headcand.gif (1946 bytes)
hruler04.gif (5511 bytes)
DCWatch home  Archives home

Back to Carol Schwartz’s main page

Carol Schwartz for Mayor Committee
1005 Seventh Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 393 7300

RESPONSES TO SIERRA CLUB QUESTIONNAIRE

“RESTORE THE CORE” The Sierra Club is actively working to restore DC as an attractive place for people to live and work, businesses to compete and thrive, and governments to serve and lead. Our “Restore the Core” campaign advocates improving underutilized urban resources in DC as an alternative to sprawl producing development in the suburbs.

Q1: The Sierra Club strongly supports the speedy redevelopment and environmental restoration of the South East Federal Center as a means of retaining federal jobs in the District. What would you do to promote the retention of federal jobs in the District?

As mayor, I will continue to assert my support for federal job retention in the District of Columbia at every opportunity. I think it is in the best interest of the federal government to view the District of Columbia as the core of the federal government's regional efforts and to act accordingly. My record on the Council shows that as Chair of the Committee on Local, Regional and Federal Affairs, I have repeatedly met with and emphasized to key members of congressional committees dealing with the District of Columbia the importance of retaining federal jobs here in the District. As the federal government continues to downsize, I will continue to encourage its representatives at the executive level to consolidate as many regional federal workers as possible in the District of Columbia. At both the executive and legislative levels, I have urged federal support of the South East Federal Center. I have spoken with Representative Tom Davis (R-VA), chair of the House Government Oversight Subcommittee on the District, about the importance of retaining jobs at the Navy Yard in Southeast.

In addition, I supported the Ronald Reagan International Trade Center and the renovation of the John Wilson Building and use of portions of the building as office space for federal workers to finance the renovation. As mayor, I will continue to work with federal representatives for federal worker retention in the District of Columbia.

Q2: The Sierra Club and other DC groups support a split-rate property tax system whereby occupied residential and commercial property is taxed at a lower rate than vacant or abandoned property. Do you support this type of development tax incentive?

Tax reduction is a major plank in my campaign for mayor. I have always been committed to tax reduction and during my previous term on the Council in the 1980s, I succeeded in getting income taxes reduced from the 11% that it used to be to the still-too-high 9.5% that it is today. I also introduced legislation back then that reduced estate taxes, making them comparable to estate taxes in much of the rest of the country. I also proposed sales tax reductions during the 1980s, and during this current (FY 99) budget process, I nearly got this approved along with a reduction in personal property taxes until a $70 million deficit was discovered in the school system that made it unfeasible. We did, however, succeed in including $11.5 million worth of tax reductions in the FY 99 budget, which I supported.

I would seriously explore the split tax rate. I think that the split-rate tax can be an incentive for growth and job creation. Split-rate taxes could reduce taxes on homes apartment buildings, and neighborhood businesses and would go a long way to address the problem of absentee slumlords and owners of vacant lots and blighted buildings by forcing them to pay higher taxes.

I have met with the Citizens for Socially Responsible Tax Reform and the Washington Regional Network for Livable Communities on this matter. I have told them of my interest in exploring further the idea of using split-rate taxes as an incentive for selling and developing property owned by the District government, such as vacant lots and boarded up housing units. It is a concept that has worked in other cities. Pittsburgh, PA is one example. I would promote tax policies that actually recognize industriousness — a first for our city. I want a shift to lower, fairer taxes for all that is long overdue.

CONVENTION CENTER. The Shaw Neighborhood is the proposed location of the new DC convention center. The center and its associated commercial traffic are inconsistent with the residential character of Shaw and present numerous unresolved environmental problems. The Sierra Club favors construction of the new convention center at an alternative site north of Union Station. This site is not residential, can more adequately handle trucks, provides far more expansion space, is near one of the City's major intermodal transportation hubs and would cost far less to build than at Shaw.

Will you work to halt additional planning, financing, and pro-construction activities for the Shaw site until a full assessment of the Union Station is completed?

This has been an extremely difficult issue on a number of different levels. After much consideration, and with some misgivings, I voted in support of the Mt. Vernon Square site for the new convention center. I realize there is no perfect site for this center. Mt. Vernon Square does indeed raise some questions about community impact, environmental mitigation, expansion and parking to name a few. But let’s make no mistake about the fact that many of the same questions also exist surrounding the Union Station site. Chief among such questions is just how much the land would actually cost. Unlike the Mount Vernon site, the District does not own a majority of the land and the CSX portion of the site itself is stated to be $70 million, but who knows? Moreover, the CSX site may require millions of dollars in environmental remediation with no certainty that such costs would be assumed by CSX. There are but a few certainties regarding this matter. It is certain that hospitality is the District’s number one industry. It is also certain that if the District does not move forward with this project another jurisdiction will. For too many years, we have witnessed the folly of the District's well-earned reputation for lethargy in the area of economic development. As a consequence, we have watched the lion's share of new economic development going to Maryland and Virginia.

