DC Watch Home

Council Period 12

Council Period 13

Council Period 14

Council Period 15

Election 1998

Election 2000

Election 2002

themail

Search DCWatch

FULL REPORT

Survey of Mayoral Candidates

on the status of

Democracy

in

Washington, District of Columbia

July 4 - July 24, 1998

Report prepared by
Mark David Richards, Senior Associate,
Bisconti Research, Inc.

Survey sponsored by

Stand Up for Democracy Coalition

The coalition meets at 6:30 pm every Tuesday
at the National Council of Negro Women
at 633 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Telephone and Fax: 202/232-2500

Table of Contents

“I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion.’ — Thomas Jefferson

About the Survey

Questions and Answers

1. Candidates efforts to promote democracy in D.C.
2. Expected relationship with Control Board
3. Factors that led to the failure of our local government
4. Future form of D.C. government
5. Changes to improve civic culture and accountability
6. Things to increase voter turnout and citizen involvement
7. Proposals to bring full Congressional representation to D.C.
8. Most important things to citizens to do to make D.C. the capital of democracy

Questionnaire and Democracy Forum Invitation

Mission Statement of the Stand Up for Democracy Coalition

U.S. Public Opinion Poll on Voting Rights for D.C. Citizens

About the Survey

Field Dates: July 4, 1998 - July 24, 1998

Objective: To encourage discussion about the future of democracy in the District of Columbia, including problem definition and clear and measurable ideas for how the District can move towards becoming a world class example of American democracy.

Method: Survey questions were drafted by Stand Up for Democracy Coalition members. The coalition discussed, revised, and developed consensus on the final series of questions.

Ms. Anise Jenkins prepared the final consensus questions.

Mr. Malcolm L. Wiseman Jr. prepared a list of mayoral candidates registered for the elections prior to July 1, 1998. There were 19 declared candidates at that time. Each received a written letter from Timothy Cooper of Democracy First on July 4, 1998 inviting them to participate. Mr. Wiseman called candidates to encourage them to respond. In addition, a second letter was sent by Mr. Cooper to the same list on July 14, 1998, inviting them to participate in a Democracy Forum sponsored by the Stand Up for Democracy Coalition on August 12, 1998. A second copy of the questionnaire was attached to this letter of invitation as a reminder.

Response Rate: Of the 19 candidates invited to participate, nine responded, a rate of 47 percent of primary candidates. Following are the candidates who were invited to but did not respond:

• Ms. Ida Blocker
• Mr. John "Rafael" Deaton
• Mr. Ricardo Gatlin-Moore
• Mr. David Odell Leacraft
• Ms. Sylvia Robinson-Green
• M. Osie Thorpe
• Mr. James Caviness
• Mr. Richard A. Holmes
• Mr. David P. Mugan
• Mr. Edward Wolterbeek

Questions and Answers

Format: Questions are presented in the order they were asked, with candidates responses side-by-side in alphabetical order.

A summary page was developed for each question.

It is followed by candidates complete responses.

Candidate’s Efforts to Promote Democracy in D.C.

1. What have you done to promote democracy in the District of Columbia, especially since the enactment of the President's Revitalization Plan?

Candidate’s Efforts to Promote Democracy in D.C.

1. What have you done to promote democracy in the District of Columbia, especially since the enactment of the President's Revitalization Plan?

Councilmember Harold Brazil (Democrat): When the vote in the Council on the President's Plan was imminent, those of us who believed it was inadequate began to understand the full power of the White House. After being told for months what a generous deal it was, we had forced the staff of OMB to come back to the Council with some revisions and many, many clarifications, but finally it was clear that the Council would vote. I spoke against the Council signing a document of surrender and the vote was tabled rather than be lost. The Washington Post editors reprimanded the Council. Those of us who could not yet vote FOR the plan were warned by members of Congress that we risked losing all federal moneys. Only three days later, with one Councilmember away from the city and a new Councilmember being sworn in, another vote was taken late on a Friday evening, and the Council voted to sign the MOU. I held some community meetings, believing that many people didn't understand what the Council's vote might mean, but I believe people were tired and felt powerless to influence Congress's consideration of the bill. I wrote to the House and Senate leadership, and argued against sending a bill up to the Congress that addressed only a few of our revenue problems, but took away local control of essentially local decisions. I may have been less surprised than my colleagues when the full impact of Senator Faircloth's actions last summer became known, but I was no less disappointed. Since the enactment of the Revitalization Plan, I turned my attention to one of the matters that Congress earmarked for change: regulatory reform. Congress mandated that the Control Board study DCRA and recommend legislation, but I didn't want to wait for the Control Board to tell us what to do with our own agencies. I held hearings on the Business Regulatory Reform Commission's findings and recommendations, and in a little under two months, I (and many Council staff and people from the community) drafted legislation which we pushed through in record time. This legislation was approved unanimously by the Council in January and was signed by the Mayor, approved by the Control Board and by Congress. I wanted to show Congress that our legislature had the will to act on this mandate, and that Congress has no reason to expand the "governing" powers of the Control Board or to further shrink the powers of the elected leadership. I dare say, we accomplished much more than our critics in Congress have done.

Mr. Albert Ceccone (Republican): I have espoused full representation in Congress for the citizens of the District of Columbia.

Councilmember Kevin Chavous (Democrat): As a resident of the District and a member of the D.C. City Council, I have been and continue to be a strong advocate for reconnecting District citizens to their government. Citizens must understand their government and have an effective say in its operation. Truly democratic governments have nothing to fear through greater public participation in the decision-making process. I advocate ensuring that the citizens of the District of Columbia have an agenda for preserving the process of citizen participation with regard to having an effective say in the operation of government. As you may be aware, one of my first duties as a new Councilmember was to chair the Committee on Self-Determination whose purpose was to ensure that the citizens of the District of Columbia have an agenda for preserving the process of citizen participation with regard to having an effective say in the operation of government. As the Chairperson of this committee for two years, I know there is a process and this process is critical if true and total enfranchisement and democracy is to exist and be protected for the citizens of the District of Columbia.

Councilmember Jack Evans (Democrat): Democracy in the District of Columbia suffered a critical blow when the Control Board was established. The elimination of the Control Board is necessary to bring democracy back. I have tried to bring some sanity to the process of dealing with the budget surplus. I believe that we should dedicate at least 50% of any budget surplus to pay down the accumulated deficit. The President's Revitalization Plan, of which I was one of the principal sponsors, will help to reduce our deficits thereby making it possible to get back Home Rule and promote democracy in D.C.

Mr. Jeffrey Gildenhorn (Democrat): I have encouraged new residents in the District of Columbia to sign up and vote.

