Longest Ever
Dear Long-Winded Writers:
This is the longest issue of themail ever, leading me to repeat at
the beginning of this issue what is at the bottom of every issue:
“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.’ Please.
Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com
###############
Doubts about Adrian Fenty
Deborah Akel, West End, dakel@earthlink.net
It seemed to me that, for the six years he’ been in office, Ward 4
Councilman Adrian Fenty has always stood on the right side of the
issues. Every time the council voted on a bill that was contentious,
unpopular, or pitted privileged against underprivileged, Councilman
Fenty always seemed to stand behind those who needed help the most. His
consistency in compassionate voting led me to become one of his biggest
fans. Until last week. Last week, Mayoral Candidate Fenty shook my world
and stunned affordable housing and tenants’ rights groups across DC
when he voted against Councilman Jim Graham’ bill aimed at
strengthening rent control, and instead voted for a substitute bill
written and promoted by AOBA, the association of landlords and archenemy
of rent control and affordable housing.
To add insult to injury, neither Fenty nor anyone on his staff
bothered to attend a hearing Friday night at the Wilson Building,
sponsored by Graham, where tenants and their advocates showed up en
masse to testify against the AOBA bill. One by one, well into the night,
they sat before the microphone and told their heart-wrenching stories to
Graham, the only councilmember who showed up (except for a cameo
appearance by Kathy Patterson). It was a bit like preaching to the
saved, and a big disappointment for all of us who sacrificed our Friday
night so that our voices could be heard.
When the council’s Consumer and Regulatory Affairs Committee voted
4-1 last week in favor of AOBA’s bill, two of the four pro-landlord
votes — Ambrose and Catania — were no surprise. Kwame Brown’s was
a bit disconcerting. But Fenty . . . Fenty? Some in the tenants’
rights community are expressing their disappointment in Fenty with names
like “traitor” and “turncoat.” For me, it has become an issue of
credibility. As the race for mayor heats up, will Fenty again abandon
his record of compassionate voting and sell out to those with the
deepest pockets? Will he turn his back again on the powerless and
penniless who have supported him for six years? If he is elected, will
he become another Anthony Williams? When I returned home Friday night
from the hearing, I peeled the Fenty sticker off my apartment door.
###############
Flat Tax, Let’s Try It
Ed T. Barron, edtb1@macdotcom
It has been proposed in Congress that a flat tax system be offered to
DC taxpayers. This is a very simplified way of collecting taxes. It’s
not clear just how it would effect all taxpayers, but it sure looks
tempting compared with the incredibly complex, and convoluted special
interest tax code we currently have.
Armed with my MBA and some accounting experience I have been
preparing my own taxes for the last fifty years. Over those years the
returns have become very complex. Despite using the latest popular
computer tax program, which does all the math and entries, it has been a
very daunting task to prepare the tax return in each of the last several
years. And I don’t have a very complex return. Pity the poor bloke who
has limited accounting experience, or, God forbid, incomplete records.
So, I say, bring on the flat tax program. I’m a willing lab rat for
that test. It certainly won’t affect my long term health, and it just
might make my annual travail a lot simpler.
###############
Jim Graham’s Parking
Mark Shields, shields@msrl.com
Councilmember Jim Graham, according to the achievements listed on his
home page, has increased the level of parking enforcement in Adams
Morgan, blaming scofflaw “out-of-state” (actually, out-of-district)
drivers. I fully support this effort and would like to see a dramatic
increase in parking enforcement force citywide.
Unfortunately, Mr. Graham often parks his own car illegally. I took a
photo of the no-parking zone where he had chosen to leave his car last
Saturday morning: http://www.msrl.com/graham-parking/.
Although I reported this incident to 311, I thought that readers of this
newsletter might be interested as well, particularly those who are
constituents of Mr. Graham.
Parking can be very difficult in these neighborhoods, but that does
not excuse lawless behavior, whether by suburbanites or by our own
elected officials. It is disappointing that Mr. Graham chooses to drive
a car around town when he is not willing to legally find a place to
leave it.