My concerns about the alternative site are based on the costs of mitigating environmental damage at the Union Station site, other potentially unknown negative factors associated with that site, and the likelihood that neighborhoods not so distant from that site would oppose the site, while most affected groups and residents of the Shaw community have supported the Mount Vernon site. After consultation with the GAO, I learned that their report would not be available until the end of the year. For the same reasons that I found that delay untenable, I also found the delay necessary for the exploration of all factors associated with the Union Station site imprudent. The likelihood that the District would lose any convention center to the suburbs, just as we lost the Redskins, in the meantime, is too great in my estimation to delay this important economic development project.

3. ROCK CREEK PARK. The National Park Service is currently reviewing several options for the future management of Rock Creek Park. The Sierra Club is on record as supporting alternative 2½, a blend of Park Service Alternatives 2 and 3 (See attached description.) Among its components, this Alternative favors closing Beach Drive to commuter traffic 7 days a week, not just on weekends, and improving and widening the bike trail leading from downtown to Beach Drive.

Will you support Alternative 2% and advocate for its adoption by the Park Service?

The issue of whether or not Rock Creek Parkway should be used by commuters during the weekdays, as compared with the views of those who would like to see no commuter traffic at all or with those who would prefer to see an HOV-2 mechanism applied during rush hours, is a challenge for any policy maker. As an elected official representing all of the residents of the District of Columbia, I could not support any plan that would favor one particular constituency at the expense of others. That is, in part, why I tend to favor alternative scenario 1. I think traffic alterations that would pour additional traffic onto District thoroughfares at rush hour would be difficult to justify unless there were an offset designed for the benefit of District of Columbia residents. As a member of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments’ Transportation Planning Board, I recognize the value of efficient transportation and would consider the institution of HOV-2 rules during rush hour, which might alleviate traffic, permit enjoyment of the Park by more citizens and provide a means of maintaining the Park and its infrastructure.

4. ANACOSTIA RIVER/ANACOSTIA PARK. The proposal to permit a commercial developer to build a theme park on Kingman and Heritage Islands in the Anacostia River was narrowly approved by the Council in December.

Do you support or oppose the proposal put forth by National Children’s Island, Inc. Island Development Corp., and Contessa Bina Sella Di Monteluce?

After much consideration and a visit to the proposed Island site, I voted against the proposed development on Kingman and Heritage Islands because of the damage I believe it would do to the quality of life of long-time residents in the immediate area.

If opposed, would you support the development of an alternative, more natural development plan that does not impose an entry fee on DC residents?

If an adequate process were pursued, including a full environmental assessment, and if it were made clear to me that District residents would benefit more than they would be adversely impacted, and if desirable jobs were to be provided to DC residents, including our youth, I would support such a project.

5. RECYCLING. Since the enactment of the City’s Recycling Act more than a decade ago, Washington residents have received curbside recycling collection service for only about four years. The Barry administration has refused to resume collections, despite the fact that recycling has historically cost the City less per ton than trash disposal, and despite a series of injunctions won by the Sierra Club. In May, CFO Barnett canceled the existing contract and put out a new contract out for bid. The low bid came in at $3.8 million, far higher than the amount of the contract she canceled. The line-item appropriation for recycling in the FY 1999 budget is $3.12 million.

Will you advocate for the reinstatement of recycling services and their continuation even if the budget line-item appears insufficient?

Since the suspension of the curbside recycling program in 1997 I have repeatedly contacted the mayor and the Department of Public Works to advocate for the resumption of curbside recycling and to assess the status of the program. I emphasized that recycling is a very important program and that we must not get out of the habit of recycling. I wanted the program reinstated yesterday and I am on record both through letters and statements at Council hearings as strongly supporting its reinstatement.

In March of 1997, I called for the Mayor and the Chief Financial Officer to put the then unexpended snow/ice removal funds into recycling. And I have requested that the Department of Public Works provide the Council with the statutorily mandated solid waste management plan. I do not think that the budget line-item is insufficient for a properly managed program by a government that is truly committed to the ideals of recycling and the reuse of recyclable materials.

At my Council office, we participate fully with the devoted members of environmental groups who assemble each month at One Judiciary Square to collect recyclable materials Bless them for their work!

TREE PLANTING/MAINTENANCE. The viability of our urban forest is integral to the attractiveness and livability of our City. Trees improve air quality, moderate temperature and abate noise. Though once known as “the city of trees,” Washington has zeroed out its budget for tree planting and maintenance, with the result that the number and health of our trees is declining visibly, year by year.

Q: Will you take a stand to fully fund this program?

