Leaded

Dear Lead Drinkers:

Jonetta Rose Barras writes in the latest issue of The Barras Report (http://www.jrbarras.com), excerpted below, about a power grab for the schools that she views with approval and I view with alarm. A group of the usual suspects, DC's power brokers and influence peddlers and fixers, has proposed to Council Chairman Linda Cropp that the Board of Education be strong-armed into ceding its powers to an unelected and unrepresentative appointed group that would put a businessman in charge of the schools (http://www.dcpswatch.com/dcps/040218.htm). This would fulfill an important part of the long held dream of the Federal City Council and the Greater Washington Board of Trade, to disenfranchise DC citizens in favor of the suburban business interests that they think should rightfully be running the city, and it would advance the mayor's goal of seizing power over the school system in order to control its real estate holdings.

But this proposal and the mayor's own school takeover scheme also raise an important question — why does this mayor keep losing control of boards and commissions that he has created and shaped? Why does he have to keep restructuring the government to try to control it; why can't he exert influence over his own appointees? Why, after he appointed half of the Board of Education and had his candidates elected to all the other seats, did he lose all of his authority and sway over the Board? Why does he want to create a new Anacostia Waterfront Corporation to undertake his urban removal plans for southwest, when the National Capital Revitalization Commission had already been set up for the express purpose of doing sweetheart deals with favored developers and giving away city assets without adequate public scrutiny? Why could he not trust his own appointees on the NCRC to steer projects and contracts to his predetermined favorites and to do his bidding?

It's a problem of governance. Both the mayor and his administration simply fail to do any follow up. We know that the mayor failed to call the elected school board members who were anxious to follow his lead, and failed even to return the calls of his own appointees on the board. We know that the mayor repeatedly announces initiatives and legislation as a surprise to the council, without doing any preparatory work with councilmembers and without doing any follow-up lobbying of them. But this story can be told again and again throughout government. Even though the Executive Office of the Mayor has doubled and redoubled in size and budget over the past few years (and is scheduled for more major increases in the mayor's proposed budget for next year), no representatives of the EOM ever attend any of the meetings of even the major boards and commissions. You can't influence people when you refuse to speak with them. The problem is not just that the mayor is disengaged from and out of touch with the people and the city, it is that the mayor and his executive office and closest advisors are disengaged from and out of touch even with their own government.

Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com

###############

The Lead Task Force
Dorothy Brizill, dorothy@dcwatch.com

On February 11, Mayor Williams and Councilmember Carol Schwartz announced the establishment of an interagency task force that they would cochair to respond to the growing public concern regarding lead in the District's drinking water (http://www.dcwatch.com/wasa/040210.htm and http://www.dcwatch.com/wasa/040211.htm). To date, the task force has met twice, February 13 and 19, in secret meetings closed to the public. Mayor Williams hasn't attended either meeting. On February 13 he was in Barcelona, Spain, and on February 19 he was preparing for his interview the next day with the federal Office of the Special Counsel, which is investigating illegal campaign solicitations and violations of the Hatch Act by the mayor's Chief of Staff, Kelvin Robinson.

In the mayor's absence, the meetings have been convened by the District's new city administrator, Robert Bobb. At the meetings, DC Water and Sewer Administration's representatives on the task force, Glenn Gersell, Chair of WASA, and Jerry Johnson, General Manager of WASA, have still failed to appreciate the public concern about the lead problem. Instead, they have continued to act in an arrogant and aloof manner with the other task force members. At the initial meeting on February 13, Johnson shocked other members when he tried to argue against WASA's culpability by alluding to his “old friendship” with Bobb. (Bobb and Johnson have a history dating back to when both worked for the city government of Richmond, Virginia — Bobb as city manager and Johnson as deputy city manager for operations.) At the next meeting of the task force, Bobb stressed the need to consider the current situation a major health crisis, to have the Department of Health assume a leadership role, and to consider activating portions of the District's emergency preparedness plan in order to deal with the lead in the water as the equivalent of a terrorist poisoning of the water supply.

###############

It’s Time for WASA to Come Clean on Lead
Bill Adler, billonline@adlerbooks.com

It's time for WASA to be honest about the District's lead problem. For over a year WASA kept quiet about the high lead levels in many people's drinking water. In Sunday's Washington Post, I read that some DC homes have lead levels that are astronomical: over 900 parts per billion. (The EPA says that 15 ppb is the maximum safe level.) Some of my Cleveland Park neighbors have reported on the Cleveland Park E-mail list, http://www.cleveland-park.com, lead levels in their drinking water that are more than twenty times the maximum safe levels.