###############
Budget Survey by DC Action for Children
Susie Cambria, scambria@dckids.org
Mayor Williams included thirty-nine “opportunity enhancements” in
his proposed FY 2007 budget, a portion of which are related to children,
youth, and their families. The order in which additional revenue would
be directed to these enhancements is not final, so you have a say in
what gets funded and in what order. DC Action for Children is conducting
a survey. Residents and those who work with residents are being asked to
prioritize the enhancements, and we will share the results of this
effort with the mayor in mid-April in time for the community’s
recommendations to be incorporated prior to the new revenue estimate
release on May 1.
Please identify your priorities and then forward this message to
colleagues, friends, board members, clients, students, etc. Everyone
with an interest in the District’s budget as it relates to children
and youth needs to vote. Here is a link to the survey: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?A=93374700E79226.
The deadline is April 14. Direct any questions to Susie, 234-9404, or
use the E-mail listed above.
###############
Metro Closes Doors
Sheila Willet, nccowl@aol.com
The slogan “Metro Opens Doors” is changing to “Metro Closes
Doors” as public hearings on the proposal to eliminate Metrobus
service and routes in DC, Maryland, and Virginia. See the events listing
below for information about the hearings. Metrobus service is not
“just transportation.” For those of us without cars: 1) it makes
possible gainful employment within the Washington Metropolitan Region;
2) it enriches our lives with accessibility to movies, sporting events,
theaters, schools, libraries, etc.; and 3) it is essential to maintain
our social contacts with friends and relatives who do not live within
walking distance to a Metrorail Station. These routes were originally
established because a need existed. If ridership has fallen, I think
WMATA should do some advertising to increase ridership instead of
penalizing the existing ridership by stopping the service.
WMATA proposes to eliminate weekend Metrobus service on two routes,
weekday service on five routes, and specific late night trips on
fourteen routes in the District, as well as to eliminate routes within
Maryland and Virginia. For those who do not use Metrobus to travel, the
bus route numbers listed in the hearing notice are meaningless. Yet to
those who depend on public transportation and use these routes, the
routes may be essential to their daily lives for employment or for
leisure. Furthermore, since we travel throughout the whole metropolitan
region, the elimination of Maryland or Virginia routes are important to
DC residents also. The full public notice can be viewed at http://www.wmata.com/about/community/B06-2.pdf.
To highlight a few routes in the District, weekend travel on route X6
from Union Station to the National Arboretum should not be eliminated.
Not only DC residents but out-of-town visitors without cars will lose
convenient access to the Arboretum on weekends. WMATA proposes to add
the Arboretum to two existing routes. This will extend the ride time on
those existing routes with no central pick up location like Union
Station to accommodate out of town visitors. On another weekend route, I
envision the students from UDC and American University who utilize the
“cross library privileges” might be concerned about the elimination
of N8 Van Ness to Wesley Heights Loop. Elimination of weekday service is
of concern also. I believe in shopping in DC; but occasionally I want to
shop at Tyson’s Corner. The 5B route is a 38-minute ride to and from
Tyson’s Corner from L’Enfant Plaza station. WMATA says there are
alternative Metrobus routes available. These routes begin at the
Ballston-MU, Roslyn, and West Falls Church stations. To use one of these
routes would extend the ride time substantially. Other essential weekday
routes WMATA proposes to eliminate include the H5, H7 Mt.
Pleasant-Adams-Morgan Line and the M2 Fairfax Village to Naylor Road
Station line. As to eliminating "selected late night trips,"
the H2, H4 crosstown line service includes two universities (CUA and UDC)
as well as the VA Medical Center, Washington Hospital Center, Children’s
National Medical Center. I think of those employed in the evening at
these locations who use public transportation to get home after work.
What options are available to them if their bus route is eliminated? Do
they wait an additional hour or so? Or will they be forced to seek other
employment.
I urge you to take the time to view the routes yourself. Don’t let
these proposals go unnoticed. Let WMATA know that Metrobus service is
important to our daily lives and should not be eliminated. Attend the
public hearing or send an E-mail to public-hearing@wmata.com.
Reference Docket Number B06-2 in an E-mail or letter. You can also write
a letter to be received by close of business on Monday, April 17, to the
Office of the Secretary, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority,
600 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001.
