themail.gif (3487 bytes)

July 3, 2005


Dear Watchers:

Apologists for the Williams administration are busy claiming that a little government corruption isn’t such a bad thing. To review: City Administrator Robert Bobb steered some single-source contracts to Oakland, California, cronies of his. One of these contracts went to Oakland city councilmember Jane Brunner, who fulfilled one of the requirements of her contract by plagiarizing the unions’ position paper on why the city should contract exclusively with the unions to build the new ballpark and submitted it to the mayor as the city’s due diligence study on why the city should sign a Project Labor Agreement with the unions (see themail, June 29). DC Auditor Deborah Nichols wrote a report exposing the illegal sole-source contracting ( In response, some DC reporters, like Jonetta Rose Barras on the DC Politics Hour and James Jones in the Washington City Paper (, are minimizing the problem, saying, “Nothing to see here; no problem; look away.” Jones even buys into the administration’s transparently false claim that Nichols is just a disgruntled job seeker, that this controversy is nothing but a clash of egos, and that there is some kind of moral equivalence between engaging in corrupt contracting practices and exposing them. In an unusual role for her, even Councilmember Kathy Patterson acted as an apologist for the administration’s illegal contracting. At a hearing on the issue, Patterson asked Bobb softball questions that excused the practices; the questions had been written for her by administration aide Gregory McCarthy, who coordinated them in advance with Bobb.

Mayor Williams’s and Bobb’s response to the exposure has been arrogant defiance and promises of more of the same to come in the future. So it’s time to go back to the basics, and explain why government corruption is bad no matter which administration does it, and no matter whether the mayor is named Barry or Williams. Corrupt contracting wastes the taxpayers’ money and distorts spending priorities. When politicians can reward their friends with contracts, without an effective check on how the contracts are awarded, government funds are spent on what profits the friends rather than benefits the people as a whole, and the government gets shoddy, second-rate work in return. This is corrupt government whether or not politicians are monetarily rewarded for their favors; most often, elected officials will not expect or receive personal payments in return for contracts. Mayor Barry did not enrich himself when he enriched his administration’s friends. What politicians get is support and loyalty, in addition to money for their campaigns. I seriously doubt that anybody in the administration pocketed any personal funds from the unions for negotiating the Project Labor Agreement with them, but the politicians expect and will receive the unions’ campaign support and contributions, all paid for by the taxpayers’ money.

These first contracts exposed by the Auditor’s report are not for a lot of money, in the scale of the government’s budget. But they are an auger of things to come, of the way that our money will be spent by this government on a ballpark project that will cost a billion dollars — if the accounting were honestly done, and all the costs counted. And beyond that, of the way that our money will be spent on the surrounding Anacostia redevelopment projects whose costs will dwarf the cost of the ballpark. They are a warning that we can either heed or disregard, but if we disregard them now we shall pay dearly.

Gary Imhoff 


Independence Day Trash and Recycling Collection Schedule
Mary Myers, 

In observance of Independence Day, most Department of Public Works services will be suspended on Monday, July 4. There will be no city trash or recycling collection, no street or alley cleaning, graffiti removal or nuisance abatement. There will also be no parking enforcement, including meters, residential and rush hour lane restrictions, and no booting, towing or abandoned vehicle removal on Monday. The Fort Totten Trash Transfer Station will be closed. All services resume on Tuesday, July 5.

Once-weekly (Supercan) trash collection will "slide" one day for the remainder of the week, beginning Tuesday, July 5. In the twice-a-week trash collection area, Monday and Tuesday trash and recycling collection will slide one day. Thursday and Friday trash and recycling collections will be made on the regular day.


Watch Those Fines
Ed T. Barron, 

In a very unheralded manner, the fines for an obscured license plate were recently increased from $25 for a violation to $500 per violation. The reason for this is that many DC drivers have put plastic covers over their plates that preclude red light or speeding cameras from reading the license plates. The plate number can be read using these plastic covers only from directly behind the rear plate (or in front of the front plate). From any other angle on the side or above the plate number cannot be read. I have seen a few of these on cars in DC. The plastic covers are readily available on the Internet or by phone or mail using the ads in the automobile magazines. The fine cost is now too high. Drivers beware.

