Salutary Elections
Dear Electors:
Even in DC, an election race can have a salutary effect on
politicians. The Common Denominator has an online report on the
Ward 5 Democrats mayoral candidates forum that includes the good news
that Council Chairman Linda Cropp has decided that from now on the
private, closed-door business breakfasts that the council holds before
each legislative session will be open: “Cropp told the crowd at the
forum, sponsored by the Ward 5 Democrats, that she informed her fellow
council members ‘last month’ that she was opening the breakfast
meetings. . . . Cropp’s comments came in response to Councilman
Orange, who chairs the government operations committee, telling the
audience that he and Ward 3 Councilwoman Kathy Patterson plan to
introduce legislation to strengthen the city’s open meetings law.
Current DC law requires only that final votes by the city council and
other government bodies be conducted at public meetings. The law
requires no public notice of meetings, permits discussion of public
business to take place without the public’s involvement or knowledge,
and includes no penalties for violation of the law” (http://www.thecommondenominator.com/032706_update1.html).
For years, the council has deliberately flouted the intent of the
public meeting law by making its real deals and tradeoffs in private
meetings, and holding just its final formal votes in public. It takes an
election in which incumbent candidates Cropp, Orange, and Patterson see
a real chance that they could lose their seats to get them to do the
right thing, and to get the council to pass a sunshine law with teeth
and penalties. But I want to see them deliver now, before the primaries.
I don’t want this law to be a promise of action sometime in the
future, because we know how well candidates can be counted on to keep
their campaign promises. The follow-up to the Common
Denominator story in today’s Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/28/AR2006032802278.html)
says that Cropp is opening the breakfast meetings only to reporters, not
the public, and that she predicts the meetings will be closed again
soon. Cropp speaks for many councilmembers who are not fans of
conducting the public’s business in public. Unless airtight sunshine
legislation is passed under the pressure of the election campaign, the
bad conduct is sure to be resumed.
What other legislation would you like to see the council pass, in the
few months before the election when members of the public have their
attention?
Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com
###############
Eminent Domain, Part II
Ed Johnson, mvcorderito at yahoo dot com
Since no one seems to have cried “unfair” to my argument
(accusation?) that we turn a blind eye to abuses of eminent domain when
we don’t feel all warm and fuzzy about the victims [themail, March ],
it makes me think I may have been correct. Optimist that I am, I have to
believe that at least some people think we should be doing something
about it. Consider that the acts that created the National Capital
Revitalization Corporation and more recently the Anacostia Waterfront
Corporation: DC ST §2-1223.12 “(a) The Corporation may acquire and
assemble land, real property, easements, and other interests in real
property through condemnation of property by eminent domain in
furtherance of the public purposes of this subchapter, in accordance
with Chapter 13 of Title 16. Any exercise of eminent domain power by the
Corporation shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of the
Board members. The condemnation proceedings shall be brought in the name
of the Corporation, and title to the properties shall be taken in the
name of the Corporation.”
While other municipalities are limiting the use of eminent domain,
our city council is handing out free passes to quasi public-private
entities for the express purpose of taking private property for whatever
they decide to call economic development. Am I alone in thinking this is
going way too far? I ran across a good resource for people interested in
curbing the use of eminent domain. The Castle Coalition is a project of
the Institute for Justice, “The Castle Coalition does whatever it
takes to keep homes, small businesses and houses of worship safe from
the government and its corporate allies.” They have a great resource
page for the do-it-yourself grassroots lobbyist: http://www.castlecoalition.org/legislation/index.html.
###############
Why Are They Afraid of a Certificate of Need
Review?
Pat Taylor, ptaylor.dc@verizon.net
For some months now Howard University and the DC Administration have
been leaning on the DC council to exempt their proposed new hospital
from the requirement of a Certificate of Need review and certificate.
Why is Howard University so opposed to a Certificate of Need review of
the proposed National Capital Medical Center? Why are Mayor Williams and
City Administrator Bobb so opposed to a Certificate of Need review of
the proposed new hospital? Why aren’t our representatives welcoming
the open public process of a CON review by independent experts, which
would show them that the NCMC is a wise investment in the health and
health care of Wards 7 and 8 residents, if it is? The extreme vigor with
which Howard University Hospital and DC City Administrator Bobb are
lobbying DC councilmembers to waive the CON review should raise a great
big question mark in the minds of those councilmembers.
What are they afraid of? What is it in the NCMC proposal they are
hiding from DC Councilmembers and citizens? An open CON review process
is the way to find out. An FHA review behind closed doors will not
answer this question. Is it that the new hospital’s additional 250
hospital beds are not needed? Howard now operates only 291 beds of its
482 licensed beds because it has judged this is the number of beds its
needs to care for its patients (DCHA 2005 report). Then why does Howard
now think it makes sense to it make sense to add another 250 hospital
beds to the DC supply, this after a number of years in which DC
hospitals have been operating fewer and fewer of their licensed beds?
