Few Laughs
Dear Jokers:
Let me make one thing clear: I am not the person who titled Kathy
Patterson's message in this issue, “Councilmember Talks Trash.” She did that
herself. Self deprecating humor is perhaps the only form of humor allowed in today's
America. Other than that, Mrs. Grundy is in charge more firmly than she ever was in
Victorian England. In November, the idiots at the New York Times fired 22
employers at their Norfolk office, and one in New York, and issued warning letters to
twenty other employees. The people who got warning letters had merely received jokes over
the Internet; the ones who were fired had committed the unpardonable offense of forwarding
those jokes to others. These messages were the kinds of joke lists that we all get and
forward, and that give us the little laughs that brighten our days. The dolts at the Times,
including its publisher, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., argue that employees don't have
any right to make jokes, since jokes may be offensive, and it is necessary to prohibit
anything in the workplace that may raise a complaint of sexual harassment or
discrimination.
I was reminded of this incident by the current issue of the Costco
membership magazine, in which a column on making presentations recommends that speakers
avoid using any jokes in their speeches, since humor is dangerous. I hate to sound like an
old fogy, but I'm glad that I was born during a time when humor wasn't a firing offense,
when speakers were advised to start a speech with a joke or two, and when a joke was more
likely to get a laugh than a lawsuit. Please laugh today, make a joke today, and screw the
s.o.b.'s.
Schools are a big subject again in themail. Tonight, Mayor Williams
revealed that pressure from the Control Board is likely to change what options will be
given to the citizens in the November election, and hinted that a political compromise of
a partially elected, partially appointed board may be the only option given to citizens
— either to accept or to reject. This is an option that neither the Mayor nor the
City Council likes — and that has no educational rationale behind it — but
citizens are probably going to be asked to accept it to make the politicians happy. Let
others know in the next issue of themail what you think of the proposals that will
probably be unveiled tomorrow. For background on the issue, see http://www.dcwatch.com/schools — there are
two new links there to Mark Richards's timeline of DC schools governance and to his
listing of some Internet resources on school governance issues.
Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com
###############
It is most revealing to note that Alice Rivlin admitted last week that the
qualitative difference between elected and appointed boards nationwide is inconclusive.
Therefore, in view of DC's alarming paucity of elective democracy, both at the legislative
and Congressional level, it is prudent to side with the proponents of an elected school
board. Moreover, it is height of hubris on the part of Mayor Williams to assume that his
well intentioned but nevertheless authoritarian plan to command the D.C. school system
will yield results superior to the lackluster present-day system. To date, he has simply
not made his case as to why his plan contains the essential assets necessary to elevate
the system to higher levels of academic achievement. Furthermore, the minority position of
the D.C. Council, which likewise advocates for an appointed Board, as well as a reduced
size of the Board, smacks of hypocrisy. Council members have cited other state school
board sizes in arguing for downsizing the number of school board representatives, while at
the same time ignoring the identical comparative argument for why D.C. should expand its
legislature, based on these same kinds of state comparisons. Until that blatant
contradiction is reconciled, the latter shouldn't be reduced in size without expanding the
former.
In general philosophic terms, the effectiveness of reducing the size of DC
public school classrooms would do far more to raise the academic standards of the schools
than any reduction in the number of elected school board members. Furthermore, in our
theoretical yet anemic democracy, the mayor should feel it incumbent on him to utilize the
political process to influence the composition of any school board of his liking by
running a slate of candidates citywide. In this way, he may have a powerful influence on
the character of the school board while maintaining principles of democracy. Indeed, city
council members should likewise be obliged to draw up lists of candidates, or promote
someone to run alongside of them to buttress their own campaigns. To simply disregard the
tenants of an established democracy in favor of the peculiar premise that “an
appointed few make qualitative more” is woefully absurd, and flies in the face of
reason. Therefore, the notion that democracy and improved educational standards in this
city are mutually exclusive should be rejected.
Nevertheless, it is self-evident that the city requires a new breed of
school board official and a revitalized Board of Education that is held strictly
accountable for its performance by the City Council. However, the question begs itself:
Where was the city council during the past 25 years of DC public school failures? It had
oversight responsibility for the public school system, but failed to exercise it
vigorously. Perhaps if the Council now starts to do its job and holds the school system to
account while the mayor and others begin to reinvigorate the school board election process
by running slates of better candidates (drawn from the deep well of educators, both local
and national, who live in the city), then we may end up with the best of both worlds: a
better school system and the lively retention of democratic governance. The alternatives
out there today, however, add confusion to panic, and attempt to put in place an autocracy
instead of a thriving democracy.