Mr. John Gloster (D.C. Statehood): As Chairman of the DC Statehood Party, I have protested resisted the imperialistic forces of the Congress and the Control Board. We have joined in and organized numerous demonstrations. One incident that sticks in my mind was a protest led by the Stand Up for Democracy Coalition on a Control Board meeting in which the mayors powers of appointment were stripped. That protest turned into a shoving match with Dr. Brimmer's personal SWAT team palace guard. It got lots of press, as viewers got a glimpse of just how the Control Board aimed to treat irate citizens. Another demonstration sticks in my mind as a defining moment in the struggle. The DC Statehood Party organized an assault on Virginia's Congressional overseers, Tom Davis and Jim Moran, which culminated in a 5 mile march on Tom Davis' house. I originally planned to have this demo on a date that did not conflict with Stand Ups bus demo on Faircloth. Unfortunately, Mr. Thompson conveyed to me in early August that the demo on North Carolina was not going forward for a lack of funding for the buses. When I was later told that the trip was back on, for the 23rd of August, I had already released fliers indicating that our event was to occur on the 23rd. We could have become dejected for our lack of coordination, or we could have acted as if we were in competition with each other. Instead we billed our demonstration as being in support of the Stand Up demonstration in North Carolina. As a result, I believe the ISSUE got twice as much media coverage. Aside from the extensive media attention our event got from the local media that would not track down to North Carolina, we caused thousands of Virginians to scratch their heads upon seeing us in Arlington, and in Falls Church. Rep. Tom Davis, himself, still quips, "tell those Statehood demonstrators not to come to my house because I had nothing to do with this" when someone else's actions oppress the District. (It's probably time to pay him another visit.)

Mr. G.E. Maxwell (Democrat): I was an early advocate of the Homerule Charter and a supporter and member of the statehood drive since my teens. I have gathered statistics and research, marched in parades and demonstrations and put together programs, pamphlets and protest. However since the President's Plan was actuated I have done little but fight the Control Board, complain about the lack of recycling, and demonstrate, testify and renounce the proposed convention center in my home neighborhood of Shaw. I support the Union Station North Site.

Councilmember Carol Schwartz (Republican): In my role as Chair of the Council's Committee on Local, Regional and Federal Affairs I have been consistent and vociferous in registering my opposition -- with members of Congress - and not just the members of the DC subcommittees in the Senate and House -- to the Congressionally-appointed non-elected Control Board. I have scheduled meetings with the Senate Majority leader to discuss an equitable approach to oversight of the District's budget. I worked for the Voting Rights Amendment during efforts to ratify it which were underway from 1978 to 1985. I attended every meeting on the President's Plan and registered my opposition to the President's Plan because of democracy issues. I have suggested to all who would listen that the idea of DC subcommittees for oversight of a budget that is a mere drop in the bucket on the federal budget scale, and now with no federal payment, is a waste of taxpayer's money and drastic interference with home rule. I have testified before the House on the need for a fair and equitable approach to this year's consensus budget. I have lobbied each and every member of the House Appropriations Committee to eliminate harmful riders from the District's budget. I have protested the use of the District of Columbia as a social laboratory by federal lawmakers who would never dream of trying to impose vouchers in their own jurisdictions. I have railed against the Control Board, their non-elected overseers, and their exorbitant salaries as another intrusion into home rule. I held governance hearings this year to permit open discussion of the electorate's views on how they want DC governed. I have urged strong and consistent oversight of our District's finances by elected Councilmembers in an effort to return responsible, elected government to the District by ending the Control Board's reign. I have urged federal legislators to let DC tax revenue be taxed at the source. I have demanded that DC residents be given the same rights as other Americans and be allowed elected, voting representation in the House and Senate. I have vigorously protested federal interference in our regional airport system, specifically opposing recent efforts by the Senate to alter perimeter and slot rules at National Airport.

Mr. Anthony Williams (Democrat): As Chief Financial Officer of the District of Columbia, I helped bring the District back from fiscal insolvency. The critical actions that I took helped the District stave off bankruptcy and perhaps receivership, and will lead to the return of Home Rule two years ahead of schedule. I improved the District's financial management, instituted spending controls, and dramatically improved our tax department, sending over 175,000 tax returns to residents within 15 days. Additionally, I improved the District's credit rating on Wall Street, which has restored credibility in the District government, further improving the chances of democracy returning to the District in the next two years. But perhaps more importantly, I helped real people with real problems. For example, I helped small businesses get the money that the District owed them for critical services they delivered to our most vulnerable citizens. Second, I helped AIDS patients receive the critical treatment they needed to live by securing much needed federal funds. And I helped ordinary citizens receive their tax refunds in record time.

Expected Relationship with Control Board

2. If you are elected Mayor, what will be your relationship with the Control Board?

Expected Relationship with Control Board

2. If you are elected Mayor, what will be your relationship with the Control Board?

Councilmember Harold Brazil (Democrat): I believe it is in the District's interest to take what is best and most productive from the experts (in any arena) and to learn and benefit from that expertise. In that vein, I want to challenge the Control Board to do what Alice Rivlin has so eloquently described: work its way out of existence. We are not the first city to experience a fiscal crisis, and we aren't the only city in the United States that has had to learn to manage better and be more disciplined. We can jointly bring an end to the control period by becoming very good at managing our resources and our government employees, and by turning our focus and attention to serving the public in the very best way we can. I have not agreed with the Control Board's spending hundreds of millions of dollars on consultants, but having spent the District's money, let's take the information they have provided and put it to use. I have not agreed with some of the Control Board's decisions, but with new members coming onto the Board, I believe it is time to agree on our goals, roll up our sleeves and get to work so that we receive real benefit from this period. With a more collaborative approach, I hope that the Control Board will be more able to understand the impact of its actions on neighborhoods and communities. I hope that, as mayor, I will be able to offer more protection than protest, more action than anger.

Mr. Albert Ceccone (Republican): I view the Control Board as a potentially valuable ally in providing the citizens with a cost effective government that delivers quality services.

Councilmember Kevin Chavous (Democrat): I am committed to working with the Control Board, but I will settle for nothing less than the rule of the law with regard to the effective administration of government. I say this because to date I have been disappointed with the job done by the Control Board due to the fact that this entity has paid more than $20 million to consultants to verify what many District residents and businesses have already defined as our problems within the government and solutions to the problems. Their process of selecting contractors has been a closed one, as has been many of their decisions. It is my hope that the new Chairperson of the Control Board and the new Chief Financial Officer for the city will open the process to citizen participation and work toward implementation of the recommended management reforms. As Mayor, I first intend to establish a set of performance measures for each District Government agency, the administrators who head these various agencies, and for the Control Board. The performance measures will identify management, program and service delivery criteria and reforms, and will set a deadline for implementation of these management, program and service delivery reforms. Secondly, I will inform the Control Board if, in my opinion, one or more heads of the agencies under the authority of the Control Board is not the best person to head a particular agency. My administration will not tolerate "less than" excellence with regard to recruiting, attracting and appointing the best talent available to head the various District government agencies under the authority of the Control Board. Equally as important, is the fact that the taxpaying citizens of the District of Columbia deserve nothing less than "excellence" with regard to fiscal responsibility, management accountability and service delivery.