Is it that claims of the new hospital’s financial viability are
based on unrealistic assumptions? Howard University Hospital on Georgia
Avenue had a 2005 operating deficit of about 7 percent ($17.3 million),
even after receiving a $30 million federal subsidy amounting to about 12
percent of its revenues. In other words, the hospital’s 2005 deficit
without the federal subsidy would have been about 19 percent. (These
percentage estimates, based on US Department of Education reports for
HUH’s 2004 revenues and expenses, are likely good ballpark estimates.)
Some part of this deficit is very likely due to the insurance mix of
Howard’s patients. In 2004, 51 percent of its revenues were from
Medicaid, including DC Healthy Families and DC Healthcare Alliance, and
uninsured patients (DCHA 2005 report). These are insurance payors who
typically pay less than the cost of the care received so hospitals lose
money on these patients. For comparison, it is helpful to see the much
smaller percentage of payments below the cost of care delivered at major
DC hospitals that break even or almost: Washington Hospital Center, 17
percent; George Washington University Hospital, 15 percent; Georgetown
University Hospital, 12 percent. What is the support for the assertion
that the proposed hospital’s payor mix will be more positive than
Howard University Hospital’s? Why is the proposed new hospital
expected to be financially viable when Howard University Hospital is
barely viable with its generous federal appropriation? Especially since
Howard University’s president says its hospital on Georgia Avenue will
be kept in operation and presumably will need that $30 million annual
federal appropriation to balance its books.
It is disingenuous of City Administrator Bobb to argue against a CON
review on the grounds the review would take many years and therefore
unnecessarily delay the opening of the new hospital. The time required
for CON review could well be comparable to the six-month time period of
the CON review for George Washington University Hospital’s new
hospital. That said, the CON review process might extend beyond next
fall’s elections, but surely no DC councilmember will be deterred from
backing CON review for that reason.
###############
The financial underpinning of the National Capitol Medical Center (NCMC)
is the use of bonds backed by the tobacco settlement money — which is
what the March 13 city council hearing on the “Tobacco Settlement
Trust Fund and Tobacco Settlement Financing Amendment Act of 2006,”
was ostensibly about. Now, we hear that the tobacco settlement fund may
be in financial trouble (see story in Tuesday’s Washington
Examiner, “Battle Looms for States, Tobacco Companies,” http://www.examiner.com/Search-a60779~Battle_Looms_for_States__Tobacco_Companies.html).
According to a story in The Bond Buyer of March 8 [available
online only to subscribers], “Some tobacco bond analysts say that if a
final determination is reached that favors the major tobacco companies
— and they choose to withhold part of their payments or put that
amount into escrow funds pending a final determination — the impact on
tobacco bonds could be severe.” It looks like this is exactly what is
happening.
In lay person’s terms, that means the interest rate we would have
to pay goes way up. And that means that the cost of the NCMC goes way
up. So, why are we relying on this potentially shaky financing
structure? What happens if the city can’t raise the amount of money it
needs at the projected interest rate? What are the consequences for the
city’s long-term financial health? And why did the Chief Financial
Officer’s representative testify at the hearing that "market
conditions are favorable" given the concerns cited above? Why did
he testify that we should go ahead and sell the bonds independent from
any decisions as to how to use the money? Was this just so they could
have some off-books funds to use for other purposes without any review
by the council or public (the concern I raised in my earlier posting and
my testimony to the council)?
Finally, given all these questions, why has the city council
scheduled the first reading on this bill for April 4? As I’ve stated
before, this is just another series of unanswered questions and another
reason why the council needs to take a very careful look at this whole
proposal.
###############
Guerilla Advertising
Denise Wiktor, DDOT, denise.wiktor@dc.gov
There is a guerilla advertising group that is paid to place graffiti
advertising on sidewalks in public space. Another location was
identified to me yesterday. It was orange and was a Verizon
advertisement. Now I understand there are two on Connecticut Avenue
sidewalks in Woodley Park, near the Chipotle and Mr. Chen’s. I would
appreciate it if anyone sees such advertisement would E-mail me with its
location so that we can ensure it is removed and the parties properly
sanctioned. You may reach me at denise.wiktor@dc.gov.
###############
The Metropolitan Police Department’s Gay and Lesbian Liaison Unit (GLLU)
has been honored as one of the top fifty government innovations for
2006. Harvard University’s Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and
Innovations has honored GLLU from among a thousand applicants for
helping to redefine community policing by coupling community outreach
with traditional crime fighting. Congratulations for this well deserved
recognition of their community service. A special thanks go to Sergeant
Brett Parson, officers, reserve officers and civilian auxiliary members
of MPD’s Gay and Lesbian Liaison Unit for their tireless commitment to
make community policing work.