And, while speaking about license plates, my front plate was purloined (bracket and all) from my car when the car was uncharacteristically parked on the street in front of my house. The car is normally in the garage at night, but last Thursday evening it was parked in the street for a few hours because house guests were using the driveway. After getting a police report number I went to the dreaded Department of Motor Vehicles office on C Street, NW. Found myself on a line of about thirty folks but was out and on my way with new plates, registration, and sticker for the windshield in less than twenty minutes. The DMV seems to be using a very fast system for routing customers to, and through, the right windows. Well done.


International Legislators Vote Overwhelmingly in Support of DC Voting Rights
Kevin Kiger, 

On Saturday, July 2, the General Committee on Democracy, Human Rights and Humanitarian Questions of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) overwhelmingly approved the amendment brought forward by Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) urging the United States to provide equal voting rights for the District of Columbia. The passage of the amendment comes one day after nearly three hundred supporters of DC voting rights took part in the “Equal Voting Rights for DC Rally” on Freedom Plaza. Rally participants encouraged members of the OSCE to support and pass the Norton amendment.

The language of the amendment “calls on the Congress of the United States to adopt such legislation as may be necessary to grant the residents of Washington, DC, equal voting rights in their national legislature in accordance with its human dimension commitments.” With approximately fifty OSCE parliamentarians voting, only three voted against the measure, including Senator George Voinovich (R-OH). No calls were returned from Senator Voinovich’s office at the time of this release. The Norton amendment is now part of a draft resolution. A vote on the draft resolution will take place on the morning of Tuesday, July 5. Sponsored by Rep. Norton, the amendment was cosponsored by U.S. Reps. Mike McIntyre (D-NC), Louise Slaughter (D-NY), Benjamin Cardin (D-MD), Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and by Senator Jerry Grafstein of Canada and by Barbara Haering of Switzerland.

For more information: read the approved amendment to the OSCE resolution supporting full congressional voting rights for DC, passed July 2 (; the Washington Post article “Think Locally, Ask Globally,” by Mary Beth Sherdian (; the Equal Voting Rights for DC Event press release, dated July 1 (; and the DC city council’s Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Emergency Resolution of 2005, passed unanimously on June 7 ( 


The Truant Mayor
Dorothy Brizill, 

As I have noted in past issues of themail, in recent weeks Mayor Williams’s travel schedule has been busier than ever. Writing in the Washington Post last Thursday, Lori Montgomery noted that, “the mayor will have spent all of part of 57 days out of the city so far this year — nearly one in three. That means Williams’s 2005 travel schedule has been busier than any since his 2002 reelection. In 2003, the mayor spent all or part of 107 days out of the city, or about 29 percent. Last year, his trips ate up 97 days, or about one in four” ( 

In the past three weeks, Mayor Williams has visited Beijing, Chicago, London, Puerto Rico, and Ocean City. Last Thursday, he made a two-day trip to Los Angeles in order to represent the National League of Cities at the swearing-in ceremony for that city’s new mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa. Upon returning to DC, Williams turned around briefly and on Saturday morning again left for a four-day “private trip” to an undisclosed location. The press office for the executive office of the mayor has been so sensitive to the issue of the mayor’s frequent absences that it now refuses to announce his trips more than a day in advance. If he were a student in DC schools, the truant officer would be hunting him down as an incorrigible absentee.


Representative Ray Browne Responsible for Most Proclamations
Patrick Pellerin, 

Per Steve Leraris’ comments about the proclamations from around the country in support of voting representation for DC residents in the Congress [themail, June 29], the person responsible for almost all of those proclamations was US Representative Ray Browne (D-Shadow). Through hard work and determination he received proclamations from city councils or mayors in large cities, such as Cleveland, Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans, and many others, and from small town America including Baker, Louisiana, Lansing, Kansas, Clanton, Alabama, and many others as well.