I have supported tree-planting efforts in all the wards of Washington, DC I have commended the organizers of the Columbia Road tree planting project in their efforts to beautify and shade Washington streets for the long term Another approach to consider for beautification of our city streets, is the possibility of planting trees in front yards of homes in neighborhoods where curbs are too narrow, according to existing regulations, to permit tree boxes on the sidewalks Our government has failed to provide sufficient funding to plant and maintain trees I would consider resuming funding this program after comprehensive review of how the program was managed in the past and how we could improve future maintenance of our tree stock I, too, want to see the “City of Trees” deserving of that title once again.

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. Metro rail and bus services are essential to a cleaner environment and more robust economy in the District. They reduce commuter traffic volume and congestion, reduce air pollution, allow people of all economic levels to travel efficiently throughout the City, and spur economic growth. However, intra-city Metrorail service is limited, and recent cutbacks in intra-City Metrobus service have reduced the effectiveness of Metro as a tool for DC's economic growth.

Would you advocate for the following measures as a means to increase Metro ridership and improve service: (a) reversal of 1997 Metrobus cutbacks (particularly in Anacostia); (b) extension of Metrorail service hours; and (c) improvement of the fare discount program?

Will you advocate for improved bicycle access in the District, including bike friendly road and metro policies, as well as increased funding for development and maintenance of bike trails in the City?

As chair of the Council’s Committee on Local, Regional and Federal Affairs, I have oversight responsibility of how District funds are spent on the Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority (WMATA) or Metro I take a strong interest in Metro construction and in the maintenance of our region’s $10 billion investment in public transportation I am a consistent advocate of providing transportation services to those in need as the proper alternative to more automobile traffic the city. I convened four oversight hearings in my Committee, at which I emphasized to Metro officials the importance of making certain that new buses were equally distributed throughout the region.

On July 13, 1998, I am holding a hearing on workforce development at which I plan to examine ways to improve Metro access to jobs in the suburbs for unemployed and underemployed residents Metrobus service, in many areas of our city where Metrorail has not and will not be extended, is the principal, and in some cases the only transportation method to many of our citizens, especially our seniors. I support, in conjunction with the existing Regional Mobility Plan, a review of the need for enhanced bus service funded at the pre-1997 levels.

On the issue of fare discounts, I introduced legislation that was unanimously passed by the Council providing fare discounts for special education students between 19 and 22 years of age — the limit before was only 18 years of age.

I think that multi-modal transportation plans are essential to future survival of the city and its neighborhoods. I view bicycle commuting as an important part of the plan. In addition, I have promoted bicycle access to Metrorail during my Committee hearings on WMATA. I endorse the Department of Public Work’s efforts to promote a new plan for DC, emphasizing light rail, water transport, bicycling and an automobile-free inner city core area.

8 PERSONAL BACKGROUND. Finally, please describe what you have done to improve the quality of the natural environment in the Distinct of Columbia.

As 1st Vice Chair of the Transportation Planning Board (TPB), I have direct input into regional transportation planning issues and have contributed to the TPB’s vision for planning and implementing a regional, intermodal, multi-modal transportation system. I participated in the Washington Board of Trade Potomac Conference’s Regional Planning Committee. I consistently emphasize the importance of public transportation for the District of Columbia over freeways. I will seriously consider the WMATA Regional Mobility Plan’s recommendation for renewed regional and federal cooperation as a means of solving WMATA’s rising infrastructure costs and of preserving the region's $10 billion investment in public transportation. I continue to urge multi- modal transportation plans that include the use of bicycles and bicycle access on Metro. I support the use of “Park and Ride” lots to encourage suburban Metro ridership. I recently looked into the possibility of going through the Council of Governments' (COG) cooperative purchasing agreement to have the District purchase more recycled goods. Through this initiative, l learned that the District had not even been participating (through the Department of Administrative Services) in these regional meetings, and I have succeeded in getting the chief procurement officer to send a representative.

In my last stint on the City Council in the 1980s, l served as representative to COG, where I worked on many environmental issues affecting the region, including airline and auto emissions standards. I recently became the District's representative to COG’s Committee on Noise Abatement at National and Dulles Airports. My votes as a Councilmember, both now and in the 1 980s, have always taken into serious consideration environmental concerns.

In my long involvement with the Metropolitan Police Boys and Girls Clubs, I have worked on cleanups of clubhouses — raked leaves, painted walls, etc. I frequently write letters to commend groups I learn have participated in neighborhood beautification projects.

My involvement in improving the quality of our natural environment is personal. Years ago, I spent both money and time in planting and improving public parkland adjacent to my former home. I now live in a condominium, where private waste haulers pick up our trash, and I personally continue to recycle all my disposals.


Send mail with questions or comments to webmaster@dcwatch.com
Web site copyright ©DCWatch (ISSN 1546-4296)