###############
If the Washington Post is firm on one issue, it's that appointed
school boards are the only way to go. Well, at least as long as it concerns DC. However,
when it involved our cousins on the south side of the river, they saw it just a little
differently.
A VOTE FOR THE VOTERS IN VIRGINIA, Washington Post, Friday,
January 18, 1991; Page A20
You never know just how long it takes a good idea to become a perfectly reasonable law in
Virginia, but maybe 35 years is enough time. That's how long members of the General
Assembly have been discussing — and then dismissing — proposals to let voters
elect local school boards if they so choose. Longer ago than that — 1947, in fact
— Virginia actually gave Arlington County the authority to elect its school board
members. Everything was all right for a while, but when the Arlington school board decided
to resist “massive resistance” to desegregation of the public schools in
Virginia, Richmond lowered the boom on any elections of school boards. Ever since, there
have been just enough members of the legislature around to kill even the most modest
attempt to revive the idea of elected school boards. The old familiar excuses for
maintaining this ban are sure to be trotted out again this year, but there is one small,
promising note already: a House of Delegates committee has voted 11 to 8 for a bill that
would give at least some voters a chance to experiment. This latest proposal would let
voters in Arlington, Fairfax and Prince William counties and in Virginia Beach decide
whether to elect their boards directly instead of allowing county boards to appoint the
members. Alexandria might be added to this list through a floor amendment being considered
by Del. Marian Van Landingham. The House committee bill would allow 10 percent of the
registered voters in any one of these localities to petition for an elected school board.
The question then would go before the voters in a referendum in November 1992. If approved
then, the elections could be held in 1994. How's that for a wild and crazy, permissive bit
of legislation? All it allows is an option for a tiny fraction of the state to decide
whether it might like the elections idea. If any locality prefers its appointed board,
that's what it could keep on having. Three years ago, when the legislature was talking
about this, Prince William County Sen. Charles J. Colgan observed to his colleagues that
“the people were wise enough to send us here. We should be wise enough to let them
elect their school board members.” But a good question then as now is whether enough
of this wisdom exists among the lawmakers. If not, maybe those voters will have the wisdom
to send some legislative replacements to Richmond this fall.
###############
DC’s State/Local Board: We're the 2-in-1
Jurisdiction
Mark Richards, mark@bisconti.com
According to a study faxed to me by National School Boards Association,
here's the profile of LOCAL school boards: 97.14% elected, 2.84% appointed, 0.02% mixed (3
in Indiana, 1 in Tennessee). 77% of boards have taxing authority, 23% do not. At the time
of the study (1991), Virginia was the ONLY state with ALL appointed Boards, but changes in
VA law allowed public referendum on the question of appointed vs. elected. Within 5 years,
102 of 134 switched to elected — main reason was “many years of poor academic
performance.” Example: April 1992, Fairfax County School Board formed the School
Board Referendum Information Committee, developed info with the League of Women Voters
identifying the advantages/disadvantages of each system. A big negative of appointed
board: political appointment. Fairfax voted to go elected. Alexandria County held a
referendum in May 1994. The Alexandria chapter of the NAACP opposed an elected board for
fear that they might lose the guaranteed 3 African-American seats under the appointed
system. Don't know the outcome. NSBA has a new program to help board members called
“Key Work of School Boards,” are developing training modules. FYI: Istook's
state, Oklahoma — 604 school boards, all elected, all with taxing authority. Point:
appointed boards are pretty much an anomaly in the American system.
The National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE) http://www.nasbe.org/edprofiles.html,
profiles state boards. Here is how STATE school boards (ranging from 7 to 16 members) are
picked: 35 appointed by Governor, some confirmed by legislature, 11 elected, 4 mixed. As
usual, DC is listed on the state profile. How DC compares to STATES per NASBE: % teachers
w/advanced degrees: DC,59%; OK, 43%; VA, 34%; MD, 56%. Student/teacher ratio: DC, 15:1;
OK, 16:1; VA, 14:1; MD, 17:1. High school graduation rate: DC, 87.8%; OK, 87%; VA, 86.6%;
MD, 93.4%. Students in poverty: DC, 31.5%; OK, 24.2%; VA, 14.5%; MD, 13.3%. Federal $
portion of school revenues: DC, 9.5%; OK, 9.4%; VA, 5.7%; MD, 5%. State $ portion of
school revenues: DC, N/A; OK, 59%; VA, 32%; MD, 37%. Local $ portion of school revenues:
DC, 90%; OK, 25.8%; VA, 59.1%; MD, 54.9%. P/pupil $ (w/o state admin $): DC, $9,335; OK,
4,845; VA, $5,327; MD, $7,245.