Councilmember Jack Evans (Democrat): As Mayor, I envision a partnership with the Control Board where I will be the first among equals. This will mean working cooperatively not only with the Control Board, but also with each of the other entities and individuals who will have a role in managing the city when I take office. This includes the Chief Management Officer, the Control Board, the City Council, and the Chief Financial Officer.

Mr. Jeffrey Gildenhorn (Democrat): I would strive for a conducive relationship with the Control Board. I would expect to make constructive suggestions as to issues I deem important.

Mr. John Gloster (D.C. Statehood): As I have said before, the District has been poorly served by our status quo leaders, who care more about their position than the citizens of the District. Too often they back down, and do the enemies bidding, at the threat of the Control Board or Congress to overrule the DC government and intervene directly. The District is a type of plantation, and plantations need straw bosses. The Congress and Control Board do not really want to get their hands dirty and enact these anti-people directives themselves. By coopting our leaders for this purpose, they legitimize their actions. We need a mayor who will not cooperate with an anti-people agenda. Many of the actions of the last 3 years would not have occurred under strong leadership. Naturally we want cordial relationships with the Control Board and Congress, but we must concentrate winning the hearts and minds of our own people first.

Mr. G.E. Maxwell (Democrat): I hope to make the Control Board redundant by making the District of Columbia completely self-reliant, even beyond the federal payment. If this can be accomplished we can challenge the congress on equal footing for fair rights and representation.

Councilmember Carol Schwartz (Republican): I accept the Control Board as a necessary evil at this point, and I will continue to work just as hard as mayor as I have as a member of the Council to put them out of business as soon as possible by effectively managing our fiscal affairs. As mayor, I would expect to continue to pursue substantially the same approach to the Control Board that I have adopted as a member of the Council -- one of collaboration when it is appropriate and will serve the interests of our citizens, and one of firm opposition, when I believe that the Control Board has exceeded its Congressionally mandated authority as the District's ultimate fiscal manager. I am confident that in the coming year, with new Control Board leadership that recognizes the importance of restoring real home rule, all the District's elected officials will be able to work more productively with this appointed body.

Mr. Anthony Williams (Democrat): As Mayor, I will articulate a vision for the city with education, jobs and economic development as my top priorities. The Mayor, in consultation with neighborhood groups, labor, and business groups, among others, must set the agenda for the City. To that end, I will work with the Control Board to improve public education so that our children have a bright future and are prepared for the world of work in the 21^st century. Second, I will work to ensure that our citizens have the highest paying, highest quality jobs. Third, I will work with the Control Board to ensure that in two years, when the District has had its fourth consecutive balanced budget, democracy will return to the District. As Mayor, I will be an advocate for those that need advocacy: children, seniors, less fortunate. I believe elected leaders have an obligation to help those who are not in a position to help themselves. As CFO, I helped AIDS patients receive much needed federal funding and helped small, minority businesses get the much deserved money they were due the government. I will advocate before the Control Board on behalf of all citizens.

Factors that Led to Failure of Local Government

3. What were the most important factors that led to the failure of our local government?

Factors that Led to Failure of Local Government

3. What were the most important factors that led to the failure of our local government?

Councilmember Harold Brazil (Democrat): Perhaps the most grievous failure of our local government was its failure to understand and communicate the depth of our revenue problem. But it is not possible to cite the District's revenue problem without also acknowledging that there was little stewardship of the scarce resources we had, or without acknowledging that some of the elected leadership was insensitive to the depth of Congress's tolerance of anyone else's deficit spending. I spoke against, and voted against, unbalanced budgets that would only end up being paid for in higher and higher taxes. And those higher taxes drove families and businesses out to the Virginia and Maryland suburbs, and further eroded our fragile revenue base – driving us into a fiscal crisis that all but invited the Control Board's presence in our city. I fought to get control of our city's contracting processes because I believed that the well-publicized fraud and waste and corruption were, in essence, a tax on those in our city who could least afford another tax. That waste and corruption diverted resources from AIDS treatment programs and tenant assistance programs and even Summer Youth programs to lucrative and non-competitive contracts, sometimes for things we didn't need. I fought for reform of our personnel system, in which it was obvious to everyone but our mayor that we had untrained, unmotivated, unresponsive people in positions that were supposed to SERVE the public rather than annoy it. I fought for stronger management of our pension funds and for a law that would demand accountability from our top government managers. These problems were not invisible – on the contrary, they began to define our city in the eyes of the rest of our country and their representatives in Congress. We must now do the hard work of writing a new definition of Washington, D.C.

Mr. Albert Ceccone (Republican): Unfortunately, the elected officials (The Mayor and the City Council) did not responsibly discharge their duties. The Council did not provide adequate budget oversight, and budgets that demonstrated concern for the taxpaying citizens of our City. The mayor did not professionally manage the provision of basic services. They simply took their pay without earning it.

Councilmember Kevin Chavous (Democrat): Washington, D.C. is a wounded but heroic city. I say this because the District of Columbia is at a crossroads in its history. Over the past ten years, many residents and businesses have left the District. To stem this exodus and to rebuild the city, as Mayor, I will focus policy decisions on stabilizing neighborhoods, improving schools and the delivery of government services, retaining existing businesses and attracting residential and business development within our neighborhoods. After two years of balanced budgets, the District is moving rapidly toward the return to elected government. It's time we got down and implemented the reforms and delivered the services our taxpayers expect.

Councilmember Jack Evans (Democrat): The most important factors that led to the failure of our local government were the improper management of the resources that we had and the failure of the Executive Branch to respect and follow the laws passed by the Council. Lack of financial controls to adequately gauge spending and the failure of the city government to invest in training and technology for its managers and workers also were major factors. Having said that, I would be remiss if I did not point out that effective government in the District also was hampered by several other factors, including an inadequate federal payment, coupled with the city's inability to tax entities such as the many non-profit organizations, the federal government, foreign embassies, and the several colleges and universities located within its boundaries. The loss of revenue boggles the mind. The burden of the city's unfunded pension fund, the obligation to fund its own prison, and the responsibility for the state functions of Medicare, Medicaid, etc. also played a major role in de-stabilizing the city's financial base. That is why I was a sponsor of the President's Revitalization Plan. I am the only Council Member who supported that plan which placed under the purview of the federal government many of the responsibilities which more properly belonged there. This plan will count for about $200 million of our projected surplus for 1999. Although the President's Revitalization Plan did not go far enough, it was the best deal we could get at the time and far better than what we had.

Mr. Jeffrey Gildenhorn (Democrat): An arrogant and disenfranchised Mayor, and a stalled, fragmented, and befuddled City Council have led to the failure of our city government.

Mr. John Gloster (D.C. Statehood): We must first win the hearts and minds of our own people. Poor management and corruption have gotten the people to disbelieve in the very principal of democracy. Too many of our people welcome the Control Board and Congressional interference. We must do more than give people a civic lesson on the virtues of democracy. We must offer government that actually takes up the interests of the average working person, instead of serving the interests of outside business and political interests.

Mr. G.E. Maxwell (Democrat): (1) The Mayor's (Barry's) imprisonment, (2) The Kelly Administration's Deficits, (3) The unforgiving attitude of the Congress toward the current Mayor.