WASA' website, http://www.dcwasa.com, says that tests “indicated that some households experienced increased lead levels above the Environmental Protection Agency's 'action level' of 15 ppb.” While it may be that only some homes have high lead levels (WASA doesn't reveal how many “some” is), what WASA doesn't say is that some homes have exceedingly dangerous levels of lead. WASA also doesn't say that on some blocks virtually every house has high lead levels. WASA also doesn't reveal that many homes that have had their lead service pipes replaced still have extremely high lead levels.

WASA is treating this like a public relations problem, not a public health problem. WASA has lost credibility with District residents.

###############

The Mayor and the Water
Melody R. Webb, melodywebb@lobbbyline.com

The mystery is still a mystery, and the Mayor doesn't care. In the beginning, no one knew the cause of elevated lead levels in our tap water. Then WASA (after having failed to disclose the existence of the problem possibly for years) began their spin job — narrowing the causes down to one -- the city's lead service lines. WASA set the tone and ensured that what we talked about was not the multiple potential causes: just one, which meant that only homeowners in older, single family homes were affected. So, the poorly housed and affluent couples with children alike dwelling in large multiunit buildings need not worry. And the Mayor, in tandem with WASA's inaction based on this theory, failed to demand immediate testing of city schools, which were seemingly so unlikely to be at risk, that lead testing in the city's public schools occurred only last weekend. Compare that to the Catholic Archbishop, who quickly moved to shut down fountains and begin testing. School officials are buying WASA's story and keeping fountains open until results indicate otherwise.

The Mayor, who initially was outraged and pointed fingers, has disappeared, while the mystery has meanwhile metastasized as the evidence from lead tests trickles in and WASA's theories prove to be more like wishful thinking than science. Why has lead service line replacement made no difference in the lead levels for some? Is WASA making educated guesses about what kind of service mains some of us have? Aren't all the city's children at risk since each and every tap in the city could be receiving water carried through either lead pipes or lead components that may be prematurely leaching lead because of chemicals being used to treat the city's' filthy source water — the Potomac River? Until we find out who all is affected by this problem, should our WASA bills be suspended and or should WASA be paying our bottled water bills? Shouldn't someone help the poor get their bottles or filters?

If there is a chance, any chance at all, that we are all likely feeding lethal tap water to our children — where is the Mayor's plan to aggressively test the city's children and (through sampling or otherwise) every single source of drinking water in the city, particularly those servicing infants, children and pregnant women? Where is the Mayor's independent citizen-expert task force? We need leadership in the form of government support for public health precautions (e.g. taxpayer rebates, supplies through the Department of Health's WIC program). Maintain the pressure on WASA, but seek action also from the City Council and please — don't forget the man who appoints the entire WASA Board (even those from Maryland and Virginia) -- Mayor Williams himself. Take one minute and demand these solutions and your own via an E-mail that you can edit or send as-is from http://www.waterfordckids.org/callwritefax.htm.

###############

More Lead in the Water
A. Marsh, anitangela@hotmail.com

With great interest I read Bryce Suderow's synopsis of the Capitol Hill meeting with DC WASA (themail, February 18). Last night, I attended the meeting at Francis Gregory Library on Alabama Avenue. This meeting was originally scheduled to present rate increase matters but, of course, was about lead in our water. Ground rules were set; each question was two minutes and the moderator was hard pressed to keep every citizen to two minutes. All announcements about the meeting said it would be held from 6:30-8:30 p.m. At 7:55 p.m., the moderator said we only have five more minutes. I protested that the announcements in the newspaper and on their web site said two hours; quietly, five minutes later, Jim Johnson, General Manager, asked to have the meeting go on until 8:15 p.m. What's up with that?

Attendees were quite angry and upset that the Board and the Authority withheld this information from us. As a parent of a young child, I was livid and didn't mind saying so. First, her school is in NW, DC (Georgetown), where the lead service lines are slotted to be replaced; contingent upon coordination with DDOT. Like that'll happen. I was told by the engineer that they have no control over DC school lines. I countered with, “You control the main service line; don't be ridiculous.” As for the Chief Engineer, his slick PowerPoint presentation says they're committed to “engage in public education activities.” They've failed miserably on that. Next, he said most of the lead isn't from the water main, but from the line from the main to the home — meaning the homeowner is at fault for the lead. They don't ever need to have him speak again. He is a PR nightmare, because he further stated more than once that most lead water levels are acceptable at 15; and didn't at all mention the levels of up to 300 that have been reported! Jim Johnson spoke acknowledging their faux pas and actually gave a good PR presentation saying that they erred. No consolation to those directly affected by their failure.