Their office is located at 1369-A Connecticut Avenue, NW, east of
Dupont Circle, entrance on the Massachusetts Avenue side of the Sun
Trust Bank Building. Their web site is http://www.gaydc.net/gllu/.
###############
The DCPS Master Education Plan for SY2007:
What to Drop; What to Keep; What’s Missing
Erich Martel, Wilson High School, eh martel at starpower
dot net
The DC Public Schools Master Education Plan contains a number of
expensive proposals, many with little or no evidence of success, but
written in prose designed to evoke visions of success: theme high
schools, in-house academies, “differentiated instruction,” “parent
resource centers,” increased graduation requirements, rewards for
success (i.e., doing one’s job), and expensive technology-based
learning programs. Principals will now be “instructional leaders,”
classrooms will be inviting. and all will be “seamless.” The MEP is
silent on principals’ and teachers’ responsibility for establishing
an orderly and quiet atmosphere conducive to concentration and paying
attention, key prerequisites of learning. It promotes a philosophy that
students are not responsible for behavior that supports learning. There
is simply no acknowledgment of the anti-learning behavior that defines
the atmosphere of many schools and leads concerned parents to pick
charter schools. There is no mention of students disrupting classes,
roaming hallways, acting abusively and inappropriately toward other
students and adults, arriving in class with headsets, iPods and cell
phones, but no pencil, pen, or notebook. All of the fads and learning
gimmicks rest on the premise: if the teacher doesn’t make learning
fun, students have a right not to learn.
I have written a review that suggests specific reductions or cuts in
proposed program-related expenditures; describes current flaws in
special education that the Blackman Decree doesn’t address; and
analyzes the newly released individual high school graduation data (2000
to 2005), the widespread practice of "social graduation" or
awarding diplomas to ineligible students, and the absence of real
accountability and transparency. It will help Board Members understand
why an increase in graduation requirements — at least for the
foreseeable future -- is counterproductive to improved student learning.
That review is available at http://www.dcpswatch.com/martel/060326.htm.
Meanwhile, here is a summary of proposed deletions from the FY2007
DCPS budget: 1) the “Principal Leadership Institute” (PLI); possible
FY2007 savings, $1,800,000. 2) The “Parent Resource Centers”;
possible FY2007 savings, $3,000,000. Parents belong in every school, not
in parent centers. The Master Plan reduces the amount by $2,000,000; now
it should cut the remaining $3,000,000. 3) The “Full Community-School
Partnerships Modeled After J.C. Nalle, 3 per Yr”; possible FY2007
savings, $318,000. Do “Full Service Community Schools” improve
student learning? The case of J.C. Nalle Elementary School raises doubt.
4) “Differentiated Instruction”; possible FY2007 savings,
$1,500,000. Differentiated Instruction is an educational fad “lacking
empirical validation.” 5) Stipends for National Board Certifications;
potential savings for FY2007 unclear (cost not given). But do fund the
Tennessee model of value-added assessment: $100,000 may not be enough.
6) SummerBridge; possible FY2007 savings, $2,665,000. Does the
SummerBridge program, “piloted successfully in four schools in summer
2005,” “improve student achievement” (MEP, p. 69)? Or, “Were the
positive impacts a result of the particular students who ended up in the
program?” (MEP, p. 95). 7) Ninth Grade Academy expansion; possible
FY07 savings, $85,000.
Finally, DCPS can achieve long-term savings by fixing Special
Education (SE). It should raise the pay of SE classroom aides
(Paraprofessionals, EG4); stop counting SE Coordinators as a local
school cost; stop ignoring local school abuses of Special Education;
stop the misdirection of federal special education funds; and adjust the
Weighted Student Formula funding for each school to match the actual
number of SE students in each intensity level following the October
enrollment count.
###############
Post Details
Doubt About Ballpark Revenue
Ed Delaney, profeddel@yahoo.com
“The return of a professional baseball team to the city last year
provided a new venue for lobbyists to entertain members of Congress and
their staff at RFK Stadium. But Nationals executives fear their
popularity among the federal elite might decline, concerned that a
significant piece of their business could be affected by the Abramoff
scandal, which is leading many lobbyists and elected officials to
reconsider how and where they do business. An emerging bill in the
Senate would effectively prohibit members of Congress from accepting
tickets to major DC Area professional sporting events from registered
lobbyists. Nationals President Tony Tavares said the team already has
had some ‘push back’ from lobbyists who were ticket holders a year
ago, and it has led to the cancellation of ticket plans for about 100
prime seats at RFK. Even if Congress does nothing, several lobbyists
said the affair will cut down on the number of tickets available on
Capitol Hill. ‘It will have a chilling effect,’ said Gregory Gill,
executive VP of Cassidy & Associates, a prominent lobbying firm. ‘We
have Nationals, Capitals and Wizards tickets. There are times I have
given tickets to Hill staffers. Will I do that any more? No. What’s
the point of having them if we can’t entertain Hill staffers or
members?’ He said the firm has decided to cancel its tickets at
Verizon Center. ‘A lot of people do a lot of business at sports and
entertainment events,’ said Thomas Boggs, chairman of Patton Boggs LLP,
a top lobbying firm that shares a suite at FedEx Field. ‘The people
who will do it, it will have an effect on considerably. Members of
Congress and their staff will be reluctant to accept tickets to sporting
events.’” (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/27/AR2006032702036.html)
The cancellation of 100 prime seats will result in the loss of quite
a significant chunk of change, with possibly more to come given the
pending legislation and the aforementioned “chilling effect” that‘s
going on at Capitol Hill. Anyone want to guess if the integrity-soaked
CFO will factor in this significant variable into the report he’s
compiling to Wall Street? And you’ve gotta love how the Brigade fought
to obligate the city to pay every penny that the cut-rate boondoggle of
a ballpark will cost, while those lobbyists who fully supported the
Brigade’s effort to build the ballpark (at the public‘s expense and
not their own, of course) can simply choose not to fund the stadium’s
construction and existence in the form of ticket and suite purchases
when it doesn’t work to their advantage. Way to go, DC council!