Councilmember Carol Schwartz (Republican): The reasons for our government's failure to perform as many would like are numerous, complex and interwoven. Without blaming our forefathers for their failure to foresee the problems of the District when they drafted the Constitution, I will say that there is sufficient blame to go around for nearly everyone else who has had anything to do with the District of Columbia on the federal and District government levels. First on the list of reasons for the District's plight is Congress - the same Congress that represents its constituents in home jurisdictions bullies us. The same Congress that does not interfere when a home jurisdiction wants to tax income at the source, prohibits the nation's capital from taxing income at the source; the same Congress that does not hesitate to fund its home jurisdictions when they need money for infrastructure maintenance, health care or schools takes away federal funds form the District almost at will. The same Congress that will not entertain the idea of vouchers in its home jurisdictions, freely plots to use the District of Columbia as a social laboratory for its pet projects. The same Congress that never managed to live up to its fiscal responsibilities in the District of Columbia by failing to fund pensions and corrections did not hesitate to fund these programs after taking $3 billion in pension funds from the District of Columbia and doing away with the federal payment to boot. The same Congress that inveighs against DC's inability to raise revenues, grants tax exemptions to over half of the entities found within the District. The same Congress that chides DC for failing to lure business to the District readily places federal installations in home jurisdictions at the expense of the District. Second among the causes of the District's woes was over-eagerness on the part of our leaders to take the "deal" offered by the Congress when home rule, sort of, was agreed to 25 years ago. The pension issue, the corrections issue, the federal payment issue, the taxing revenue at the source issue, the lack of representation in the House and Senate issue, the lack of a state issue, were all forgotten in the rush to celebrate "home rule". We were victims of our own thirst for freedom. Third the failure of the District to promote a true multi-party political system has led to domination of the District by one political party to the detriment of most of the District's citizens. Cronyism, cozy jobs programs, lack of standards, inability to enforce performance standards and elected officials "retired on active duty" became the rule. DC became synonymous with corruption and incompetence. Fourth, lack of fiscal discipline and, paraphrasing Will Rogers, "never meeting a spending program it did not like", led the District Council, in coordination with two mayors, to preside over the demise of the District's financial reputation. Admittedly, Congressional wisdom in its decision-making vis-a-vis the District did not help, but even in the District's "boom" days of the late 1980s, city government was spending at a deficit rate and not funding infrastructure needs. Particularly ironic is the fact that Congressional deficit spenders now sit in judgement over the District and its financial plight. Finally, the District's electorate, which fails to show up at city elections large and small, played no small part in allowing elected officials to woo their votes with brightly wrapped spending packages and promises. Who can forget the 10,000 jobs offered by one Mayoral candidate in the 1994 race? The lesson to be learned here is that if you have the same people doing the same thing the same way all of the time you will get the same results.

Mr. Anthony Williams (Democrat): The problems that have plagued the District government have their roots several areas: financial and management. Specifically, local leadership failed to reign in spending while at the same time revenue estimates were inflated to support the expansion of government programs, many of which were not working. Financial: In the original grant of Home Rule to the District, the federal government failed to fund the pension liability which grew to an ever increasing share of the District budget year after year. Second, the Home Rule act did not allow the District to tax income at its source, creating a revenue limitation that further hampered the District. Third, Congress imposed a height limitation on buildings which further constricted the revenue bases, albeit with an aesthetically pleasing result. Fourth, the District does not have true elected representation with a vote. The District cannot advocate for our positions or secure the necessary funding for important projects, like every other state, because we do not have a vote in the Congress. Fifth, the District continually failed to invest in the infrastructure of the City, bridges, roads, sewers, and schools. Finally, in 1994 all of the above factors culminated in an accumulated deficit and budget deficit that left the District close to insolvency and the establishment of a control board. As a result of my leadership as CFO, the District has now balanced its budget two years in a row and has a budget surplus of over $200 million. This occurred through diligent tax collection and enforcement and solid revenue and expenditure estimates. This positive financial position will allow the District to invest in education, economic development, housing, and other important areas that have been neglected by the Council for a number of years. Management: The District government and its leaders have failed the District citizens. Early on in the experiment in Home Rule, the government was delivering quality services in the area of health and human services and in tax administration, for example. However, over time, the services began to slip, too many employees had been hired, managers failed to manage, and programs were expanded without an adequate revenue stream to support the expenditures. This failure to manage government agencies coupled with the financial problems put the District in a precarious financial position prior to my arrival as CFO. As a result of my management and leadership skills, vendors were paid within 30-45 days, critical services to AIDS patients and seniors were delivered in a timely manner, tax refunds were sent out within 15 days, and credibility was restored to the District government.

Future Form of D.C. Government

4. Should D.C. change its form of government? If so, how? If not, why not?

Future Form of D.C. Government

4. Should D.C. change its form of government? If so, how? If not, why not?

Councilmember Harold Brazil (Democrat): I believe we need more democracy, not less. We need more accountability by elected officials, not another layer of government. Washington, D.C. is very different from cities with professional city managers, like Charlotte or Denver; those cities have elected officials at every level. District residents cannot vote for a state legislator or governor, a county commissioner, or a Congressman or Senator. We must be respectful of our citizens' desire to have elected leaders, accountable each election year for the job they do. We should consult with the residents of the District before making any change. Washington, D.C. needs a mayor who can work with Congress and the President to repair the flaws in the Home Rule Charter, and forge a new alliance with the federal government to ensure the success of the city we share with them. My experience as both a Congressional staff member and a member of the City Council will allow me to build working partnerships. My record of working for economic and management reform is evidence not only of my capacity for meeting this challenge, but also of my commitment to making this city work.

Mr. Albert Ceccone (Republican): No. The form of government is excellent. The people responsible for operating the government have not exercised capable, caring and effective leadership in the provision of quality government services.

Councilmember Kevin Chavous (Democrat): I do not support any change in the structure of the District government that reduces the role of elected officials. Many citizens have fought for these rights and the District will not give up representation easily. The choice to make any structural changes belongs to District citizens and must be made in open forum, ratified by referendum and clarified by law. As Mayor, I will facilitate these discussions. More importantly, my task as Mayor is to reconnect District citizens to their government. Citizens must understand their government and have effective say in its operation. Truly democratic governments have nothing to fear through greater public participation in the decision-making process.

Councilmember Jack Evans (Democrat): No! Although I advocate that the District of Columbia's form of government not be changed, I do advocate the Mayor playing a stronger role in the education system. The Mayor should hire and fire the School Superintendent in addition to having budgetary authority and a Line Item Veto of the schools systems budget. The strong mayor form of government that we have is a good model. It places accountability for our city squarely at the feet of the voters and the elected officials they choose. Most other forms reduce citizen participation at the expense of democratic government.

Mr. Jeffrey Gildenhorn (Democrat): Yes. I am in favor of a strong mayoral form of government, with significant changes being made at the city council level. I propose an elected five-member full-time city council consisting of four at-large council members and a chairperson to replace its 12 part-time council members. Taxpayers would save over a half a million dollars yearly under this concept.