Eminent Domain
Richard Layman, 

Mr. Ladduwahetty [themail, June 29] can rest assured that plenty of progressives find the recent Kelo v. New London decision to be troubling. Here’s something I wrote in another forum: "Even though this case is attributed to the liberal grouping of Supreme Court Justices, I think it needs to be looked at more in terms of the Court’s general treatment of citizens vis-a-vis the government. In the civil liberties area in particular, more and more cases have upheld the government versus citizens (reduced scope of Miranda, citizens have to produce identification if requested by police officers, etc.).

This case is not really about capitalism at all, unless you are a proponent of what Immanuel Wallerstein called “state capitalism,” which was the term he used to define the then Soviet Union and its approach to economic development. I consider myself progressive-left leaning (although my college friends would probably think of me as conservative now -- particularly my stands with regard to “disorder”), concerned with “equal protection under the law” (14th Amendment), as well as a balancing of community concerns with individual rights, which is at the heart of historic preservation law and philosophy and the foundation of my work as a community advocate working to repopulate and revitalize the center city.

To really understand land use politics, I highly recommend reading either or both “The City as a Growth Machine” by Harvey Molotch (American Journal of Sociology, 1976) and Urban Fortunes: A Political Economy of Place by John Logan and Molotch. (For more on how land use issues work in DC, one of the best things to read is chapter 4 of the book Dream City by Henry Jaffe and Tom Sherwood.) If you are intimately involved with such issues in your communities, these writings will transform how you think about these issues. They did for me, and I was already pretty knowledgeable (and cynical) about the back room aspects of how all this works. The entries below from my weblog,, are specifically about these issues and DC. “Why I don’t always favor ‘community’ development corporations,” “Even more on eminent domain — DC style,” “More on eminent domain,” and the entry from Sunday, April 10, 2005 (in the archive), “City Business as usual — land giveaways, diminishing urban design.”


WPFW Complaints
Thomas Gomez, 

[In response to Lea Adams, themail, June 29] I believe the issue in the complaints against WPFW (I’m filing one) is not about programing diversity as much as diversity in hiring. The station has no obligation to hire me (or Rhyme Kakthouda). It is obligated to open its hiring process for paid staff positions to other persons of color who may wish to apply. We charge it has failed to do so.

The charges of sexism concern primarily the west coast station KPFA, not WPFW. In April 2004, while serving on the local board, I called for those allegations to be investigated before they led to litigation. Sadly the reaction was, as usual, that I was "an ungrateful upstart." Today litigation has been filed at KPFA and we now know that some $200,000 in public money was paid out to settle other complaints against the same programmer. What the basis for those complaints were we will never know, his personnel file was destroyed. You can’t make some of this stuff up if you tried, and, yeah, things were different I’m sure four decades ago.


Cops Fight Crime
Winston S. T. Bull, 

[In response to Bryce A. Suderow’s submission, “Cops Fight Crime, Mostly Jaywalking.” themail, June 29] I am not only a distant neighbor of his: I also live behind the alley where the body was found. Mr. Suderow has often surprised me with the negative tone of so many of his postings, and this one finally drove me to respond. I am new to this area of town, having moved here recently from Georgetown. It is exciting, vibrant, and there are many things going on here, both bad and good. One of those things is that, unlike my own personal experience in Georgetown, there are neighbors here who greet one another, and work with one another to deal with issues. I have tried to sit back and simply listen to those issues, and to who says what, before jumping in with suggestions that might not be helpful. But one that impressed me the other day was several residents noticing a case of public urination: cops were called, simply asked to show their presence. And they did arrive.

I confess that the civil libertarian in me has issues with the notion of zero tolerance made so popular by Rudy Giuliani, but there is no doubt that it changed the public perceived face of New York that I grew up knowing. There are various messages that we want to send out: that we will not tolerate crime -- prostitution, drug dealing, public urination, etc. — and that the police are in the area to watch and see as well as to enforce.