“Although Washington’s business community is much more diverse
than it was even a decade ago, lobbying is still a huge part of the city’s
culture. Verizon Center and FedEx Field — with their rings of luxury
suites and club seats — were designed to maximize income from the
money lobbyists, corporations and other organizations spend to entertain
politicians and executive branch officials. Verizon Center earns between
$165,000 and $265,000 per year” on each of its 114 suites. One of the
244 or so luxury suites at FedEx Field can cost up to $200,000 a season.
Every report from the Brigade showed that the main reason for a new
stadium was the massive benefits to be had with as many luxury suites as
possible. MLB even insisted against the existing budget guidelines that
an entire concourse level of additional club seats and suites be added
to the stadium design after the agreement had been reached, and the
DCSEC eventually acquiesced in another move that left the city holding
the bag and cost consequences. All of these projections were based on
ideal conditions and didn’t remotely factor in variables such as the
Abramoff case, which the local media downplayed to the Brigade’s
benefit and which the DC Council had started to recognize before getting
cold feet and making their midnight closed door deals that tied the city
to this boondoggle.
“The Nationals say they will go ahead with their plan to include 78
luxury suites at their new 41,000-seat ballpark on the Anacostia River
because they are confident they can make up the difference from any lost
business from lobbyists. ‘Lobbying is just one small part of the
commercial population that is out there,’ Tavares said. ‘There are
other parts of the DC economy that can fill the demand.’” Note how
when it comes to luxury suites, that‘s the one part of the stadium
project that won’t be downsized or value-engineered out of the plans!
Once again, the Brigade reacts with “Don’t think twice, it‘s all
right!” to answer any significant cost or revenue question. It’s not
as easy to fill in the gap as newly arrived Tavares suggests. As I
pointed out when challenging the latest dubiously-high ballpark revenue
numbers in which the unbelievable projections credited “premiums on
suite and club seat leases” as the reason for the increase, those
revenue streams were already extremely questionable and uncertain. The
October 8, 2004, Post article discussing these uncertainties
noted the competition for luxury suite dollars that goes with the
opening of yet another new stadium in the region, and further pointed
out that “some corporate executives already are expressing a sense of
skybox fatigue and wonder if current investments in tickets to
entertainment venues are worth the price.” The example given was
Verizon, which though it owned suites and ticket blocks at other
regional stadiums, would not commit to leasing a luxury suite at the
planned ballpark and, like many companies, doesn’t have a limitless
budget on that front. If there are shortfalls on that front, it’s not
MLB or the business or lobbying communities who will make up the
difference — it’s DC taxpayers. Thanks, DC council!
“‘We have had people call from lobbying firms and indicate they
are hesitant to move forward with their season ticket purchases, asking
for more time, which we can’t give them,’ Tavares said. ‘There
could be more of a measurable impact, but we won’t know until they
pass the new rules.’ One person who is leading a group of investors
trying to buy the Nationals said that any legislation that affects the
number of tickets purchased by lobbying firms and corporations was a
concern. ‘It definitely could impact sales of suites and premium
seats,’ said another bidder, who requested anonymity for fear of
offending baseball and losing his chance to buy the team. ‘We would
have to make it up elsewhere.’” All of this uncertainty is just part
of many variables that could lead to a revenue shortfall that would
negatively impact the funding of the stadium if something goes wrong.
Yet out of the major local media and DC government, it was only a
handful of councilmembers who discussed these variables and the
consequences of leaving the city at the mercy of those variables by
tying the city alone to the costs of the ballpark — only to have their
reasoned arguments eventually marginalized and shouted down by the
Cropps, Pattersons, and Evans of the world as the Brigade maneuvered
things to the benefit of MLB and a handful of select developers.
Accountability must occur, and election day can‘t come soon enough for
that.