[Dennis Jaffe, dennisjaffe@gmail.com,
also sent a notice about Metro’s public meetings. — Gary Imhoff]
###############
Education Rights Charter Amendment
Dorothy Brizill, dorothy@dcwatch.com
On Thursday, Parents United for the DC Public Schools held a press
conference at the offices of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights to
announce a campaign to place the DC Education Rights Charter Amendment
on the November general election ballot. The entire amendment reads:
“The fundamental right to free educational opportunities is a basic
value of our society and serves as a foundation of our democratic system
of government. Accordingly, the District of Columbia is hereby obligated
to provide a system of free high quality public schools to every
child.” The press release, list of endorsers, and Parents United’s
talking points on the amendment are at http://www.dcpswatch.com/parents/060330.htm.
At the city council’s legislative session on Tuesday, nine
councilmembers —- Cropp, Patterson, Fenty, Gray, Barry, Brown, Graham,
Orange, and Ambrose — will introduce the amendment to start the
process of adding it to the Home Rule Charter. At first reading, the
amendment may sound like a harmless and high-minded statement of good
intentions. However, it does not define what a “high quality” public
school is, although it establishes a legal entitlement to one for every
child. The Board of Education has passed a resolution supporting the
charter amendment, convinced that the amendment would give it the power
to demand that the city council pass any budget it proposes, with the
threat that without that budget it would not be able to ensure high
quality schools. But the threat could just as easily be turned against
the Board of Education and DCPS. The amendment could lead to a flood of
lawsuits about the failings of the public schools, and eventually to a
court-ordered takeover of the school system, should a judge find that DC
schools are not high quality. In the 1990’s, Parents United sued DCPS
over fire code violations, leading to a federal court’s determining
which schools could open and when the school system as a whole could
open. Now, Parents United and the many lawyers who attended Thursday’s
press conference promise that they have no intention of filing lawsuits
on the basis of the charter amendment’s entitlement to “high quality
public schools.” They claim that the charter amendment is
"nothing more than a statement to our children" of our best
wishes for them, but if it is passed it will have the full legal power
of any provision of the Charter.
###############
Smokefree Law Goes Into Effect Monday, April 3
Tac Tacelosky, Tac@smokescreen.org
The first phase of DC’s Smokefree Workplaces Law goes into effect
Monday, April 3. It covers all workplaces except for licensed taverns
and nightclubs, and the bar areas of restaurants. If a restaurant serves
meals adjacent to the bar, that area is considered the dining area and
is also required to be smokefree. Diners who wish to smoke while eating
must eat at the bar.
All restaurants, taverns and nightclubs will be required to be
smokefree on January 1, 2007. Some restaurants with bars are choosing to
go smokefree immediately, rather than waiting until 2007. For example,
Odeon Cafe in Dupont Circle, which has a large, neighborhood-type bar,
is now completely smokefree. For more information about the new law,
visit http://www.smokefreedc.org
###############
NCMC and “Truthiness”
Jim Myers, Hilleast@aol.com
“Truthiness” is a word that’s now in vogue. In January, the
American Dialect Society named it the 2005 Word of the Year, saying it
“refers to the quality of stating concepts or facts one wishes or
believes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true.”
Wikipedia, a web site also in vogue, defines it as “the quality by
which a person purports to know something emotionally or instinctively,
without regard to evidence or to what the person might conclude from
intellectual examination.” TV satirist Stephen Colbert eventually
described the truthiness dilemma in October, saying the nation is
“divided between those who think with their head, and those who know
with their heart,” an insight that could also apply to the debate
about the proposed National Capital Medical Center.
There’s no question that medical services, particularly family
doctors, are sadly lacking east of the Anacostia River. But what should
we do? Arguments for NCMC ring with truthiness, because some District
residents just seem to “know” — or have faith— that NCMC is
needed, even if the factual evidence that it will change healthcare
outcomes is weak. Truthiness also dictates that it is very upsetting to
know that you live a few miles from the nearest Level 1 Trauma center.