And therein lies the main issue of Mr. Suderow’s complaint as I see it. What exactly does he want the police to do? If he was at the meeting held last week in response to this horrific crime, he would have seen that the police are out there, that they can’t talk a lot about an ongoing investigation, that the neighbors -- those who are in the immediate area he discusses, not several blocks away — are concerned and taking action and working with the police. If he was not at the meeting, he should have been. On the one hand, he appears to make fun of the police for being in the area with their lights on, implying that that is not enough. On the other hand, he then scoffs at them for the one example he provides where not only did the "jump-out team" appear, but did so on one of the worst corners in the area. Rather than simply making sarcastic comments, I suggest that Mr. Suderow consider offering concrete action.


Ban on Smoking
Erica Nash, 

Bottom line, smoking kills. It’s not a hypothesis, it’s a fact. I smoked all through high school and college and quit just before graduation. And the whole myth that reformed smokers are worse, is just that, a myth. I recently moved to NYC and while going out to bars and restaurants is now an absolute pleasure, it’s pretty tough, when it’s 90 degrees with 100 percent humidity, to walk down the street with all of the smokers congregating outside of buildings . . . to breathe!

You wanna smoke, you have every right to do it; I don’t want to and therefore shouldn’t be forced to by having to sit in a nonsmoking section that is merely divided by an imaginary wall. It’s amazing how Ireland and Scotland have finally caught on that smoking kills and England isn’t too far behind, and California has been nonsmoking for about ten years, but our good old boy’s network of a Capitol can’t seem to agree to decades worth of credible research and statistics. And when it boils down to it, it’s not a matter of if it will pass in DC, it’s a matter of when, and it’s coming pretty quickly. Hoorah!


On Tobacco, Gary Imhoff Loses Touch with Reality
David Sobelsohn, dsobelso -at- capaccess -dot- org 

In the June 29 issue of themail, Gary Imhoff wrote “The results of the scientific studies on secondhand smoke have been politicized and exaggerated for political purposes, to aid in a movement to prohibit smoking entirely, in gradual steps.” Gary, get a grip! I expected better from you than this canard. California has banned smoking in restaurants and simultaneously legalized (or tried to legalize) smoking marijuana, in private, for medical purposes. Most of those who support smoke-free restaurants also support liberalization of the marijuana laws. Are we all schizophrenic? Or do we just prefer marijuana to tobacco? No, we just think there’s a time and a place for everything, and there are good ways to regulate harmful behavior, and bad ways to regulate harmful behavior. Lots of activities are acceptable in private but not in public. Lots of harmful behavior is and should be tolerated when it harms only the person behaving badly and no one else. None of the leaders I know in the movement for smoke-free indoor air thinks a total prohibition of smoking makes sense. I hope we learned from Prohibition that the criminal law is a rough tool. When it addresses conduct usually taking place in private, enforcement costs are extremely high. It’s not worth it when the people regulated are mostly harming only themselves, as are most smokers who smoke in private. If anyone tried “to prohibit smoking entirely,” I’d be at the battle-lines denouncing it as stupid and unenforceable, as it would be, and as I have argued for decades against our current stupid method of regulating illegal drugs. But smoking in public, in restaurants? Enforcement costs are pretty low, as the California and New York examples indicate. Yes, sure, all of us agitating for clean indoor air — especially the medical professionals who see the damage of smoking up close — will be pleased when no one uses tobacco any more. I got sick when my mother used to light up her cigarettes, and my father his cigars. But would I have put them in jail? Not on your life. Would it help the kids of smoking parents to send their parents to jail for smoking? Maybe I’ve heard more idiotic suggestions than that, but I can’t remember when. Gary, you would do Chicken Little proud.


Government Regulation Is Not a Dirty Word
Angela Bradbery, 

After reading all the submissions over the past few weeks, I feel compelled to write in. Kudos to those who understand the dangers of secondhand smoke and the need for smokefree workplace legislation. I am baffled at those who must belong to the Flat Earth Society and who question the well-established science showing secondhand smoke causes disease in nonsmokers. Since when did government regulation become a dirty word? Does it occur to folks that when they turn on their tap, they get clean water (or in DC, relatively clean water) because of government safety standards? Or that all vehicles come equipped with seat belts because of government rules? Do you really want the marketplace to handle oversight of prescription drug safety and cut the government out of it? What about toys? Do you want manufacturers to make whatever they want with no government guidelines at all to ensure toys are basically safe for kids? The government’s role is to maintain basic health and safety standards by setting rules that people must abide by for the good of society.