Members of the National School Boards Council of Urban Boards of Education
(CUBE): 83% elected, 17% appointed. Here are the 14 cities with appointed boards: Chicago,
Jackson, Birmingham, Detroit, Norfolk, Boston, New York, New Haven, Newark, Trenton,
Baltimore, Cleveland, Yonkers, Philadelphia.
###############
In the Grips of KPMG
Ed T. Barron, edtb@aol.com
The risk of hiring consultants is in how you structure their contracts. It
is clear that the District has allowed the consultants to write their own contracts
(filled with consultantspeak and gobbledygook) and then to hire these consultants to do
work for the District government. It is very typical of the large consulting firms, KPMG,
Booz-Allen, Arthur Anderson, et al., to write their own requests for proposal so that they
are the only bidders who can respond (or they get sole source contracts).
The most ethical consultants are those who come into an organization not
to do things, but to teach how things can be done and to let those being taught do the
work. Most consultants begin their work from day one with the objective of working their
way out of the job in a most reasonable time frame. In my small consulting operation I
always have as my objective to turn the running of the asylum over to the inmates as soon
as practical. We are now in the stranglehold of non ethical consultants who want only to
perpetuate their own longevity and their own contracts with the District.
###############
Kathy Patterson’s Doing Plenty
David S. Reed, d.reed@mindspring.com
Larry Seftor in the Feb 9 themail criticizes Councilmember Kathy Patterson
for not putting herself forward in the media regarding recent DC Government problems with
snow and trash. I don't think Patterson was wrong in this. Councilmembers should be
responsive to their constituents on any issue, but each Councilmember should also
specialize in sustained work on a few issues, so they can achieve real improvements rather
than just grabbing media time on the issue of the week. Councilmember Carol Schwartz was
very properly out front on the snow and trash problems, because she is Chairperson of the
Public Works Committee. Patterson is very responsive on constituent service, and she is
widely considered the most effective Councilmember in legislative oversight, because of
her work on job training and other areas in the jurisdiction of her Government Operations
Committee.
###############
Kathy Patterson
Ed T. Barron, edtb@aol.com
Our Council Person from Ward 3 came under fire in a recent issue of
themail by a writer who found that Kathy is not effective and not going public with what
she is doing as a Councilmember. That criticism is way off the mark. Ms Patterson is
probably the most tenacious and fervent digger into the workings (or non-workings) of the
D.C. Government. Ms. Patterson does her homework and investigates thoroughly all of the
issues in her purview. There are times that I don't agree with Ms. Patterson's conclusions
and/or recommendations (e.g., an appointed School Board) but I admire her for her
willingness to do so much work in finding out what is really happening in the D.C.
Government.
If you want to see just how Ms. Patterson has worked to find out how
enmeshed the District is with its highly paid consultants, just read the last two issues
of the City Paper's Loose Lips column. Would that all the folks on the Council
have the dedication shown by Kathy Patterson.
###############
Councilmember Talks Trash
Kathy Patterson, KpattDC3@aol.com
In response to Larry Seftor's “where was she” posting: demands
made of, and information shared with, Mayor Williams, City Administrator Norman Dong, and
DPW Director Vanessa Burns by me and my chief of staff, JoAnne Ginsberg, over the last
three weeks, are a major reason many streets (finally) got plowed or treated, and trash
got picked up — in some instances after a month without service. These conversations
took place during the day, during the evening, and on weekends. And they are continuing
because the city government is still not at 100% delivery.
It is true that I did not attend Carol Schwartz's committee hearing on
snow removal and trash, but anyone who attended or watched the hearing saw my colleague
wave at Director Burns the 20-page, single-spaced list of streets not treated and trash
not picked up in Ward 3 supplied by me and my staff expressly for that hearing. Carol also
asked questions on my behalf, as we had discussed, and I am awaiting written responses
from DPW on other specific service breakdowns.