One man said that he and his wife are expecting their first child very soon, having been drinking and cooking with tap water, their test results haven't been returned but block neighbors have evidence of lead levels from 100 to over 200! My prayers go out to them. I said last night and am saying here . . . the Board that sets the rates and governs the Authority is highly responsible for this major problem. To have a Board member sit there last night and say proudly that she drinks the water and will continue to do so; was stupid, outrageous, and offensive; furthermore, she's not in the lead service problem area nor is she in the at risk category. I think citizens should have input as to who is placed on the board. The board is the governing body and the authority is the management. Change has got to happen! Lastly what did our elected city officials say? Or their representatives? Nothing! Because they were not there! No one at all showed up at this meeting in far Southeast.

###############

WASA’s Higher Rates
R. Linden, Faraday Place NW, rlinden3@juno.com

Long before the lead in water alert, WASA has been significantly raising our water rates. A few weeks ago we were told to run the water for one minute before consumption. Then it was five minutes. Today's Washington Post article, February 19, tells us to run the water for as much as ten minutes. At this rate of consumption, our monthly water bills will be double our heating bills. Is this WASA's hidden agenda — to increase its revenues? Not good news for DC residents.

###############

Nastygram from PEPCO
Ed T. Barron, edtb@aoldotcom

My mail, yesterday, included a nastygram from PEPCO telling me that my electric rates for the coming year will be increased 50 percent over this past year's rate. There was no explanation for the rate increase and only a suggestion that one might want to change electricity suppliers. PEPCO provided a web page set up by the DC Public Service Commission that it purported to contain a list of alternate suppliers (http://www.dcpsc.org/PES_PriceIncrease.pdf). In fact, however, there is only one supplier on that list who provides residential power services. That supplier is not accepting any new customers. Maybe I can get some hamsters, a treadmill, and a generator. How much can hamsters eat, anyway?

###############

School Board Takeover
Jonetta Rose Barras, jrbarras@aol.com

On February 18, a group of business and education leaders in the District submitted to DC Council Chairman Linda Cropp a proposal that, if approved, could achieve the education renaissance for which everyone has hungered. The plan was signed by seventeen individuals including former councilmembers Charlene Drew Jarvis, now president at Southeastern University; H.R. Crawford, now head of his own management company; and John Ray, now a partner with the law firm of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips. Former school board member Roger Wilkins, former school Superintendent Floretta McKenzie, former City Administrator Elijah Rogers, Chamber of Commerce Chairman Barbara Lang, Federal City Council Chairman Terence Golden, Greater Washington Board of Trade Chairman Togo West, Jr., and Jim Kimsey are also among those who signed the letter to Cropp, a copy of which was obtained by the Barras Report (http://www.dcpswatch.com/dcps/040218.htm).

The plan proffered by the signers calls for the creation of an Education Reform Oversight Committee that would include the president of the school board, a regular member of the board, the mayor, the city administrator, the council chairman, the head of the council's Committee on Education, and representatives from the private sector selected by the mayor. The council would approve the full committee. The school board would then delegate to this committee and the council for five years various functions that now fall under the purview of the hybrid board; the partially elected and partially appointed nine-member body would remain in place for the duration of the committee.

The Reform Committee would be an independent body with oversight by the council and mayor. It would be responsible for selecting a Chief System Operating Officer/Superintendent who could be a person with strong management skills but without an academic experience, in which case that person would hire a deputy superintendent with that requisite background. The CSO also would hire the chief financial officer for the schools, who would report directly to the CSO; currently the CFO for schools, like those at all District agencies, reports directly to the independent, congressionally created Chief Financial Officer for the city. The CSO would report directly to the Reform Committee.

###############

Guardians and Owners
Gregory Alden Betor, gbetor@aol.com

In a message in themail of February 18, Clare Feinson wrote: “. . . cats and dogs of guardians in need of financial assistance. . . .” While I totally support the spay/neuter clinics, I would remind Ms. Feinson that the proper term for those who possess pets is owner, not guardian. We are not in LA, nor have we yet surrendered to the animal activists in this city.

###############

McLean May Be Overrepresented, But Not DC
Esteban Guzman, regimechangenow@yahoo.com

One more comment about Greg Easterbrook's write first/think later blog entry on The New Republic's web site: The author thinks DC is overrepresented because the people in power (legislators, cabinet officials, etc.) live in DC. By that logic, perhaps DC's shameful colonial status should instead be conveyed on cities like Potomac, Maryland and McLean, Virginia, where many of these people actually live.