###############
As a native-born Washingtonian who is also an African-American female
and former Chair of the District of Columbia Democratic State Committee,
I am deeply offended by Leo Alexander’s rant in the March 26 issue of
themail. My city has a long record of electing candidates regardless of
race to public and party offices, based on their qualifications and
commitment to serving the residents. If I have a concern, it is that the
number of women serving on the city council may drop from four to one
after the September elections. Mr. Alexander needs to study the history
of its residents, and stop insulting the intelligence of our residents
with his simplistic statements about what is best for us. If he finds
that this too difficult, then maybe he needs to take his brand of hate
and move to another city.
###############
Leo Alexander is completely correct! There are black issues and white
issues. There are black positions and white positions. All black
citizens must always vote for black politicians, who are the only ones
who can be relied upon to always support black positions on black
issues. Similarly, all white citizens must always vote for white
politicians, who are the only ones who can be relied upon to always
support white positions on white issues. Now what ?
###############
Race in the Election
Kathryn M. Sinzinger, The Common Denominator, NewsDC@aol.com
Dear Leo, I find this message from you, posted in themail@dcwatch.com,
to be very disturbing. It is clear to me, from my long contact with
persons of all races and all ethnicities in DC, that whites and blacks
are both extremely concerned about the issues you raise — and you
leave out our growing Hispanic community, which is both black and white.
I do not believe that race is the main issue; I do believe that
economics is the real 800-pound gorilla, along with our city leaders
being almost totally out of touch with the reality of life in DC for
most of us who are residents — probably, in part, because their
salaries are so far out of line with the typical DC wage-earner that
they are sheltered from the economic impact of their government
decisions.
I think arguments such as yours — that only people of a specific
race have the right sensitivity to lead DC forward for all its residents
-- have been blinding people in this city for far too long. Our current
leaders who are black have taken many official actions that have hurt
the black community, just as our current leaders who are white have
taken many official actions that have hurt the white community. I also
have a problem with defining a community as “black” or “white.”
I have never in my life identified myself as part of the “white
community.” I consider myself to be a part of my community — DC, my
entire community — and I continue to urge persons of all races
(including you) to embrace our whole city as their own. That’s the
only way we will move forward to create a self-sustaining community in
DC. A community cannot move forward without its residents.
And, by the way, there are more than five declared Democratic mayoral
candidates and more than two declared Democratic council chairman
candidates. Check the official government sources, where folks are
required to file the legal paperwork to be a real candidate. The
political establishment in DC is a large part of the problem when the
people who profess to support democratic institutions and processes
(with a lowercase “d”) fail to walk their talk.
###############
The 800-Pound Gorilla
Ralph J. Chittams, Sr., chittams@sewkis.com
With all due respect, I think you started with the wrong question.
Whether it is right or wrong, the truth of the matter is people, in
general, do vote race. There are always exceptions, Barak Obama. If race
in politics were not an issue, the question is America ready for a Black
president would not have to be asked. For the citizens of the District
of Columbia of African descent, the primary question should be, why don’t
you vote? If they voted, following the general trend that people do vote
race, the city council would not and could not have a white majority. I
am not saying this is right or wrong, I am just stating a truth. Is DC’s
politics stuck on race? For some people, yes! But more importantly, DC
politics is stuck on Party. Now, moving to the agenda question, there is
no monolithic Black or White agenda; however, there are class agendas,
there are cultural agendas, and there are political agendas, and these
are not based upon race. And where individuals do not fall within a
preconceived notion of how a Black person is supposed to vote
(Democratic, pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, pro-gay marriage), that
person will be viewed as not really Black. No one person defines an
agenda for an entire race of people -- not Leo Alexander, Jesse Jackson,
George Bush, or Bill Clinton. To even imply such infantilizes an entire
race of people. Who is best to represent me is the person who most
closely matches how I feel on a wide-range of issues — for me, race is
of no consequence.
###############
Are You Trying to Be Funny?
Beatrice Irby Smith, bis_e1@yahoo.com
Gary Imhoff: I may be assuming too much, but do you live in DC? Do
you have a family? Have you ever visited where I live in SE? I live on
the stolen-car-capital-of-the-nation street. The children have nothing
better to do with their time for enjoyment than rip off unwary auto
drivers. Where are their after school centers and study halls? Yes, damn
it, it is all about race!
I challenge you to take a ride on the District buses. On Connecticut
Avenue the bus is clean, frequent and uncrowded. At any time of the day
on Benning Road the bus is a double one that runs infrequently, mostly
overcrowded — especially during the hours when the maids are going to
or returning from cleaning the homes up Connecticut Avenue way. Does
that make any sense at all? Would not simple reason dictate that the
most buses be placed on the routes where there is the most use? Yes,
damn it, it is all about race!