Mr. John Gloster (D.C. Statehood): First of all, we must become a state. The founder of my party, Julius Hobson once said that "Home rule is home fool". Only through the powers and sovereignty of statehood can we end Congress' continual meddling in our affairs. Only then can we secure the resources we need to care for our needs the way we should. Additionally, we must have a local government that is more representative of the people, which is more free of the interests of big moneyed interests. Each ward represents 60,000 to 80,000 people. At-large members of council represent over 500,000 people. It takes too much money to reach that many constituents, and each constituents voice is that much more removed from the process. To improve this situation, we should increase the number of council members to 34 or 40. Also, ANCs should be given more power over the distribution of services to area residents, in order to employer communities.

Mr. G.E. Maxwell (Democrat): Yes. I would decentralize power down to the individual neighborhoods. Divide and conquer. With service providers placed on an immediate level with the consumer there will be less waste and red tape and greater accountability. Also volunteers can be acknowledged with CSA hours and properly recognized and encouraged. With the Towns of Washington united D.C. could stake a claim to full independence and self-determination .

Councilmember Carol Schwartz (Republican): I am running for Mayor of the District of Columbia, an office unfortunately only a shadow today of the same office I sought in 1986 and 1994. There is nothing wrong with the strong mayor form of government put in place a quarter of a century ago when home rule was enacted. The form has not been the problem, the substance has been. As in any governmental structure, conscientious, competent and courageous leadership is the answer. Since the enactment of home rule there exists the position of city administrator. That is the opportunity I would use to get that top notch experienced "city manager" type to run the day-to-day operations of the city. But, that person would report to me as mayor and be accountable to me and citizens who elected me. City managers per se are no panacea. Miami had one and failed abysmally. New York has a strong mayor form of government and has succeeded. There again, it's not the form, but the leadership. Any decision related to the form of government after the Control Board should be decided by the citizens of D.C. I would be happy to lead that discussion as mayor.

Mr. Anthony Williams (Democrat): The citizens of the District of Columbia should have the final say on whether the District should change its form of government. When Philadelphia and New York went through their financial crisis, nobody asked them to change their form of government. I would leave it to the voters of the District to decide their form of government. I do believe that the CFO should continue to have an independent role with respect to estimating revenue to ensure that the District does not return to deficit spending. In other respects, the CFO should perform the normal role that a finance officer plays in an organization.

Changes to Improve Civic Culture and Accountability

5. What changes in our local government would have the greatest impact in...

(a) strengthening our local civic culture?
(b) improving accountability of our elected officials?

Changes to Improve Civic Culture and Accountability

5. What changes in our local government would have the greatest impact in...

(a) strengthening our local civic culture?
(b) improving accountability of our elected officials?

Councilmember Harold Brazil (Democrat): My campaign is about moving our city into a better future by: 1) making our government work within its means, 2) lowering the tax burden on our overtaxed citizens, 3) restoring self-government by elected officials, 4) building a solid, equitable working relationship with the federal government, 5) improving our schools, 6) ensuring public safety, and 7) bringing new jobs and economic development. As mayor, just as I have done as a Councilman, I will work with District residents in every neighborhood, citizens of every faith and race and philosophy. If we do this work, our citizens will feel more empowered. We all hope that they will, in turn, participate at greater levels – make their voices heard not only about what is NOT working in our government, but also about their ideas that will benefit their neighborhoods and their communities. It is citizen participation that improves the accountability of our elected officials – an honest and energetic representative has nothing to fear from active and informed voters.

Mr. Albert Ceccone (Republican): The usurping of local government control by Congress should be a clarion message that holding elected officials accountable by an involved electorate is a desirable goal.

Councilmember Kevin Chavous (Democrat): See response given to Question #4 above.

Councilmember Jack Evans (Democrat): (a) In order to strengthen our local civic culture, I believe that changes such as giving the Mayor the right to hire and fire the School Superintendent are essential. Our children's education is the Number 1 priority. Currently, enough has been said about blaming someone else for the failure of our school system. As Mayor of the District of Columbia, I would like the responsibility to rest on my shoulders. There is no more important key to the future than providing our children with a quality education. An educated citizenry is the first step in strengthening our local civic culture. (b) In order to improve the accountability of our elected officials, change such as putting the Control Board out of business is essential so our local elected leadership can have the authority to govern. Then and only then can we hold our elected leaders fully accountable.

Mr. Jeffrey Gildenhorn (Democrat): To have more neighborhood events, ethnic festivals and block parties. I propose an independently elected Attorney General to monitor waste, fraud, and corruption.

Mr. John Gloster (D.C. Statehood): We must involve the citizens more in the decision-making process of government. We must make government work for them, and be about securing their interests, rather than just big business. The trickle down economics of our political status quo is killing our people's enthusiasm for government and belief that things can get much better. Finally, we must talk straight to the people, without rose-colored glasses, without the pretty lies politicians think we want to hear, and without the unimaginative tunnel vision that is designed to curtail our possibilities, and channel us in the direction that meets the desires of the status quo's benefactors.

Mr. G.E. Maxwell (Democrat): (a) Local archives and historical societies for each neighborhood. (b) A position between ANC Commissioner and City Councilmember, I believe would help a lot.

Councilmember Carol Schwartz (Republican): (a) Once the voter rolls are properly maintained by the Board of Elections and Ethics and all the names that are not legally there are removed, all citizens will have greater confidence in their ability to be properly counted when they choose to participate in electoral matters, by signing or circulating ballots, initiatives, or recall petitions. (b) I would favor examination and possible revision of our electoral practices to ensure that small parties have a fair opportunity to challenge incumbents who represent the majority party in the District, and who may not have been accountable to the citizens. These might include: proportional representation, preference voting, runoff elections and other options. Once changes were widely discussed, agreed upon and adopted, and new leaders had a better chance of being elected, established politicians would recognize that they must be dedicated and accountable to the people, or risk being unseated by those who will actually address the concerns of the electorate.

Mr. Anthony Williams (Democrat): (a) One of the changes that would strengthen our civic culture would be a change in the way the government does business. This would entail being responsive to customer needs and concerns, identifying areas of the government that need to be improved, and ensuring that our elected officials follow through on promises. As CFO, I set out specific goals and objectives at the beginning of my term and met or exceeded many of these goals including: Improving the operations of the tax department; Paying vendors in a timely manner; Ensuring that critical services were delivered to AIDS patients; Balancing the District's budget two years ahead of schedule; Eliminating the accumulated deficit. Another issue facing the local government is that of lowered expectations. Everything from quality of service delivery, accountability of elected officials, and taking pride in our city, is analyzed from a diminished expectation. For too long, our leaders have failed to set high expectations and meet those expectations. As Mayor, I would expect tremendous improvements in our government which would translate into real civic pride. (b) One of changes that would have the greatest impact is demanding accountability of our elected officials. For too long some members of the Council have neglected the needs of the most vulnerable citizens of the District: seniors and children. One of the reasons I am running for Mayor is to give people a choice. For too long the status quo has failed our citizens. I quit my job as CFO to run for Mayor because I am committed to working with the citizens of Washington, D.C., to restore faith in our government and to deliver the basic services we all expect to receive. I believe that the Mayor must advocate on behalf of all citizens of the District. As CFO, I helped small, minority businesses get paid by the government. Additionally, I balanced the budget to ensure that critical funding was available to fund special education programs for children, senior citizen programs, and critical police functions.