The Constitutional rationale for Congress' exclusive authority over the District was that mob rule would give us undue influence. Now that the US federal government has the most powerful armed forces in the world, I think DC residents -- angry Democrats with pitchforks and torches — are not much of a threat to the feds. The rationale for the District clause is as obsolete as the three-fifths compromise. Give us our franchise!

###############

Legitimate Distinctions and Antiquated Rationales
Timothy Cooper, worldright@aol.com

Most journalists, liberal and conservative alike, boast little if any knowledge of international law in general and human rights law in particular. So when Gregg Easterbrook, a public policy expert and a graduate of Northeastern University of Journalism, writes that "the idea that [DC residents] are suffering some form of human-rights violation is the sort of absurdity that could only be given hearing in an institution divorced from reality," it’s probably safe to say that he also speaks for others who fail to understand the connection between the denial of DC voting rights and violations of internationally recognized human rights.

The fundamental right to political participation in ones’ national legislature through duly elected representatives is a political right recognized under every civil and political human rights treaty in existence in the world today. The right is enshrined in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights (IACHR), the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man (ADRDM), the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), and the African [Banjul] Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. On the basis of this internationally recognized human right, guaranteed under the OAS Charter, a petition was filed with Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in 1993, charging the US with human rights violations against the residents of the nation's capital.

Mr. Easterbrook heaps scorn on the OAS judgment, which did in fact find that the denial of representational rights to DC residents constituted a human rights violation. By way of justifying our disenfranchisement, he invokes the founding fathers’ historical rationale for proscribing our rights. The US State Department also used similar arguments in its pleadings before the Commission. Like Mr. Easterbrook, it claimed that the founding fathers’ rationale was legitimate because DC residents could wield undue influence over Congress should they enjoy equal Congressional rights. Yet, after exhaustive study, review, and argument, the Commission — made up of international legal experts — concluded otherwise. The Commission stated that it “must interpret and apply . . . [the right to political participation through duly elected representatives] in the context of current circumstances and standards. . . .” Significantly, it noted that “the State's judicial branch has specifically concluded that the historical rationale for the District Clause in the US Constitution would not today require the exclusion of District residents from the Congressional franchise and has accepted that denial of the franchise is not necessary for the effective functioning of the seat of government.” Rightly recognizing the fact that a legitimate distinction made two hundred years ago during the horse and buggy era had long since turned into a wrongful discrimination, it therefore found human rights violations. To argue today that DC residents should be denied full representation by invoking the founding fathers makes about as much sense as justifying the disenfranchisement of women and African-Americans with the original language of the US Constitution and other antiquated notions of equality. I invite everyone to read the full text of the OAS decision at: http://www.cidh.oas.org/annualrep/2003eng/USA.11204.htm.

###############

On Easterbrook, DC, Republics, and Democracies
Tom Matthes, tommatthes@earthlink.net

Responses in themail to Gregg Easterbrook's critique of the OAS ruling on DC's lack of votes in Congress focus on the democratic issue. “I am motivated by democracy and its founding principle of government by the governed,” writes Jane Varner Malhotra. This seems self-evident to modern minds, but not to the American Founders. The UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights says, “The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government” (Article 23, Section Three). The Declaration of Independence, in contrast, says “all Men . . . are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. . . . That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed.” In short, the American vision is that the government only exists to defend the rights God granted mankind and is further limited in its just powers by the people's consent. This is why the Constitution creates a federal republic and makes no reference at all to “democracy.” A democracy often leads to tyranny by the majority. A republic limits the power of government and a federation divides the powers of government. Since the US is a federation of the fifty states, a constitutional amendment is required to grant the federal district a vote, or votes, in Congress.

The UN's vision of rights, drafted by socialists in the late 1940's, is a contradictory grab bag, including the right to own property (Article 17) and the right to “food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services” (Article 25, Section One). In other words, the state must grant the right to property, but also must confiscate property whenever it wishes to provide “housing” and “necessary social services.” You may consider this an improvement upon the US Constitution's strict limits on the government, but most Americans don't. That is why they won't take seriously decrees against their Constitution from the UN, OAS, or any foreign organization.