But wait a minute: Most Americans don’t have a Level 1 Trauma Center
in their neighborhood, their town, or their city, a fact that’s
apparently irrelevant when truthiness is involved. Truthiness posits
that it’s possibly an injustice if anyone lives closer to a Level 1
trauma center than you do.
Truthiness also seems to have produced a belief among some in our
city that people are needlessly dying every day that the NCMC is not
open. Is there any evidence this is so? Probably not, or we’d have
heard it by now. Knowledgeable opponents of NCMC regularly say there’s
no evidence that people are dying for lack of hospital beds, emergency
rooms or Level 1 trauma care in the District. But apparently a feeling
persists that an unreported death toll has been rising ever since DC
General Hospital closed. So where’s the evidence?
It’s little wonder that truthiness further demands that no
certificate of need “process” requiring facts and medical evidence
is necessary to buttress what NCMC supporters already know in their
hearts is true. Hearts cry out for NCMC. Last week, Ward 5 Councilmember
Vincent Orange oozed more truthiness at an Eastern High mayoral forum.
He asked if those in attendance would “feel better” if the NCMC were
open just down the street for anyone who might suffer a stroke, heart
attack or sudden hemorrhage while listening to candidates at Eastern.
There was a small murmuring of agreement. Yet Orange’s pitch for NCMC
suggested a larger issue — that he or the rest of us could keel over
at any of a multitude of spots in the city that are more than a block
from a Level 1 trauma center. So what are we going to do, build Level 1
trauma centers at every other corner? Can we afford to? Something in my
heart hopes that sooner or later we’ll listen to a little reason and
logic on this subject.
###############
The Deceit and Dishonesty of the Ward 6 Dems
Raymond S. Blanks, brsb20002@aol.com
The Ward 6 Democrats voted in late 2005 to oppose the proposed
National Capitol Medical Center, although the lease between the city and
Howard University was not signed until February 2006. The group’s
resolution unfortunately reflects the degrees and disadvantage of deceit
and dishonesty in its operational process. I challenged the action taken
by the Ward 6 Dems in opposing the new hospital and petitioned for an
opportunity to dialogue with the executive committee because the
process, in my estimation, was tainted, rushed and simply not kosher.
The group’ President, Jan Eichhorn, an old Marion Barry ally,
rehearsed the facts related to the development and passage of the
resolution. First, Ms. Eichhorn determined alone that a resolution by
Ward 6 Dems was necessary. Secondly, she selected a Ward 6 officer who
is also a senior manager at a public health advocacy organization to
draft the group’ resolution. Both the author and the agency are
publicly known as opponents of the hospital. The resolution’s writer
is bright, hard working, and deeply engaged as a talented political
activist. He is no Jack Abramoff, but a decent and competent health
specialist. Would the Speaker of the House appoint Tom Delay to write
legislation on lobby reform? Secondly, why was only one person assigned
this important task to reflect its large membership? A month earlier,
more than 250 residents attended a forum on the proposed hospital. No
straw poll was taken to gain the public’s input on this issue.
To add insult to injury, the resolution opposing NCMC was not
reviewed nor approved by the executive committee prior to its being
voted on by the membership. It must be emphasized that on the night the
resolution was passed, a downpour of rain erupted and only eleven people
attended the meeting. The vote was not postponed to mirror more
accurately the views of nearly 40,000 voters in our ward. Jan Eichhorn
controlled the whole process regarding this resolution. She initiated
the resolution. She selected the author. She diminished the Executive
Committee’ role in the process. But does the resolution reflect the
opinion of the majority of residents or a cabal of select leaders? The
author of the resolution may have no conflict of interest regarding his
role in this exercise of charade. His singular role in the process,
however, calls into question the appropriateness of his participation as
a resolution committee of one. Finally, why was the executive committee
not engaged in the process? Regretfully, some people want to win at any
price even if their action calls into question the group’ integrity. A
poisonous pollution penetrated the process and makes evident that the
practice of deceit and dishonesty of Ward 6’s leaders in their
opposition to NCMC. Only a re-vote will purify the process.