Things to Increase Voter Turnout and Citizen Involvement

1. What are the most important things you will do, if elected, to increase…

(a) voter turnout?
(b) citizen involvement in decision-making?

Things to Increase Voter Turnout and Citizen Involvement

6. What are the most important things you will do, if elected, to increase…

(a) voter turnout?
(b) citizen involvement in decision-making?

Councilmember Harold Brazil (Democrat): In my previous answer, I spoke about empowering the residents of the District by making sure that we deliver the things government is designed to deliver. I sincerely believe that when so many functions are the subject of scandals and court battles and receiverships and federal takeover, our residents are overwhelmed by the lack of functionality. Relieve them of their cynicism, give them a responsive, responsible government and we have a better opportunity to see their active and enthusiastic involvement in our meetings and hearings and in the electoral process.

Mr. Albert Ceccone (Republican): If some citizens do not feel that their vote is important in maintaining a high quality of life in our city, I can only suggest making the privilege of voting, and voting itself, available and accessible to all citizens that are eligible.

Mr. Albert Ceccone (Republican): If some citizens do not feel that their vote is important in maintaining a high quality of life in our city, I can only suggest making the privilege of voting, and voting itself, available and accessible to all citizens that are eligible.

Councilmember Jack Evans (Democrat): (a) I will institute a program through the D.C. Public Schools that will notify young people, when they turn 18, that they may register to vote. I believe that early voter registration will manifest itself in increased voter turnout. (b) As a former ANC Commissioner I understand the importance of citizens' involvement in the decision making process. The citizens' decisions and desires will weigh heavily as I implement my plan as Mayor of the city. I believe we should have more parental involvement in decisions that affect our schools. I will expand existing attempts at having citizens input on the fundamental issues facing the District of Columbia by forming Service Area Committees in different sections of the city. These Service Area Committees will be the vehicles for citizen involvement in decision-making.

Mr. Jeffrey Gildenhorn (Democrat): Work with the University of District of Columbia's students in assisting with voter registrations and elections. I would include the rank and file in decision-making.

Mr. John Gloster (D.C. Statehood): I will be a responsible servant of the people, who is honest and believable, and engages the people in an ongoing dialogue about how to improve our society and the quality of life for all.

Mr. G.E. Maxwell (Democrat): (a) Electronic voting, advanced voting, more polling stations with better accommodations and greater privacy. Contracts to independent organizations that profile information on election issues and candidates. (b) The ability to determine better what goes on in and takes priority in their immediate area will insure more community involvement in decision-making.

Councilmember Carol Schwartz (Republican): (a) As I mentioned in response to another question, if all candidates felt they had a fair chance to be elected, and if incumbents were not so favored by the system, more voters would take the trouble to come to the polls. As mayor, I will look at implementing such changes. I favor as much citizen access to elected officials and candidates for office as possible. I would like to see some of the candidates' forums/debates televised, either on one of the government-run cable stations, on one of the network or public television stations, and/or on public radio. (b) In my view, citizens are already exercising nearly every means available to them today (from public hearings, through e-mail) to make their elected representatives aware of their positions on the issues of which citizens become aware. The District should, however, do a better job of making hearing announcements, pending bills and proposed regulations, and new laws more accessible to the public by placing them all on the Internet and other electronic sources, and by improving more basic means of communication, such as, for example, more effective use of the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions and the D.C. Public Library. My Council office has already been exploring the electronic options, and I will continue to pursue this as mayor. We also need to work on more citizen education on the legislative process, and more meaningful citizen access to the budget process.

Mr. Anthony Williams (Democrat): (a) As CFO, I was able to set goals and objectives and in most cases exceed those objectives. Whether it was paying vendors on time so that critical services to seniors and children were being delivered, balancing our budget two years ahead of schedule, and paying tax refunds within 15 days, I delivered on promises. As Mayor, I will do the same thing. And this will command the respect of the Congress and others and will ultimately result in the return of Home Rule to the District. This will, I believe, increase voter turnout because people will have more faith in their elected officials and will see results. (b) I am the only candidate for Mayor who has truly sought community input into critical decisions affecting our city. As CFO, I not only attended over 150 community meetings, but listened to their feedback. Second, I convened one meeting of all the ANC commissioners to listen to their concerns and explain to them what the CFO's office did and how it affected them and the rest of our citizens. Third, I convened groups of concerned citizens and received actual input into the formulation of the District's 1997 and 1998 budgets, the only balanced budgets during the last five years. Because I was an appointed official in an important post, I believed it was important to receive citizen input on important issues. Likewise, as Mayor, I will act the same way: receiving input from the community before taking action, especially in the area of education, crime prevention and economic development. Instead of making decisions on important issues like the Police Department behind closed doors, as Mayor I will open those doors and let the citizens have input into the decision making process.

Proposals to Bring Full Congressional Representation

7. What do you propose to do to bring full voting Congressional representation and fully autonomous local self-government to the District of Columbia?

Proposals to Bring Full Congressional Representation

What do you propose to do to bring full voting Congressional representation and fully autonomous local self-government to the District of Columbia?

Councilmember Harold Brazil (Democrat): Structural changes are going require changes in the Home Rule Charter. This will require the mayor, the Council and citizens to sit down together and find our common ground so that we can go together to the rest of the country – and to their representatives in Congress – to make our case. Our legal challenge is only part of the job – we have to tell the rest of the country our story in a way they can hear it. One of my staff had visitors from Alaska, last week, and they had no idea that our citizens are expected to pay federal income tax but have no vote in Congress. Their response was heartening – they were appalled at this injustice. I believe that the rest of the country will respond in much the same way. As mayor I expect to act as ambassador from Washington, D. C. and I want the rest of our country to understand what the District faces. If their representatives will not be candid with them, we will deliver the message ourselves. Perhaps we should quote the late Congressman Adam Clayton Powell: "Either let us practice the democracy we are preaching or shut up."

Mr. Albert Ceccone (Republican): It is only through citizen participation that Congress will allow full voting Congressional representation and fully autonomous local self-government for the District of Columbia.

Councilmember Kevin Chavous (Democrat): I have met and will continue to meet frequently with key members of Congress. I will lobby for true self-determination for the District and the right of our citizens to have the District run by their elected officials. As Mayor, I will represent the interests of the District before Congress and urge Congressional action based on our recommendations. After two years of balanced budgets, the District is moving rapidly toward returning to an elected government. The last budget process illustrated that an improved working relationship between the Congress, the Mayor, the D.C. City Council and the Control Board is possible and can be productive. As Mayor, I will emphasize centralized information flow and regularly scheduled meetings to streamline and enhance the working relationship between all of the four aforementioned parties and to set goals for the implementation of the prescribed management reforms.

