QUESTIONS RESPONSES TO LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
BY CANDIDATE GREG RHETT
JULY 28, 1998

1. Name your three committee choices? Select one arid explain how your being on that committee will contribute to that area of public life. What, if any, legislation do you feel is needed m the area? Why? What would be the first bill you would introduce?

My three Committee choices are: (1) Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (2) Economic Development (4) Judiciary

My one selection is the Committee on the Judiciary. My being on this committee will bring the voice of realism to the committee. Being a Civic Association President has given me broad insight as to how our quality of living is greatly impacted by the delivery of services from agencies under the jurisdiction of this committee. I’ve prepared and given much testimony before this committee, demanding that the council more aggressively exercise its oversight responsibilities. I know that we must have a fair court system, efficient and effective police, fire, and emergency medical services. We have witnessed the extraordinary cost and embarrassment caused by a dysfunctional Department of Corrections. I understand that as Public Servants, councilmembers have fiduciary responsibility. By that I mean that Councilmembers have the responsibility of ensuring that tax dollars are properly and efficiently utilized. Councilmember Rhett absolutely agrees with the premise that Citizens have a right to have a voice in who manages agencies under the jurisdiction of this committee, Citizens have a right to expect excellence in the function of agencies under the jurisdiction of this committee, and Citizens have a right to demand excellence and accountability from those tasked with setting policies and implementing policies. My thought is that the voice of the citizen and taxpayer has been unwisely overlooked and ignored during many Committee Hearings. I will be the advocate for the rights of Citizens and taxpayers. Our city, recently, has suffered embarrassment due to the perceived lack of protection of the lives and property of our citizens, both free and incarcerated. Citizens have witnessed the dramatic effects of businesses and citizens leaving the District of Columbia because of the perception that our city is not a safe and secure environment in which to raise a family or do business. This perception must be turned around, and turned around quickly. Not by gimmicks, but by old-fashioned management and strong legislative oversight.

I’m not certain that additional legislation is needed right away. What we must do is enforce laws already on the books and ensure that we have quality managers running the various agencies and commissions. Well managed and structured Confirmation Hearings is a start.

Without adequate information, I think it premature to say what specific Bills should be introduced once I'm officially on the council.

2. Identify an agency over which your “chosen” committee has oversight, and assume you are m charge of the confirmation hearings for the newly appointed director of that agency, briefly summarize how you would structure the hearings.

The Metropolitan Police Department. My idea is to structure Confirmation Hearings in a way that any factual and objective information can be gained from both proponents and opponents. My objective is to have citizen input, so that the Confirmee, will understand the importance of gaining the trust and respect of his or her new “bosses” (taxpayers). I would structure the confirmation hearings for a new police chief as follows: After providing adequate Public Notice throughout each Ward, I would insist that the Confirmee be at the Hearing from start to finish. I would schedule the hearing for a time that is convenient for Citizens. Next, I would call the proceedings to order, then I would lay out what the purpose and mission of the Department were, what the expectations are for a Chief, what the qualifying criteria is. Next I would allow each committee member to give the perspective of those whom they represent. I would swear in each witness and those appearing for confirmation. Next I would bring forward citizens to gain their insight and advice. I would ensure that both opponents and proponents share equal time. Next I would bring forward randomly chosen employees of the department to give their insight on what has worked and what challenges are faced by the department. Then I would call for the Nominee to explain to all of us why he or she should be hired. I would allow an adequate opportunity for written testimony to be submitted by those unable to attend, before making any final decisions.

3. One of the reasons for the District government’s management problems is the problem of vacancies in key posts. For example, after Vernon Hawkins was removed from his post as Director of Human Services, he was not replaced for a year. Not until this July were nominations of three members of the Historic Preservation Review Board presented to Committee on Consumer and Regulatory Affairs. If you serve on a committee that has oversight over an agency in which the post of Director remains vacant for six months or more or a Board or commission that has trouble functioning because of vacancies, what, if any action will you take?

Ultimately, the Mayor has the responsibility to administer the personnel functions of the District, including appointing or dismissing department heads. The Mayor also has the responsibility to appoint members of boards, commissions and other agencies. The Council serves to confirm or deny appointments.

As a Councilmember, I can certainly voice the citizens’ impatience, and outrage about dysfunctional agencies due to vacancies. I certainly can hold investigative hearings on pressing matters. If necessary, I certainly will urge my colleagues to utilize our combined authority to create, abolish or organize any office, agency department or instrumentality of the government. I certainly will remind my colleagues that the citizens have invested more than $30 million to fund the work of this body, therefore, we have an obligation to see to it that the peoples work be done effectively, efficiently, and honestly.

4. Under what circumstances would you vote against the confirmation of a Mayoral appointee?

There are many potential circumstances that may call for a “No” vote of a Mayoral nominee. Bad references, little or no specific experience, having no real understanding of their proposed roles within a given agency or commission, morale issues, residency, criminal convictions, etc. Particularly, I will vote “No,” if all evidence presented confirms that the individual is blatantly unqualified for the position! I am mindful of the fact that no Mayoral nominee has ever been turned down by the D.C. Council.

5. Budgets for District of Columbia agencies are often vague and fail to explain the relationship between expenditures and program objectives. If you feel the budget for your “chosen” agency fails to reveal enough about the services the taxpayers are buying, what, if anything, will you do?

Budget oversight is a key element of oversight that the Council has. Obviously, we can do much better in managing the budget of the Metropolitan Police Department. We must ensure that the Citizen has input and say in the budget process. Councilmember Rhett will utilize the authority to call for public hearings, or investigative hearings to get to adequate information to taxpayers. Councilmember Rhett will utilize the power of the subpoena to ensure that taxpayers know the whole truth about the expenditure of our tax dollars. I simply will not accept, “we don't know where the money went.” Accountability and excellence must be paramount. Councilmember Rhett will not hesitate to establish a regularly scheduled performance review process for Metropolitan Police Department. I will work with the Chief to establish and meet benchmarks, goals, and objectives. My responsibility is to ensure that he or she has the adequate tools necessary for optimum performance.