As for the lack of a nearby full-health-care facility, I campaigned
mightily to prevent the closing of the DC General Hospital because I --
and thousands of us living in SE and SW, as well as NE -- benefited from
that wonderful provider of general health services. When a facility has
mismanagement, it does not necessitate closing the facility. No, simple
reason dictates putting in honest leadership. Little did I know when I
cast my vote for Williams that he had been instrumental in the closing
of Boston City Hospital as well. The Washington Post did not
inform us citizens of that man’s infamous past. So much for the Washington
Post. Yes, damn it, it is all about race! If you really cannot
understand that, Gary, then you need to take off the blinders.
###############
Thank you for raising the issue about the role of race in the
upcoming elections. I think Mr. Alexander does a disservice to the
residents of the city, however, by suggesting that African Americans and
whites do not share the same commitment to meeting our city’s many
needs. We all want a better life — better health care, better schools,
safe streets, jobs — the list could go on. The issue for me is not the
color of somebody’s skin. Throughout the short history of
self-determination in DC, we have been blessed with both African
American and white political leaders — real visionaries — who worked
tirelessly to try to make this city a better place to live and work. To
vote along racial lines is a real cop-out. It’s easy to know the color
of somebody’s skin. It’s a lot more work to know what they believe
in, what’s in their hearts, and what they are prepared to do and
capable of doing to make this city a better place to live and raise our
families. We need to demand more of our local leaders than simply asking
them to show us their face.
###############
In response to Gary’s request, I can see that the constant
distinction between two races in the letter he is referring to bespeaks
of discrimination, and that is not acceptable, much less politically
correct. However, this person is simply speaking for himself -- and
therefore I would not attribute any more to it than that. If Mr.
Alexander might truly speak for a majority of others, he should try his
hand at political office.
Meanwhile, in the interests of shedding more light on the subject,
anyone who checks out Mr. Alexander’s blog, might find him as
inoffensive as I did: http://www.dcsblackvoices.blogspot.com/.
###############
As if there is a monolith of opinion with any one group in the
District. Every week I am reminded of the diversity of views, with
District residents of African origins, Ethiopians, Somalians, Jamaicans,
Trinidadians, other Caribbean-born residents, Africans from the many
west African nations who live in the District, and African-Americans.
The question from [the March 26] posting implies there is one
universal set of political views and interest of all people of African
descent. How insensitive is that? And how about a Latino/Latina on the
Council? Or an Asian? We have a long way to go.
###############
In regard to Leo Alexander’s tired platitudes, if being the same
color as the majority of your constituents was the most important
qualifier for public office, Mayor Nagin would have done (and be doing)
a lot more to save the tragic citizens of New Orleans. As long as people
in DC see the world through race-colored glasses instead of looking for
quality in its leaders, we will continue to be a political backwater.
###############
What a shame that Leo Alexander has put our national capital city’s
only truly world-class problem under the wrong spotlight! It is the key
issue for DC’s forthcoming election (and for future national elections
too). Urban transportation issues pale in comparison. The glaring and
widening gap between American Haves and Have Nots threatens the fiber of
our largely urban, democratic, free market society, to say nothing of
our global image.
But the skin color of the officials we elect, or of the taxpayers who
foot most of the bills, for that matter, is not the basic issue. It is
how America treats its Have Nots and their problems: poor health, high
crime, wretched housing, blighted communities, demeaning jobs, and
alienated kids. Should we focus on comforting the Have Nots as they are,
or on encouraging them to become Haves? Isn’t it obvious,
statistically and empirically, that the American path to having is to
get ourselves educated, and inspire our progeny to do likewise? All
governments take from the Haves to make the Have Nots’ life more
tolerable, and to make education available to all who want it,
regardless of color or wealth. But government cannot force its citizens
or their kids to get enough education to join mainstream America.
Families and communities must do that.
Leo Alexander needs to rethink several aspects of his thesis. 1) Skin
color and other ethnic proclivities predominate only in private family
and community life; 2) Have Not family and community leaders need to
focus on education, not blaming others; 3) education changes demands for
personal health and community safety; 4) Black urban governments can’t
claim to have solved Have/Have Not problems; 5) DC’s balance of voting
age Blacks and non-Blacks no longer argues for predominantly Black
representation, and 6) identical problems will persist in cities like DC
even when they become 35 percent Black, 30 percent White, 20 percent
Hispanic, 10 percent Asian, and 5 percent polka dot.
###############
A WASA customer recently wrote to DCWatch (themail, March 26) seeking
an explanation for the continued shipment of filter cartridges to
households that have been given filters through the WASA Lead Services
Program.
As you may know, average lead levels have fallen very sharply over
the past 18 months. The average level of lead in compliance samples was
about 7 ppb for the period between July 2005 to December 2005. The EPA,
however, has not yet completed its review of the sample test results
that were submitted for the last six months. WASA made a policy decision
several months ago to provide filter cartridge replacements to the
customers who have been a part of the filter program until EPA completes
its review, initially expected to be completed by the end of March.