Councilmember Jack Evans (Democrat): The first thing we have to do to bring fully autonomous local self-government to the District of Columbia is to regain the limited self-government that we lost. In order for that to occur, we must put the Control Board out of business, and show we can manage the city well. Then and only then can we realistically demand full voting representation that all American citizens are entitled to. I fully support the law suit being filed by the law firm of Covington & Burling, and the D.C. Corporation Counsel to attain voting representation in Congress. We should settle for nothing less than a voting member in the House and two senators. Our immediate aim should be to restore the D.C. delegate's voting rights in the Committee of the Whole. Amending the Constitution to award the District voting representation in the Congress would be the most permanent and concrete guarantee. Realistically, however, this avenue has already failed once and the current prospects are not improved. Instead, we should aggressively support the current effort to seek redress and due process through the courts by arguing that lack of representation in Congress represents a violation of the Constitution of the United States. If this law suit should fail I would propose a legislative remedy in the United States Congress which will entail the House and the Senate voting to give full voting congressional representation to the District of Columbia.

\Mr. Jeffrey Gildenhorn (Democrat): To show Congress that we are a responsible, self-sustaining government.

Mr. John Gloster (D.C. Statehood): We must achieve statehood, or at least something that brings all of the rights and powers of statehood. To do this, I will continue to lobby friends and foes on Capitol Hill, but more importantly, I will win the hearts and minds of the citizens of the District. When the citizens of DC are solidly behind their government, we can take on Capitol Hill much more bravely. The citizens of DC have friends and family in North Carolina, Maryland, Virginia, and all around the world. If the people are fully comfortable with the government they are being asked to support, we can move mountains.

Mr. G.E. Maxwell (Democrat): Strengthen individual neighborhoods for challenges to the congress independent of other efforts in the computer age. Reduce the tax Burden (budget) to achieve an independent stand and population and tax base to make necessary proper representation. I will make the District One Million Strong.

Councilmember Carol Schwartz (Republican): Let me point out that I have already started improving relations with Congress and will not wait for the Control Board to end. Congress would appreciate me as Mayor and Hill-City relations would improve significantly. And, as stated above, I would retain Congressional faith in the District through appointment of a strong city administrator and committed and skilled leaders in various departments of the executive branch. I consider each member in Congress a key player because each member in Congress could help or hurt DC. However, I have good relations with the Republicans who control Congress, as well as many Democrats, and I would start with the leadership of the DC committees and then go to the top leadership. I would appeal to the leadership of both parties' sense of fair play and equity and ask them to provide District residents the plain and simple rights that every other American citizen possesses -- primarily, the right to control their own destinies. I would also begin relationships with the national parties since they, many times, are the key to the Congressional members' re-election - and use them to appeal to all of America for equal rights under the Constitution. I want the Voting Rights Amendment re-enacted if our present legal actions fail; and with my leadership as mayor, I believe we can have that which is rightfully ours. All we need is for you to endorse me and to help me win on November 3, 1998 and the rest will be history -- good history -- for you and our city.

Mr. Anthony Williams (Democrat): First, I would command the respect of the Congress and of the Nation by demonstrating that we can run an efficient and cost effective government. That we can open our schools on time and educate our children; that our police department is not plagued by scandals and fraudulent activities by senior members of the force; that our roads are derivable and that our seniors are cared for. Only by delivering these services effectively can we begin to seek the type of representation that we deserve. As Mayor, I will ensure that we accomplish the critical goals of my administration. We must educate our children, provide access to quality, high-paying jobs for our citizens in the private sector, and restore Home Rule. By balancing the District's budget two years ahead of schedule, I have put the District two years closer to Home Rule. I will work with Members of Congress.

Most Important Things for Citizens to Do to Make D.C. the Capital of Democracy

8. What are the most important things that citizens of the District of Columbia can do to help make D.C. the capital of democracy?

Most Important Things for Citizens to Do to Make D.C. the Capital of Democracy

8. What are the most important things that citizens of the District of Columbia can do to help make D.C. the capital of democracy?

Councilmember Harold Brazil (Democrat): I sincerely believe that the SPIRIT of democracy is alive and well in the District. In the last year, the Council has held hearings on Medicaid contracts and personnel issues, on problems in the police department and on police redistricting, on reform of our business regulatory structure, on economic development and on tax reform. So many citizens have wanted to testify at these hearings that they have stretched into the night -- until eleven o'clock and midnight and sometimes well into the early morning hours. When the School Trustees overseeing the public schools attempted to close certain schools, the public needed to be heard. When the Police Chief and Booz-Allen and the Control Board wanted to change the boundaries of the police district, the residents who were involved in neighborhood watch programs and Orange Hat patrols wanted an opportunity to speak. It was not the appointed members of the Control Board or Congress who listened to them, but the elected representatives in the Council. D.C. residents want to be heard, and they want whoever is in charge to be accountable for the decisions they make on behalf of the District. It is these citizens' vigorous participation -- especially in the voting booth -- and their faith in the process, that will strengthen democracy in Washington, D.C.

Mr. Albert Ceccone (Republican): The most important thing that citizens of the District of Columbia can do to help make D.C. the capital of democracy is to achieve full voting Congressional Representation now.

Councilmember Kevin Chavous (Democrat): Citizens of the District of Columbia can work with their elected officials to ensure that an agenda for preserving the process of citizen participation with regard to having an effective say in the operation of government is maintained; and to demand accountability from their elected officials and the Control Board.

Councilmember Jack Evans (Democrat): The most important things that citizens of the District of Columbia can do to help make the District of Columbia the capital of democracy is to demand a better managed city. Citizens must demand better fiscal responsibility, a better educational system for our children, safer streets and accountability of our elected officials. By making these demands, citizens will become more involved in the governance of our city. This participation will further open their eyes to the lack of democracy in the city. We should begin a crusade for justice that is not waged only by citizens but by scholars, legal professionals, civic leaders, and public personalities. The crusade for justice represents an opportunity to unite all our citizens in what could be an uplifting and empowering experience. If we really do believe in "people power" and the promise of "participatory democracy," our crusade should be a citywide renewal of our respect for one another and the pivotal point for achieving full self-government.

Mr. Jeffrey Gildenhorn (Democrat): Participation in local government such as ANC's, Boards and Commissions or higher elected positions.

Mr. John Gloster (D.C. Statehood): We must hold our leaders responsible for their actions, and responsible for their words. If a politician tells you something in Ward 8, find out what s/he is telling Ward 3! Do not stand for discrepancies. If a politician is saying s/he stands for a strong University of the District of Columbia, examine his or her voting record and testimony while in office. If s/he did not stand firm for UDC while on City Council, or as CFO, why should you believe his or her campaign rhetoric now?! Take back your politics from the big moneyed interests. Do not decide who you will vote for based on what you see and read in the status quo media. If you do, you are asking to be misled. Find out for yourself! Go to debates. Get the candidates' literature. Research their past voting records. Think outside "the box". And, most importantly, look for candidates outside of the two status quo political parties. Their monopoly on our government has made them smug and arrogant. They take your vote for granted. Take it back! Even if it is only for a short while, teach them humility by voting for the DC Statehood Party, for a change. That is the only way they will ever sit up and take notice, and reform their act.