Easterbrook may not have mentioned it, but DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton unwittingly proved about a year ago that DC's demand for statehood would work against the goals of the Declaration of Independence. She argued, successfully, that DC needed to keep the jobs in the Department of Homeland Security for its economic well-being. She added that, while Virginia could prosper without having that Department moved to Herndon or Chantilly, DC has nothing to replace those jobs. In short, DC's prosperity, unlike any of the fifty states, depends entirely upon a growing federal government, contrary to the Constitution's goal of limited government. That is not a concern to be taken lightly in the era of the Patriot Act. My recommendation is that DC ask for an amendment granting it only one vote in the US House. I believe the American people will support that. If DC wants two US senators, it should petition for retrocession into Maryland.

###############

Another Version of the Primary
Marc K. Battle, Thomas Circle, MKBattle1@alum.Howard.Edu

With all due respect to Gary Imhoff's “non-gloating” remarks regarding the success of the first in the nation primary [themail, February 18], he misses the point completely and instead ends up carrying the water for those entities (such as the Washington Times) and individuals who do all they can to undermine the District.

The article in the Washington Times referenced by Imhoff is misleading at best. The “regret” that members of the Council have voiced refers to the fact that we now have a fragmented electoral process that is confusing to most. No one has stated that the date should not have been changed to January 13 as Mr. Imhoff and the Times would like to surmise. In fact, members of the Council, including Mr. Graham, have indicated their desire to make the January primary binding in future years in order to avoid the issues we have faced this year (January 30, 2004 — Committee on Government Operations Public Roundtable: An Assessment of the District of Columbia's First in the Nation Presidential Preference Primary Election). When Mr. Graham stated, “This is the worst situation we could have put into place, and I think we all agree that we will never do this again,” he was referring to the non-binding bifurcated process, not that fact that the primary was moved to January 13. The Times conveniently neglects to place his remarks in the proper context, and Mr. Imhoff is ever too willing to pounce on this false opportunity to gloat.

Just because the local and national Democratic committees did all they could to sabotage the efforts of the Council does not render the Council's decision a “mistake.” The only mistake was in trusting that local and national Democrats cared more about the shameful disenfranchisement of an entire city than they did about falling in disfavor with the national party. Now that we know that many individuals would rather accept second-class citizenship that lose their seat at the party's convention, the Council will probably be less likely to leave such room for error in the future.

###############

Last Word on Primary
Sean Tenner, DC Democracy Fund, stenner@mrss.com

Brian DeBose's Washington Times article in which he cites, “Councilmembers calling the first-in-the-nation primary a mistake,” missed the major point the Councilmembers were trying to make. Graham, Chavous, etc., didn't say that going first was a mistake — they said that the decision of local party leaders to make this primary non-binding and part of a confusing three-pronged election was a mistake — and I agree!

I testified at the recent hearing on the primary where these Councilmembers made such comments. All of them agreed: having a binding, first-in-the nation primary was an excellent idea to highlight our lack of voting rights. It is too bad that some local figures cut deals with the Democratic National Committee to give us the confusing situation we have now.

The DC Democracy Fund, human rights activist Tim Cooper, and many others fought to have a real, meaningful binding primary. Nevertheless, the amount of media attention drawn to voting rights by January 13th was immense. Four stories in the New York Times alone about DC voting rights, a Wall Street Journal editorial on voting rights, articles in nearly every newspaper in the country talking about why we had this contest, and more importantly five bills introduced in this Congress to give us voting rights. Even Craig Timberg of the Washington Post admits that we were successful in getting our message out. As for the binding caucuses that came later — well, no candidates (not Kerry, not Edwards) campaigned for those events either, which further shows that going first was the only way to get DC any attention on the national stage.

###############

CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS

Janney Elementary School Community Meeting, February 24
Anne C. Sullivan, acsullivan@sstarpower.net

There will be a community meeting at Janney Elementary School (4130 Albemarle St., NW) at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, February 24, to discuss the possibility of a public/private/partnership whereby school land would be sold to a developer in exchange for school building renovations and/or additions. For more information about the exploratory stage of this concept, please visit http://www.janneyschool.org and follow the links to the public/private/partnership committee information. The committee has posted two development proposals that they have received in the course of their meetings.

In no way has the school community made a commitment to these proposals or even to the concept of a public/private/partnership. It is important for the Janney School community to have input from the community at large on this issue as well as for the community at large to be informed about actions the school community might take that could have a significant impact on the neighborhood. Please plan to attend the meeting on February 24. Your participation is welcomed and encouraged.