###############
Legislation I’d Like to See
Jenefer Ellingston, jellingston@greens.org
Answer to Gary Imhoff’s request for other legislative measures [themail,
March 29]. In keeping with a Statehood Green policy of devolution of
power, here is something we wish to have enacted: give the ANCs
collectively the power to put an initiative on the ballot. Instead of
the public’s collecting thousands of signatures, voters could present
an Initiative to their ANC and distribute it among all ANCs. If two
thirds or three fifths voted in favor of the Initiative, the ANCs would
have the power to put it on the ballot.
Also, the ANCs should have subpoena power to demand documents that
relate to activities pertinent to their jurisdiction.
I guess the city council would go into shock if confronted with this
broadening of authority.
###############
Electoral Legislation
Michael Bindner, mikeybdc at yahoo dot com
There are two items that I would like to see the council act on
before the election. The first is to decide whether to put the New
Columbia Constitution, passed in 1987, on the ballot for ratification or
not. Until this constitution is ratified or withdrawn there is ambiguity
as to whether the 1982 Constitution is still valid (which it is, by the
way). Before putting the amendments on the ballot, it might just want to
take a second look at the size of the New Columbia Legislature. The 1987
Constitution calls for a twenty-five member House of Delegates, with
sixteen from either eight or sixteen wards and eight at-large, with an
at-large chair. It strikes me that there are too many at-large members
in this arrangement. I would urge them to consider expanding the number
of wards to sixteen and expanding the number of delegates per ward to
three, with only two of these from any one party. Cut the number of
at-large members at five and have the House choose which one is Speaker
from the five at-large members. Changing how the speaker/chair is
elected will avoid what just happened in Loudon County, where the
elected chair was, for all practical purposes, ousted because the
majority of the members were of a different party.
The second piece of legislation is to amend the Home Rule Charter to
be identical to whatever Constitution is ratified (which means drafting
two possible charters, one based on the 1982 Constitution and one based
on the Constitution submitted to the voters. The theory behind the 1987
Amendments was that they changed the Bill of Rights from a social
experiment to one that was relatively non-controversial, and to make the
new constitution match the Home Rule Act as much as possible. They got
it backwards in the last case, however. Instead of making the
Constitution conform to the home rule act, what is necessary is to make
the Home Rule Act conform to the constitution.
Stand Up for Democracy is currently organizing a People’s
Constitutional Convention to urge the council to take these actions. As
details become final, they will be submitted to this space.
###############
Re: “Church and City Parking” by Judy Walton, themail, March 29]
Jane Jacobs would say that you are asking the wrong question, that you
shouldn’t be asking why aren’t there enough parking spaces, but why
are there so many cars? Suggestions that the city should build parking
structures for residents — which you state that the suburbs do, which
isn’t correct — is insane.
Urban living demands urban solutions, and urban solutions are
pedestrian- and transit-centric, not car-centric. The fact is, in our
row house neighborhoods, the space in front of a typical house can
accommodate only one car (even a Mini is 12 feet long and a VW is 13.5
feet long, while the average house is maybe 18 feet wide). Inducing car
purchasing through the provision of parking structures merely crowds the
streets, which are getting more crowded as ex-suburbanites move to the
city and bring their automobile-centric habits with them. Encouraging
the acquisition of more cars to crowd this scarce inventory makes little
sense. Building parking structures (tell me, does any city in the
country do this for residents in urban areas?) suggests subsidizing
drivers more than they are already subsidized (excise taxes and other
fees cover only 50 percent of the cost of roads). But this makes little
sense if mobility, rather than movement of personally owned automobiles,
is the objective. One lane of road in one hour can move 900 cars, or
6,250 people by buses, 10,000 people by bus rapid transit, or 16,000
people by light rail. Walking and bicycling takes up much less space
than a car as well.
That being said, with regard to church parking, I think that churches
(and similar institutions) need to develop and maintain transportation
demand management plans and that zoning regulations need to be changed
to require this. I do think that for a few hours per week, it is
possible to accommodate church parking, but the best way to do this is
to address the problem systematically, rather than through a number of
simultaneous but noncomprehensive methods.