Because the EPA review is not yet complete we have shipped additional
cartridges.
We hope your readers will remember that they can contact us through
our Lead Hotline at 787-2732 or waterquality@dcwasa.com
for specific inquiries about lead, and they should use 612-3400
(twenty-four-hour emergency hotline) or http://www.dcwasa.com
for all other types of inquiries or emergencies.
###############
As a native-born Washingtonian who also lives within a block of a
church with parishioner parking, I understand both sides of the parking
issue. In my neighborhood, we have similar parking issues. Historically,
this parking situation has been present since the growth of church
membership and the ownership of automobiles and continues with the
influx of “newcomers.” And, yes, some of the members have moved to
the suburbs and commute to church. But there are others of us, like me,
who live in and attend church in DC. It is not like this parking
situation occurs seven days a week; it happens (significantly) on
Sundays. And, going to family brunch is not serving the Lord, unless we
want to play sarcastically with the word religious. But, on a positive
and realistic note, the "newcomers" and the church membership
should talk and listen to one another. Both have similar interests and
needs.
And, as a matter of (historical) information, ever since the RFK
Stadium was built (over forty years ago) in northeast DC where I grew up
near the RFK Stadium, the District government for many years made it
illegal for residents in this area to park on their streets in front of
their houses whenever there was a football game or event occurring. We
were allowed to come back and park, after the suburban attendees of the
event had passed through out town and neighborhood. And, at the
homeowners’ expense, we eventually had to build parking areas in our
backyards, if we had such an area. And recently, only two members of my
family’s household can have parking permits that allow them parking in
front of their homes during stadium events. So, what happens if there
are more than two persons with cars (i.e., mother, father, son, and
daughter)? Tough luck! All over DC, because of the relatively small
living and parking spaces, residents have to endure with parking. So,
instead of pointing fingers or criticizing one another, why not
challenge the DC government to build parking facilities, much like the
suburbs, to accommodate its ever-increasing car population? Oh, by the
way, guess what will happen to the residents in and near the new
Anacostia stadium in a couple of years.
###############
Georgetown Metrorail Station
David Sobelsohn, dsobelso -at- capaccess -dot- org
According to Rob Marvin’s post (themail, March 26), Professor Zach
Schrag’s new book Great Society Metro “debunks the myth that
the powers-that-be in Georgetown killed the proposed [Georgetown] Metro
station.” According to Mr. Marvin, the book shows that “Metro
decided against a station in Georgetown based on a cost/benefit
analysis, not local opposition from the Georgetown elite.” Readers of
themail should know that Zach Schrag teaches at George Mason University,
the DC area’s foremost academic proponent of classic economic
analysis. There is reason for skepticism when a George Mason University
scholar explains a public-policy decision as the product of a pure
cost-benefit analysis. Moreover, there is no bright line between
“cost/benefit analysis” and “opposition from the Georgetown
elite.” If Georgetown residents all had chauffeurs, there would be a
lower expected demand for a Metrorail station in Georgetown, affecting
the cost-benefit analysis of building a Georgetown station. The
“Georgetown elite” would have voted with their feet. Sometimes the
most effective power is power you needn’t exercise. I had heard that
problems drilling into the subsurface sharply raised the price of going
below ground in Georgetown. But then what factors enter into a decision
to build a rail station above ground? It is curious that of the DC area’s
major tourist and restaurant centers, three of them — Old Town
Alexandria, Adams-Morgan, and Georgetown — have no convenient
Metrorail station. Perhaps that suggests the relative unimportance of
tourism and restaurant business to Metrorail station-siting decisions,
or maybe it says something about the level or kinds of business in these
areas back when the Metrorail system was planned. Or maybe it’s just
coincidence. Were the system planned differently, maybe we’d wonder
why Woodley Park and U Street have no Metrorail stations.
Professor Schrag may have written a wonderful, lucid, persuasive,
accurate book. I hope soon to read it. But there is reason to approach,
with skepticism, a George Mason University professor’s description of
how something came to be that relies on classical economic theory. Not
to say he’s wrong, just that we should be skeptical.
###############
Myth About Georgetown Metro
Bob Evans, SW Waterfront, robertevans20024@yahoo.com
The myth may be that it was the Georgetown Powers That Be that
actually kept the subway from coming to Georgetown, but the reality is
that the PTB did do everything they could to prevent it. It was just
that other considerations actually finally decided the fate of a
Georgetown station.
I lived in Georgetown at the time, and my mailbox was constantly full
of leaflets from the Georgetown Citizens Associations and other
community groups denouncing the idea of a Georgetown stop. That was one
of the reasons that I finally moved from Georgetown and back to Dupont
Circle (and later southwest): I did not want to live in a community that
was so opposed to improved mass transit.