There is another facet to the executive branch's failure to effectively
clean streets and alleys: the debacle of the last three weeks has set my office days if
not weeks behind in budget and legislative preparation because of the extraordinary number
of calls taken from frustrated, angry constituents who have every right to expect city
services. For any constituent waiting for information or any other response from my office
NOT related to snow and trash, I am sorry for the delay. I would also like to publicly
thank my staff for their efforts over the last three weeks to assist constituents. By the
time constituents call me they've already been ignored or mistreated by someone who should
be providing services. Yes, my staff is paid to do a job, and working with constituents is
a big part of that, but working with angry, frustrated residents takes a toll, and I
appreciate the commitment of these particular public servants. As to my not being more
visible: I will take to the airwaves when necessary, but that's a last choice in trying to
be effective. Had the Williams Administration NOT paid attention to this particular
squeaky wheel, yes, I would have been sending messages through the media as I did
following the blizzard in 1996. From the mayor on down, executive branch officials know I
have a press list and they know I know how to use it!
###############
DPW Made the Right Call?
Kenneth Nellis, nellisks@aol.com
In the 2/9/00 issue in “In Praise of Our Garbage Collectors,”
Michael Bindner expressed his appreciation for how DPW takes care of its own. And,
clearly, we should sympathize with those charged with collecting trash in inclement
weather. But, did “DPW [make] the right call” when, after two weeks of no alley
pickups, they asked us to move our trash to the street front, where it again was not
picked up? Then, when they said that alley pickups would resume, what were we to believe
— that we should haul it back to the alley again? (This could get old!) Fortunately,
we did, where it was finally, after four weeks, picked up yesterday (2/9/00). Our
discarded Christmas tree, buried in snow, will probably be with us for a few more weeks,
however.
###############
Speaking of Shoveling
Kenneth Nellis, nellisks@aol.com
In the February 6 edition of themail, “Speaking of Shoveling,”
Kirsten Sherk laments the sore display of civic duty by our residents and asks,
“Can't homeowners be fined for not shoveling their walks?” I have had the
following snippet clipped from years ago, so cannot vouch for its currency, but it says,
“District of Columbia: Residents and business owners are required to clear walkways
within eight hours of daylight after snow or sleet, or may be fined $25.00. Complaints can
be made to the police nonemergency number, 727-4325.” I've never called this number,
although I've been tempted on numerous occasions, and wonder if anyone has and how the
police respond to such calls.
###############
I'd just like to alert pet owners on this list about bill 13-473, the
Freedom from Cruelty to Animals Protection Act [http://www.dcwatch.com/council13/13-473].
We would like your input. The DC Dog Coalition supports increased penalties for cruelty,
which this bill does; the goal is an admirable one. We didn't pay much attention to this
bill until about two weeks ago, and now we have some concerns. Councilmembers Jim Graham
and Kevin Chavous introduced the bill. It seeks “To amend Chapter 106 of the Acts of
the Legislative Assembly to add the actions of continually chaining any animal to the
definition of cruelty to animals, failing to provide air, light, space, and veterinary
care, and to add enhanced penalties if the offenses are committed with the intent to
commit serious bodily injury or death.” Our biggest concern is the addition of
“failure to provide air, light, space...” to the current list of failure to
provide food, water, shelter, etc. Of course we believe animals should have air, light and
space, but the problem here is subjectivity and enforcement. How much air, light and
space? Should it be fresh outdoor air or interior air? And what about light — during
daylight savings time, your dog may not get much natural light if you work during the day.
What if you have an indoor cat? And there is no definition of how much space is adequate,
or how little space is cruel. The point is that this law must be enforced, but there is no
objective criteria for adequate air, light, and space. We are concerned because it gives
far too much power and discretion to a humane or animal control officer about whether or
not to seize somebody's pet, and this is dangerous, particularly if they are real
“animal liberation” types. There have been disputes about various pet seizures
in this city as well as the behavior of some animal control officers. If you have been
involved with one, please let us know.
We would also like your input on chaining — the bill adds
“continual chaining” to cruelty. I personally don't chain my dog; I have a
fenced-in yard. However, I do occasionally tie my dog up to my porch on a sunny day so she
can sleep and get some vitamin D, and I don't have to worry about her running into the
street. A lot of people do this. Again, I am sure the intent of this bill is to keep
people from chaining their dog each and every day, but again there is a great deal of
subjectivity. What is meant by “continual?” There are excellent reasons why you
should not chain your dog; however some people do, if no other means of containment is
available to them. DC Dog Coalition has not taken a formal position on these things yet
(we are trying to prevent “pit bulls” from being banned); we would like to hear
from other pet owners. You can reply to this list or our web page: http://members.xoom.com/dcdcoalition.
###############
I am seeking advice from fellow residents on how to stop inconsiderate dog
owners from leaving their dogs' excrement on the sidewalks and lawns in our neighborhoods.