###############
In her response to my posting about the parking problem near downtown
churches, Judy Walton notes that "going to family brunch is not
serving the Lord." But that was exactly my point when I asked,
rhetorically, whether I would qualify for one of DDOT’s new
double-parking permits if I went to Sunday brunch: under our
constitution, "serving the Lord" should not entitle one to
special privileges not afforded to folks whose beliefs point them in a
different direction. And remember that believers can serve the Lord in a
variety of ways that don’t involve attending church services, such as
volunteering at a soup kitchen, or even bagging litter to keep it out of
rivers and streams. Should people engaged in those activities also be
allowed to double park if no other convenient options are available?
###############
Churches, Parking and Great Cities
Cheryl Cort, cheryl_cort@hotmail.com
Instead of making DC more like the suburbs, as recently suggested by
one author, why not manage parking so that it’s one of several
transportation options for visitors and residents? To manage parking,
the costliest transportation option, it needs to not be given away for
free. After all, transit isn’t given away for free.
Why would someone choose to ride transit or park and take a shuttle
to church or walk three blocks when parking might be available for free
in front of her destination? Alternatives that cost money or time, such
as off-site parking, valet parking, or transit will never be competitive
with free parking in the most valued location — at the front door of
your destination. We need to price costly and valued parking so that it
can be available to those who need it most, and those who prefer to save
money and are willing to walk a few blocks, or take shuttle or a bus
will be motivated to use that option.
A great city is not known for great parking. It’s known for its
memorable streets, parks, architecture, shops, and restaurants. Great
cities are built on good transit service and safe and enjoyable places
to walk. Cars can be fit in, but must not dominate our streetscapes or
our public budgets. We should not emulate the suburbs which were built
for cars and offer few transportation choices or memorable places. We
need to keep and enhance the good qualities of our city — a place
built for people.
###############
Just by way of confirming long-ago Georgetowner Bob Evans’
recollection about the strong opposition by his then neighbors to
allowing a Metro stop in Georgetown, as a then resident of Dupont North
who regularly hoofed over there for the really good bars and restaurants
(there wasn’t a lot of that east of the Park in those days), I was
very aware of the opposition.
I remember when the plans for Metro were first announced and I was
really excited because I assumed it meant that at long last it would be
easy to get back and forth, and so felt I had an almost personal stake
in the outcome of the debate. I remember well what seemed to me to be
near hysterical, strident opposition from the Georgetown Citizens
Association (which back then in the pre-ANC days had enormous political
clout); reports in the Post left no doubt that the opponents were
waging an all-out battle. They never fooled anybody with their
dissembling about the dangers of construction, costs, etc.; their true
agenda was understood by anyone who hadn’t just landed from Mars —
they were fearful of an influx of blacks. Remember, this was the
mid-to-late ‘60s and it was a time of especially tense relations
between whites and blacks, with the well-to-do whites being downright
fearful to the point of irrationality.
The irony, from my perspective and that of my fellow “liberals”
was that, notwithstanding the lack of Metro into Georgetown, blacks (as
well as whites, for that matter) from east of the Park were coming in
more and more because of the tremendous growth of trendy retail stores
along M and Wisconsin which were slowly replacing the stodgy merchants.
It was, then, the marketplace — in true capitalist tradition — that
foiled the citizens association, something many of their neighbors
noticed by the substantial increase in pedestrians coming across the P
and Q Street bridges and walking through their once quiet streets (much
to their horror!). We “liberals” thought it was sublime justice —
even more so as time went on and it became apparent that the lack of a
Metro stop in Georgetown truly exacerbated the parking nightmare over
there!
###############
Myth About Georgetown Metro?
Christopher Jerry, zekeindc@gmail.com
As I read Rob Marvin’s post about the Myth of Metro going to
Georgetown, that it was about the difficulty of building to Georgetown
and not the elites saying keep it out, I wonder if Mr. Marvin, or the
books author, Zach Schrag, really thinks someone in this day and time
would be quoted on or off the record confirming that the power brokers
in the Georgetown community really didn’t want the Metro there because
of concerns about bringing the so called "wrong element" in.