Those who protest “nanny government” in regards to smokefree workplace legislation are missing several key points: 1) no one has the right to harm the health of those around them. 2) The proposal is not a ban. It is not telling people they cannot smoke; it merely asks them to step outside to protect the health of people around them. 3) A public place and a workplace should have clean air. Why should people who want to tend bar or wait tables jeopardize their health for a job? Why should the four in five DC residents who don’t smoke be unable to go out if they want to get a drink at a bar, shoot pool, or listen to live music without breathing toxins? (Contrary to information you may have heard, a small fraction of DC restaurants are smokefree. Just one bar is smokefree. There is just one smokefree venue for live music — Blues Alley — and none for billiards.) Just because you own business doesn’t mean you can do whatever you please. If you have workers and customers coming into your establishment, you must abide by certain health and safety regulations. You can’t leave food unrefrigerated. You can’t crowd the tables and create a fire hazard, and so on. Smokefree workplace legislation is just another basic health and safety rule that cities, states and countries throughout the world are adopting.

Carol Schwartz’s analogy was way off the mark. If Gary is sitting next to Dorothy and he drinks a six-pack of beer, it won’t hurt Dorothy in the least. But if Gary sits next to Dorothy and smokes six packs of cigarettes, he is harming her health. Yes, drinking can harm others if one drives drunk, and that is precisely why there are laws against doing so. Please don’t say that smoking sections and nonsmoking sections are sufficient; that’s like having the peeing and non-peeing sections of a swimming pool. The smoke travels and everybody breathes it. Secondhand smoke has been classified by the EPA as a class A carcinogen. There is no safe level of exposure to it. If I were to run around a restaurant spritzing arsenic and benzene into the air, I would be arrested for endangering the public health. Yet those are just two of more than 4,000 chemicals in secondhand smoke, which is being spritzed through the air daily across the city.

Smokefree workplace laws are not a new concept, folks. Nine states, many cities and several countries (including Ireland) have enacted smokefree workplace laws. Smokers don’t stop going out; they simply step outside to smoke. Smokefree states and cities are thriving. Smokers survive without a cigarette for several hours when they go to the movies and for many more hours when they fly on an airplane. Under the DC proposal, smokers can still smoke whenever they want. We just ask that they step outside to do so, which is eminently reasonable. DC prides itself on being progressive, but in this arena, it is falling way short. Let’s make sure we’re not the last city in the country to recognize that everyone has a right to breathe clean air on the job.


Secondhand Smoke Is a Serious Health Hazard
Eric Marshall, 

I would like to address some inaccurate statements made about the American Cancer Society and smoke-free workplaces in last week’s issue of themail [June 29]. As an organization, we set a challenge goal of a 50 percent reduction in the cancer death rate by the year 2015. Cancer prevention is the key element in attaining this goal, and comprehensive smoke-free workplaces laws play a vital role. Secondhand smoke is a serious health hazard that causes cancer, heart disease, emphysema, and other serious diseases in nonsmokers. Every major public health agency in the country has made similar statements about the health of secondhand smoke. It was interesting that the credibility of the American Cancer Society and the Environmental Protection Agency called into question in one sentence, and then the statements of Penn and Teller and Michael Crichton espoused in the next. Even if I didn’t work at the American Cancer Society, I would still find it hard to believe that a comedic duo and an author would be a more credible source about secondhand smoke than these two major health organizations.

Second, a statement by the American Cancer Society was taken out of context. Smoke-free workplaces protect workers, the public, people with certain health conditions, the elderly, and children from the hazardous effects of secondhand smoke. True, prohibiting smoking in bars will not protect many children from the affects of secondhand smoke. However, it will protect workers and the thousands of Washingtonians who patronize DC’s bars every year. The American Cancer Society actively supports smoke-free workplaces legislation across the country. The line, “…it is important that any such policies be as strong as possible, and that they do not prevent action at other levels of government,” refers to loopholes and preemptive actions by state governments over local smoke-free workplaces ordinances, not homes or automobiles.