This is not a case of “there oughta be a law, but of neighbors who think they can get
away without following it, even when they have been approached politely and asked to
comply. The most flagrant example in my Forest Hills neighborhood is a gentlemen who walks
his two dogs without a leash and without encumbering himself with any scooping implements
and denies that either of his animals could be responsible for the piles of excrement that
litter our sidewalks. I know there is a law, but short of conducting a stake-out or
setting up surveillance cameras, does anyone know how to get it enforced?
###############
DC Cablevision has managed to outdo itself tonight. Trying to turn on the
evening news I get the famous blank screen. I dial DC Cablevision and get the wonderful
voice mail. “Press 2 for technical help.” When I press 2, I hear “DC
Cablevision is having a heavier than usual call volume,” and I'm disconnected, no
explanation. No possible restore time or list of areas that are out; just that they don't
want to handle my call, and they hang up on me. Maybe I'm too sensitive but this
non-customer service really angers me. Anybody got any ideas? Yeah, I know, change service
providers.
###############
I subscribed to Starpower in December '99 for cable, local, and long
distance telephone. The cable service has been phenomenal. The long distance service
initially switched over transparently; I have yet to receive the calling cards that were
sent in early January. The local service switched about a week ago, and since then the
long distance service continually has been “suspended.” According to Starpower
customer service, sometimes the phone numbers simply “fall out” of their system,
causing a loss of long distance service. Unfortunately, it takes nearly an hour to reach
someone at their customer service center when it occurs, and then it takes several days to
get it fixed. Starpower indicates they will reimburse me for long distance charges
incurred during this period if I had accessed another carrier using their 10-xxx code.
Finally, I had to terminate the Starpower local service since they could not replicate the
voice mail set-up I had under Bell Atlantic (I have an identa-ring/distinctive ring number
on my main line with it's own voice mail box; Starpower can only provide a single mailbox
which is shared with the main number and the distinctive ring number). To switch back to
Bell, Starpower gives you a 1-800 number for Bell Atlantic-New Jersey, where you are
promptly told they can be of no assistance, and they transfer you back to a DC Bell rep.
The DC reps can only sell you new service ... to switch back, they have to have a
specialized rep call you back and schedule an appointment a couple of weeks out to get the
service re-established. Of course, Starpower will pick up the service fee for
re-connecting to Bell (within a limited period of time from the switch to Starpower).
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS
Join Beth Degrasse, the director of the Congressional Roundtable on
Post-Cold War Relations, in a discussion of “International Mediation in the Post-Cold
War Era,” on Thursday, February 17, at 7:30 p.m. at the Dolley Madison Library in
McLean. The program is free but registration is requested: (703) 356-0770.
###############
Bill Bradley for President
Stephanie Pendell, stephaniependell@hotmail.com
D.C. supporters of Bill Bradley come out and show your support on Tuesday,
February 15th! Come to the Front Page in Dupont Circle at 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, NW
starting at 5:30 pm. Collect information about volunteer opportunities, provide signatures
to get Bradley on the ballot in DC, and have fun with fellow supporters! Bring friends and
family. Campaign coordinators and Bradley delegates will be there. For more information,
contact Brooke Lehmann at brlehma@ibm.net or
Stephanie Pendell at stephaniependell@hotmail.com.
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — FOR SALE
1984 Porsche 911 Targa
Anne Drissel, drisselab@aol.com
Documented second owner, carefully maintained, 120k; color: white. $14,799
or best offer, value $18,500. Owner transferred to Europe. Must sell by Feb 21 or store.
Pictures: http://www.geocities.com/duncanjf/911.html.
Leave message: 342-9450 (Georgetown) if you're interested in seeing it.
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — PETS
Kitten Wanted
Randi Rubovits-Seitz, rrs2623@gwu.edu
Do you have a cat with a litter of kittens at your house? We are looking
for the right kitten for us. Please leave message on office answering machine at 234-1621
or E-mail me with your info.
###############
themail@dcwatch is an E-mail discussion forum that is published every
Wednesday and Sunday. To subscribe, to change E-mail addresses, or to switch between HTML
and plain text versions of themail, use the subscription form at http://www.dcwatch.com/themail/subscribe.htm.
To unsubscribe, send an E-mail message to themail@dcwatch.com
with “unsubscribe” in the subject line. Archives of past messages are available
at http://www.dcwatch.com/themail.
All postings should also be submitted to themail@dcwatch.com, and should be about life,
government, or politics in the District of Columbia in one way or another. All postings
must be signed in order to be printed, and messages should be reasonably short — one
or two brief paragraphs would be ideal — so that as many messages as possible can be
put into each mailing.