###############

UDC Black History Month Celebration, February 24
Joe Libertelli, jlibertelli@udc.edu

On, Tuesday, February 24, the UDC David A. Clarke School of Law Black Law Students Association (BLSA), will be hosting an event called “Black History Month: A Celebration of Culture.” All members of the extended UDC-DCSL/DCSL/ASL family are welcome to attend this event! The event will be held at 6:30 p.m. in the Window Lounge, Building 38, 2nd Floor, 4200 Connecticut Avenue, NW. American, Caribbean, and African food will be served, and there will be a fashion show by Glenn Jackson, who coordinates fashion shows for Black Entertainment Television (BET)

There will also be a Gospel choir, a performance by the University of Maryland at College Park African Students' Association, a performance by the University of Maryland College Park Caribbean Students Association, and poetry by select faculty members! Again, all are welcome to attend. Free for all paid 2003-2004 BLSA members; $5 for all UDC students, staff, and guests; $10 for faculty and alumni.

###############

DC Public Library Events, February 24-26
Debra Truhart, debra.truhart@dc.gov

Youth Gospel Explosion!, Tuesday, February 24, 10:30 a.m., Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Library, 901 G Street, NW, Main Lobby. Young voices sing gospel music at a special concert in honor of Black History Month. Alice Deal Jr. High School 7th and 8th Grade Chorus and its Second Ensemble Marching Band will perform. Also, Vincent Pope, a baritone and music teacher at Lincoln Middle School will sing. Public contact: 727-5535.

Muslims in the Washington, DC, Area, Wednesday, February 25, 6:30 p.m., Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Library, 901 G Street, NW, Main Lobby. E. Abdulmalik Mohammed will discuss the history of Muslims in Washington, DC. Public contact: 727-1211.

Cleveland Park Film Club, Thursday, February 26, 1:30 p.m. Cleveland Park Neighborhood Library, 3310 Connecticut Avenue, NW. Come see the 1967 John Schlesinger directed film Far From the Maddening Crowd, based on the Thomas Hardy classic and starring Alan Bates. Public contact: 282-3080. Community Talent Show, Thursday, February 26, 4:00 p.m., Parklands-Turner Community Library, 1600 Alabama Avenue, SE. A showcase of local talent. Public contact: 698-1103.

###############

Rugby Recruitment, February 26
Michael Stebbins, mstebbins@fbresearch.org

You are invited to join the Washington Renegades RFC at their 2004 spring season recruitment kickoff event at Titan Sports Bar on Thursday, February 26, from 6:00 p.m.-9:00 p.m. Hearty amounts of free beer and free food will be offered at the event located at 1337 14th Street, NW, which is at the intersection of 14th Street and Rhode Island Avenue, NW, above Hamburger Mary’s Restaurant. For more information, see http://www.renegades-rugby.org/bwposter.pdf.

The Renegades are looking forward to a great spring season after a strong couple of months of recruitment. The highlight of the upcoming season is our participation in London at the Mark Bingham International Memorial Cup in May (see http://www.binghamcup.com).

###############

Talking History with JEB (Joan E. Biren), March 6
John Olinger, jolinger@dmggroup.com

The Rainbow History Project and the Lesbian Services Program of Whitman Walker Clinic present an afternoon Talking History Chat with Joan E. Biren, internationally recognized documentary artist. JEB will discuss her career as a documentarian, her time as a member of the Furies collective, and aspects of the history of the lesbian community, especially in Washington DC.

The event is free, open to the public, and will be held at the Lesbian Services Program of Whitman Walker Clinic, 1432 U Street NW, on Saturday, March 6, from 1 to 3 p.m. For more information call 907-9007.

###############

Urban Planning in Jerusalem, March 8
Brie Hensold, bhensold@nbm.org

Beyond the myriad of urban planning issues common to cities the world over, Jerusalem today faces a particularly trying and unique set of challenges. In an illustrated lecture covering many of the historic city's current urban planning and design initiatives, Ofer Manor, Chief Architect of the Jerusalem Municipality, will describe how a commitment to the centuries-old universal significance and legacy of the Heavenly City is coupled with the earthly requirements of a bustling metropolis and modern capital that is home to diverse communities living in a volatile setting and an uncertain political climate.

Jerusalem: Current Challenges in Urban Planning and Design, a lecture by Ofer Manor, will be held on Monday, March 8, 6:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at the National Building Museum, 401 F Street, NW (Judiciary Square Metro, Red Line). Tickets are $10 for museum members and students; $15 for nonmembers. Registration is required. For more information, visit http://www.nbm.org or call Brie Hensold, Public Affairs Office, 272-2448, x3458.

###############

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.