Third, the Philip Morris web site was falsely quoted. Nowhere on the site that Bruce Jones provided did it say “…and it makes us say that, too, to escape further costly litigation.” In fact I found this on the web site, “Philip Morris USA believes that the public should be guided by the conclusions of public health officials regarding the health effects of secondhand smoke in deciding whether to be in places where secondhand smoke is present.”

Seventy-four percent of DC voters, nine councilmembers, the mayor, and over eighty local organizations, including the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, support a comprehensive smoke-free workplaces law for one simple reason: secondhand smoke is a serious health hazard. Everybody has the right to breathe smoke-free air, and nobody should have to choose between a good job and good health.


Blowing Smoke
Gary Imhoff, 

Let me repeat: the scientific evidence on any health risks posed by secondhand smoke is heavily politicized by advocacy groups like the Smokefree DC and the American Cancer Society. Advocates claim that any exposure to tobacco smoke is dangerous, but the science doesn’t support them. Advocates of smoking bans assert their great authority and heap scorn on skeptics, but do not support their claims with reliable, scientific proof of high levels of health risks from secondhand smoke. The scientific studies show that secondhand smoke poses a minimal risk to health, but it would not be a great enough risk to justify government intervention if the subject were anything other than smoking tobacco. Government’s proper role is protecting people from proven health risks that they may be exposed to involuntarily. Unless our government aspires to becoming a nanny state, it should not ban most health risks that people take voluntarily, like smoking, skateboarding, or playing football. Neither should government ban people from doing things that merely irritate other people, like smoking, skateboarding, or talking incessantly about football.

The question, as I wrote, is one of dosage. All sorts of things are poisonous, but many poisonous things are harmless and safe in low doses, and all poisonous things are harmless in low enough doses. There are dangerous chemicals in tobacco. Smoking tobacco over the course of many years can cause illness and death in susceptible people. But how dangerous are these chemicals in the much, much lower doses contained in secondhand smoke? The advocates confuse the issue by concentrating on the proven dangers of smoking. They also confuse the irritation caused by any smoke with potential health dangers. The smoke from a pipe of tobacco, a barbecue pit, or a pile of burning leaves smells good, but breathing in too much of any smoke will make people cough and wheeze. It’s better to breath clean air than smoky air, but the irritation doesn’t prove anything about disease.

Finally, either I am a very poor humorist or Eric Marshall has a tin ear for humor, or both. I parodied Philip Morris’ obedient recital on its web site of what the government requires it to say in order to escape further litigation. Marshall claims that I was dishonestly trying to pass off my line as a direct quotation. Was I that unclear? And when I cited Penn and Teller and Michael Crichton on this subject, I referred to them as “eminent authorities.” Isn’t that a good enough clue to show the tongue in my cheek? But Marshall’s disparagement of Penn, Teller, and Crichton does bring up a point. They’re all smart people who know how to read and evaluate scientific reports, and Crichton is also a physician. None of them questions the real, proven dangers of smoking. They’re just saying that secondhand smoke doesn’t pose nearly the same risk as smoking.



DC Public Library Events
Debra Truhart, 

July 5-25, Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Library, 901 G Street, NW, 2nd Floor East Exhibit Hall. Exhibit: Writing for the Community. An exhibit of articles, poetry and essays with art and photographs by young journalists, activists and poets participating in DC SCORES, an after school program in DC Public Schools. Public contact: 727-1183.

July 5-28, Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Library, 901 G Street, NW. American Sign Language classes are provided by the Librarian for the Deaf Community, Adaptive Services Division of the DC Public Library. Please check outer lobby bulletin board for class locations. Beginning level: Tuesday and Thursday, 5:30 p.m. (7/5-7/28). Intermediate level: Wednesday, noon (7/6-7/27). Conversational level: Saturday, 10:30 a.m. (7/2-7/16). Young adults and adults. Public contact: 727-2145 (TTY and voice).