Mr. G.E. Maxwell (Democrat): We need to increase the # of residents that act like they live here, take charge of their square and participate in the democratic process.

Councilmember Carol Schwartz (Republican): One of the District's greatest resources, in my view, is a well-informed, active electorate. Just in the past few years, District citizens have demonstrated in many ways, through initiatives, demonstrations, lobbying of Congressional officials, and participation in the public meetings convened by District elected officials and the appointed entities, that they value democracy and expect to be heard. In this context, I am fully supportive of the lawsuit that the Office of the Corporation Counsel expects to file to challenge the District's deprivation of voting rights in the United States Congress. I would like to see District citizens undertake efforts to achieve greater voter registration in the District of Columbia. As you know, many residents who have relocated to the District continue to maintain their voter registration in some other jurisdiction, presumably so that they can retain the voting representation in Congress that we in the District have always lacked. I want their involvement here. I believe that involved District citizens should continue to do all those laudable things they have already been doing -- participate in electoral politics and public policy debate at every level, and encourage their fellow citizens to do the same. The less than 5% and less than 7% voter participation in the last two special elections is deplorable. I would like all political parties to promote new ideas and new faces to stimulate the electorate.

Mr. Anthony Williams (Democrat): The first thing that citizens can do to make D.C. the capital of democracy is to vote for leaders that stand for accountability, integrity, honesty, and sound management practices. As CFO, I stood for all of these principles and practiced them in my daily affairs. For example, I promised to quit as CFO if our financial operations were not straightened out. And we straightened them out. I promised to restore integrity in our financial operations. And we restored integrity in our financial operations. I promised to clean-up our tax department and process tax refunds within 15 days of receipt. And we cleaned-up our tax operations and processed tax refunds in 15 days. I promised to get vendors paid within 30-45 days. And we paid vendors within 30-45 days. I promised to balance the District's budget and create a surplus so that we can use these resources for critical services for our children and seniors. And we did balance the budget and create a surplus. The citizens need to elect a leader that understands accountability, integrity, and knows how to get things done. I am that leader.

Questionnaire and Forum Invitation

Fourth of July 1998

Dear Mayoral Candidate:

The Stand Up for Democracy coalition is conducting an important survey among Mayoral candidates on D.C. democracy issues. We developed the questions as a group.

We will compile your complete and unedited thoughts and opinions into one report, question by question, side-by-side with other Mayoral candidates who respond by Friday, July 24th. Those who do not respond will also be listed in the report. The full report will be broadcast publicly and distributed to citizens by coalition members. We look forward to your thoughtful and timely response.

All the best,

Timothy Cooper
Democracy First

July 14, 1998

Dear Mayoral Candidate:

The Stand Up for Democracy coalition is pleased to announce that it will be sponsoring an important public forum for mayoral candidates to discuss D.C. democracy issues.

This DEMOCRACY FORUM will be held from 6:30 to 9 p.m. on Wednesday, August 12, 1998, at One Judiciary Square, in Room 1030.

News 4 reporter Tom Sherwood, co-author of Dream City: Race, Power, and the Decline of Washington, D.C. (1994), will moderate the event.

Also at this forum, Stand Up for Democracy will publicly release the report with mayoral candidate’s complete and unedited responses to Stand up for Democracy’s survey of mayoral candidates (see reverse side of this letter).

Mayoral candidates who wish to participate should RSVP Timothy Cooper, Executive Director of Democracy First, at (202) 244-9479 by 5 p.m. on Friday, July 24, 1998.

Best wishes,

Timothy Cooper

Stand Up for Democracy Coalition Mission Statement

The mission of the Stand Up for Democracy Coalition is to obtain full democracy for all residents of the District of Columbia with equal rights under the Constitution and Human Rights consistent with international law, and to promote good governance for the welfare of the people.

The Stand Up for Democracy Coalition protests:

• Stripping democracy from District of Columbia residents.
• Taking power from our elected officials including the District of Columbia Delegate, the Mayor, the District of Columbia Council and the Board of Education.
• Imposing the Control Board, the Chief Financial Officer, the Emergency Transitional Education Board of Trustees and the Chief Management Officer.
• Taxation without representation.
• Denying our right to tax all income earned in the District of Columbia.
• Ending the federal payment, which partially compensated the District of Columbia for use of its services and for tax exemptions on property and non-profits.
• Changing District of Columbia's criminal code without the consent of the governed.
• Interference in our local affairs, local laws, and local finances.
• The disregard of our long-standing petition for Statehood.

Voting Rights U.S. Public Said Residents of Washington, D.C. Should Have

Question: "I am going to read you some statements about Washington, D.C., where the federal government has authority to decide how that city is governed. For each statement, I would like you to tell me if you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree. First… (Question number is order in which statement was read.)

1. U.S. citizens who are residents of Washington, D.C. should have voting representatives in the U.S. Congress, like other U.S. citizens.

2. Residents of Washington, D.C. should have the right to elect their own local officials to run their city government, like other U.S. cities.

Source: Mark Richards: "U.S. Public Opinion on Principles of Governance for Washington, District of Columbia." Telephone interviews by Bruskin/Goldring Research with a nationally representative sample of 1,049 U.S. adults between Sept. 12-14, 1997. Margin of error +3.2%. Full report with history of voting rights available from Richards at 202/347-8822.

Congressional Voting Rights for District Residents

1. U.S. citizens who are residents of Washington, D.C. should have voting representatives in the U.S. Congress, like other U.S. citizens.

Source: Mark Richards: "U.S. Public Opinion on Principles of Governance for Washington, District of Columbia." Telephone interviews by Bruskin/Goldring Research with a nationally representative sample of 1,049 U.S. adults between Sept. 12-14, 1997. Margin of error +3.2%. Full report with history of voting rights available from Richards at 202/347-8822.

Local Self-Government for District Residents

2. Residents of Washington, D.C. should have the right to elect their own local officials to run their city government, like other U.S. cities.

Source: Mark Richards: "U.S. Public Opinion on Principles of Governance for Washington, District of Columbia." Telephone interviews by Bruskin/Goldring Research with a nationally representative sample of 1,049 U.S. adults between Sept. 12-14, 1997. Margin of error +3.2%. Full report with history of voting rights available from Richards at 202/347-8822.

The Trend: Percent of U.S. Adults Who Support D.C. Home Rule

More Detail

Source: Mark Richards: "U.S. Public Opinion on Principles of Governance for Washington, District of Columbia." Telephone interviews by Bruskin/Goldring Research with a nationally representative sample of 1,049 U.S. adults between Sept. 12-14, 1997. Margin of error +3.2%. Full report with history of voting rights available from Richards at 202/347-8822.