I’m a Metro baby, so to speak, in that for almost 28 of my 48 years
I have worked for the company, and before me my father was a bus driver
for over 35 years. Way back in the 60’s it was documented in newspaper
stories before and during the construction of Metro that the attitude of
Georgetowners, at least those quoted on the record, was they did not
want Metro, and often the reason given was the easy access to that part
of town that undesirables (I read that as Black folks looking to commit
crimes) would have to that part of the city. By the way, Atlanta, Miami,
and other cities that planned and built heavy rail subway systems in the
70’s and 80’s also trotted that excuse out to block rail in their
neighborhoods, and twenty years later the same places which had been so
short sighted and closed minded now regret not having it built in those
places.
Maybe today, as the book suggested, the spin is that construction
issues is what kept Metro out of Georgetown, but in hallways and back
room lobbying at Metro’s predecessor when planning the subway, the
attitude of Georgetown towards not having Metro was a major factor in
not building there. Despite the alleged difficulty, had Georgetown
wanted Metro, the cost to build there would not have been a roadblock,
and it would have happened even if it meant building the Georgetown
portion above ground instead of doing the more expensive tunneling.
###############
[In themail, March 29, David Sobelsohn wrote:] “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.”
Perhaps one could take Mr. Sobelsohn more seriously if he read the
book. He hasn’t. So why parade one’s ignorance for us all to see? I
am truly embarrassed for him. And this is the second forum he’s graced
with his unabashedly uniformed opinion. “Readers of themail should
know that Zach Schrag teaches at George Mason University, the DC area’s
foremost academic proponent of classic economic analysis.” Pure
casuistry and, dare I say, McCarthyism.
It is not based on classic economic theory. I am sure Zach would be
astonished to be tarred by association with the brush of “famously
conservative.” Read it — surely it’s not too much of a task. It is
actually quite well written. Or listen to the interview on the Kojo
Nnamdi show. Then express an opinion.
###############
Some Candidates’ Qualifications Are Beyond
Color or Class
Jamal Turner, jamal_tur@yahoo.com
As a 24-year-old, college-educated, African-American male living east
of the river in Ward 7, I am fully aware of the polarizing effects of
race in America. However, when I see the resume of my own Councilmember
Vincent Gray, who is running for council chair, and that of A. Scott
Bolden, who is running for at-large city councilmember, I cannot
conceive of why there would be a need to discuss race in an election
with such outstanding African Americans like this. Yes, as African
Americans we are proud of their accomplishments and can look at them as
role models, but wouldn’t white America and other races also see their
potential and value as leaders in Washington, DC? They are that good.
Certainly, Bolden and Gray are candidates that break any color mold.
They both are law school graduates, which I hope to achieve one day and
practice intellectual property law. They both have made significant
contributions to the District of Columbia. They both work well in both
white and Black worlds. They are both very articulate and sensitive to
the needs of the citizens. They both are effective,
results/goal/action-oriented, articulate, personable, and intelligent.
If African Americans vote for these two, it will be because they are the
best qualified and meet the interests of the constituents they serve.
One can see Scott Bolden campaigning everywhere in this city in all
communities. He is a partner in a major law firm and led the DC
Democratic State Committee admirably, though not flawlessly. He raises
money for causes, working earnestly to give back to the community. Gray
has put Ward 7 on the map in earnest. He once managed the mammoth DC
Department of Human Services. He unites people.
The E-mail discussing race in elections last Monday was somewhat
inflammatory and it does a disservice to these candidates of all the
people, Bolden and Gray. But it does point out that racial issues still
linger in Washington, DC, and obviously it is citywide. Thankfully, we
all can consider voting for candidates like Scott Bolden and Vincent
Gray for citywide offices not because they are African American, but
because they are exceptional candidates regardless of color or ethnicity
and they are well able to champion the issues that DC voters expect them
to spearhead. These types of candidates make all citizens proud and they
branch out far from the color line of a society long gone. They’ve
paid their dues.