July 5-28, Washington Highlands Neighborhood Library, 115 Atlantic Street, SW. Literacy tutoring for reading, writing and math provided by the Urban League Reading Information Center. Tuesday and Thursday, 1-6 p.m., Wednesday, 10 a.m.-5 p.m. Young adults and adults. Public contact: 645-5880.

Thursday, July 7, 12:00 p.m., Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Library, 901 G Street, NW, Room A-5. Brown Bag Recital Series. Cellist Vassily Popov and Pianist Ralitza Patcheva perform music by J. Brahms, C. Szymanowski and S. Prokofiev. Public contact: 727-1285.

Thursday, July 7, 2:30 p.m., Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Library, 901 G Street, NW, Room 221. Let’s Talk About Books. A group discussion of “The Lottery,” a short story by Shirley Jackson. Public contact: 727-1281.


Reel Architecture Film Series, July 9-August 24
Brie Hensold, 

As part of its twenty-fifth anniversary celebrations, the National Building Museum will present a film series dedicated to the relationship between architecture and cinema. This series will kick off on Saturday, July 9, and Sunday, July 10, with two full days of movies addressing the shape of Hollywood’s home town -- Los Angeles. The Reel Architecture Film Series will then continue with 8:15 p.m. programs on seven consecutive Wednesdays, July 13 through August 24. These screenings will showcase American films that reflect themes related to the National Building Museum’s 25 years of exhibitions, such as sustainability, transportation and transit, and office design in America. On some evenings, short-form documentaries will precede the feature film.

The Wednesday night programs will take place in the Museum’s Great Hall. Doors will open at 7:15 p.m. Live music by local bands before the screenings will add to the festivities. Select exhibitions will also be open for viewing. Seating is first-come first-served, with only a small number of chairs available; so bring your blankets and pillows and spread out on the carpeted floor of the Great Hall! Outside food and nonalcoholic beverages are permitted. Concessions will be available for purchase. No registration required. Free admission. All movies at the National Building Museum, 401 F Street, NW, Judiciary Square stop, Metro Red Line. For a complete schedule of films, see


Unknown Confederate Soldiers Memorial Service, July 16
Jerry A. McCoy, 

Please join us for a memorial service for the unknown Confederate soldiers buried at Grace Episcopal Church Cemetery on Saturday, July 16, at 10:00 a.m. The soldiers were killed at the Battle of Ft. Stevens in the District of Columbia on July 11-12, 1864.

Featured will be a Color Guard, bagpiper, bugler, balladeer, floral wreath presentation, and Civil War re-enactors in period and refreshments. Grace Episcopal Church is located at 1607 Grace Church Road, at the corner of Georgia Avenue, in Silver Spring, MD.



Executive Director, H Street Main Street
Brednan Danaher,

H Street Main Street is seeking an executive director. This person will lead the organization’s economic development programs on the H Street, NE, corridor. For a full description, please see: 



Adams Morgan Day
Corinna Moebius,

Volunteers are needed for this year’s Adams Morgan Day, sponsored by Adams Morgan MainStreet, to take place on Sunday, September 11. We will need at least a hundred volunteers for the day of the event, as well as volunteers as soon as possible to help us work on aspects of the festival, such as the kid’s fair, vendors, permits, music and dance stages, Arts on Belmont, etc. If interested, please go to to download the Volunteer Application and send it to Applications for arts, crafts, retail, and food vendors are also available at this web address.


Restoration of the Big Chair Project
Sharon Wise,

We are seeking volunteers, professional carpenters, funds, and organizations to participate in the parade that will lead to the unveiling of the Big Chair once it is complete. The restoration will begin October 3-7, and the unveiling celebration will be October 8, down Martin Luther King, Jr., Avenue, SE. If you and your organization would like to participate, please call International Executive Assistant, Armetria Knight, 531-1187.


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 To unsubscribe, send an E-mail message to with “unsubscribe” in the subject line. Archives of past messages are available at

All postings should also be submitted to, 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.

Send mail with questions or comments to
Web site copyright ©DCWatch (ISSN 1546-4296)