.C. EPA

Issue #4: D.C. Environmental Policy Act

The D.C. Environmental Policy Act (DCEPA) was enacted in 1989 to promote the health, safety and welfare of D.C. residents by requiring, according to the Act, “that the environmental impact of proposed District government and privately initiated actions be examined before implementation.” DCEPA provides overall environmental impact review and community input early in the planning of projects such as transfer stations, power plants, large housing developments, stadiums and roads. It is modeled after the National Environmental Policy Act which has protected communities across the country from poorly planned developments.

On December 19, 1997, Councilmember Harold Brazil introduced his Omnibus Regulatory Reform Bill which included language to severely weaken DCEPA. The Council voted 12-1 to remove the weakening language and retain the Environmental Policy Act. The environmental vote was YES.

TRANSFER STATIONS

Issue #5: Trash Transfer Stations

D.C. residents receive twice as much garbage as they produce! This happens because we don't have permanent standards governing the placement of trash transfer stations. Thus, the District is more attractive to regional waste haulers. Protection of neighborhoods from the odors, rodents and truck traffic produced by these facilities could be achieved through adoption of standards as protective as those in Prince George’s County, Maryland. A bill to implement such rules, already unanimously adopted by the Council on a temporary basis, has been held up in the Public Works and Environment Committee chaired by Councilmember Harry Thomas.

On July 17th, 1998, Councilmember Sharon Ambrose asked fellow councilmembers to sign a letter to Mr. Thomas requesting that the legislation be brought to a vote so permanent transfer station rules may be put into place. Seven Council members signed the letter or submitted one of their own (Schwartz and Chavous), earning a passing grade on this issue.

CONVENTION CENTER

Issue #6: Convention Center Location

Besides not being able to expand, a convention center located in the Shaw neighborhood has unacceptable environmental impacts: Tremendous amounts of traffic and air pollution would be dumped into a residential neighborhood, and the design ignores the Council's own Energy Efficiency Act of 1994. The Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth join many community groups in calling for relocation to a site north of Union Station.

On June 2,1998, the City Council ignored the alternative site and voted 8-5 on legislation introduced by Councilmember Jarvis to fund construction of a convention center in Shawl The environmental vote was NO.

RECYCLING REINSTATED

Issue #7: Recycling Reinstated

After a one and a half year suspension of the City's residential recycling program, a contract to restore the service to city households was passed by the City Council on July 7,1998. The vote was unanimously in favor. The environmental vote was YES.

ROCK CREEK PARK

PENDING ISSUE: Rock Creek Park Management Plan

For the first time ever, the National Park Service is preparing a General Management Plan for Rock Creek Park. The Park is currently under assault by a variety of threats including levels of automobile traffic never imagined by its founders. In 1890, a Congressional statute established the park as a place for “preservation from in jury or spoliation of all timber, animals, or curiosities within said park, and their retention in their natural condition, as nearly as possible.” Advocates for greater accessibility to the park “7 Days a Week” by all modes of transportation asked the Council to support an approach, labeled Alternative 2 1/2, that would manage the park for public recreation and wildlife rather than commuter traffic.

Despite the opportunity to manage the Park for better access and for conservation of natural resources, the Council voted unanimously in July 1997 in favor of a resolution requesting the National Park Service to maintain the status quo. The environmental vote was NO. Today, Councilmembers Frank Smith and Jack Evans have publicly stated their support for Alternative 2 1/2. Council action is pending and may be included on a future environmental report card.