###############
It Breaks My Heart, But
Larry Seftor, larry underscore seftor .the757 at
zoemail.net
I sympathize with Ed Barron about the abuse of our zoning laws by
American University [themail, March 26]. But I can’t sympathize with
his approach of letting hearsay (by a “Spring Valley Association
member”) dictate his actions or predict an outcome. Perhaps a
specific, factual example will clear the air. In the house next to my
old house in AU Park the resident ran an architectural business. I knew
this because of the number of people who spent the day in the house. I
complained to the zoning authorities, by making one or two telephone
calls, and someone was fairly promptly dispatched to visit the house to
investigate. I’m not sure what the law is (I think you are limited to
a business with one employee), but our neighbor was found to have
violated the law and was forced to cease these operations in the house.
Ed, it breaks my heart to defend the DC government, but you really can’t
criticize them for not responding when you haven’t formally asked them
to do a job.
###############
[In themail, March 26, Dorothy Brizill wrote] “In response to the
first question, Spagnoletti indicated that a national search had been
done, but he said that he did not believe that the DC Bar Association
(which has more than 59,000 active members, many with extensive
experience as appellate attorneys) had been contacted or made aware of
the job vacancy.”
You meant to say the “DC Bar,” not the “DC Bar Association.”
They are two very different groups.
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS
National Building Museum Events, April 1, 3
Lauren Searl, lsearl@nbm.org
Both events at the National Building Museum, 401 F Street, NW,
Judiciary Square stop, Metro Red Line. Register for events at http://www.nbm.org.
Saturday, April 1, 1:00 p.m. Film: Moshe Safdie: The Power of
Architecture. This documentary (2004, 91 minutes) portrays the
Canadian-Israeli architect Moshe Safdie, FAIA, depicting his early years
in Haifa, his architectural training at McGill University in Montreal,
and his life-altering trip through the United States as apprentice to
architect Louis Khan, which stimulated his ideas for Montreal’s
Habitat 67 project. The film focuses on several of Safdie’s major
projects including the Vancouver Library and National Gallery of Canada.
Free. Registration not required
Monday, April 3, 6:30 p.m. Spotlight on Design: The SWA Group.
Founded in 1957 by Hideo Sasaki, FASLA, and Peter Walker, FASLA, the SWA
Group is the recipient of the American Society of Landscape Architects’
2005 Landscape Architecture Firm Award. The firm’s international scope
of award-winning work covers landscape architecture, urban planning, and
design. In celebration of National Landscape Architecture Month, Kevin
Shanley, ASLA, president of SWA Group, will discuss the firm’s
collaborative group practice and projects, including the Westlake
Corporate Campus in Westlake, Texas, the San Antonio River Improvements
Project, and the Tokyo University of Foreign Studies in Tokyo. This
program is co-presented with ASLA. $12 Museum and ASLA members; $17
nonmembers; $10 students. Prepaid registration required.
###############
Slots Casino Initiative Hearing, April 5
Dorothy Brizill, dorothy@dcwatch.com
They’re back. The same offshore gambling interests that financed
the 2004 attempt to pass an initiative giving them a monopoly to run a
slots casino in DC have hired a new DC proponent and law firm to submit
two slightly different versions of a slots initiative for this year’s
general election. The Board of Elections and Ethics will hold a hearing
on whether the Video Lottery Initiative of 2006 and the Video Lottery
Initiative of 2006 (B) are the proper subject of an initiative on
Wednesday, April 5, at 10:30 a.m., at 441 4th Street, NW, Suite 280.
Anyone who wishes to testify may pre-register with the General Counsel’s
office of the Board of Elections at 727-2194. The texts of the
initiatives will be posted by Friday at http://www.dcwatch.com/election/init20.htm.
###############
Artists Sought for Glover Park Day, June 3
Judie Guy, gpgazed@aol.com
Seeking artists/crafters for the 16th Annual Glover Park Day June 3
on the grounds of Guy Mason Recreation Center, Wisconsin and Calvert. It’s
a great one-day neighborhood festival with live music all day, food from
neighborhood restaurants, kids’ activities, exhibits by local
nonprofits, arts/crafts, and prize drawings. We usually have thirty or
so artists/crafters (potters, jewelry designers, painters, wearable art,
and more). Many return year after year, but we’re always interested in
having new folks participate as well. Space is only $35. E-mail gpgazed@aol.com
for application and details.
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — RECOMMENDATIONS
Rat-Proof Garbage Cans
Alice MacArthur, amacarthur2atmsndotcom
I have been searching online for where to obtain garbage cans that
are rat proof. My first thought was to look for galvanized metal garbage
cans, the old fashioned kind largely replaced by the Rubbermaid variety.
I was unsuccessful. Next I tried rat proof garbage cans, and discovered
that municipalities, including our Capital city, issue heavy duty
plastic cans that are considered rat proof. I would like to obtain about
six to eight of these for our church, as the trash depot where are trash
cans are currently stored is not rat proof. Any help would be
appreciated.
###############
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.