All communities should come out for these candidates. Wards 7 and 8,
with all the registered votes that they have, should turn out on mass
because these candidates have taken them seriously and visited their
communities extensively. They just happened to be born black, too. That
is not a bad thing in a predominantly African American and Democratic
town and it should be expected that exemplary leaders of that community
would mount credible campaigns. Let’s see if all of DC is colorblind
when it comes to these two. Now we need for candidates like this and
others to make sure that there are more decent job opportunities in
Washington, DC, for those of us that have done what we were supposed to
do, gone to college, and stayed away from the crime and drug culture and
have honored our families. Also, those of us that were born in the
District or have lived here for a while want to be able to continue to
live in this city and buy a home here. Make that possible. Make that
happen for the residents that are looking for just a chance at the
American dream. That will be the mark of true leaders.
###############
No Need for the Race Card in This Election,
the Candidates Are Competitive and Visible
Nichelle R. Jones, ghetsweety@aol.com
Looking at the qualifications of the candidates running for election
this year, it doesn’t seem like it would be necessary to fall back on
race to win citywide elections. As a graduate of Towson University, I
have become very comfortable with diversity and relate well to people of
all races. I have lived in Washington, DC in Ward 1, for a very long
time, am in my early 20’s, and am very much African American. I have
not voted as often as I should have, but I am concerned about electoral
politics and the plight of the District of Columbia and America,
especially as it relates to healthcare. (I am a biology major interested
in medical research.)
I would like to see candidates of all races talking about crime and
education. I would love to see candidates advocate for tuition grants
for those residents pursuing graduate school. I would also be interested
in seeing candidates push to allow students still living in their
parents house but out of undergraduate school, not married, and under
thirty to be eligible to be on their parents’ health insurance until
they can find permanent employment with benefits. I do not want to see
DC become a racially polarized city, nor do I want citizens to vote for
a person of another race to show how politically correct they are or how
liberal they are. Vote for whom you like and trust to do the right
thing. Vote for those that are able to deliver, those that will be
effective. Don’t vote for a council member that can’t get the votes
to pass a bill. That’s a waste of time and votes.
I think that when some people try to bring up the race card in an
election, particularly when there is a one on one Black/White
competition, I think that they are really trying to galvanize
communities to get out the vote. They are also probably trying to show
some Black pride. Here’s another example of the pride thing. The
passing of the law making Emancipation Day a District holiday also
symbolizes the pride of the race as well as a historic triumph important
to all. Yet Blacks and White support the holiday and residents are
looking forward to it. Though DC is a mostly African American town, with
that statistic constantly changing it appears that voters vote for the
best qualified regardless of race. However, if there are two equally
competent candidates, one may tend to go for the one known best or the
one of one’s own race or neighborhood. It may amount to the toss of a
coin. I am going to vote for the best candidate whether or not that
person is in my race. But from what I see, the level of African
Americans running in the city wide elections (at-large and council chair
as well as mayor) is quite impressive. I don’t need anyone to sound an
alarm to come out to vote when the qualifications and credentials are
presented and the candidates are highly visible.
Finally, there are currently three white at-large council members on
the council of the District of Columbia out of four. The council is made
up of thirteen members. Out of the thirteen members, seven are white.
Let’s stick to the issues in 2006 and let the votes fall where they
may. Just make sure that there is a turnout evident of a city seeking
voting rights and statehood. Superior candidates are running. Voters
have real choices. Talk to me about issues that matter. Give me reason
for young America to cast their vote for the candidates running. So far,
I am impressed with two running, one for the at-large and one for the
chair’s seat. I’m still open and listening to all the candidates,
though.
###############
The last three mayors have all been black, and I’d say the score
was one win (Williams), one loss (Barry), and one, to be generous, tie
(Kelly, then). Barry almost destroyed DC government, and at the end he
was in “charge,” if I remember correctly, only of DC Parks and
Recreation. Williams has repaired the damage, and more; true, more needs
to be done, but the results given where he started from have been
spectacular. Kelly was NATO — no action, talk only. She neither
worsened nor lessened the city’s problems.
###############
Race Does Matter in Politics
Christine Frederick, cfreder2@yahoo.com
Race and ethnicity do matter in politics. They always have, and they
always will. Based on all of the comments that I have been reading, it
appears that most think that it is a bad thing to see color and that to
do so is somehow divisive. In fact, to ignore race and pretend that we
are a colorblind society is false and grossly unfair. I firmly disagree
with Mr. Chittams [themail, March 29], who commented that class,
cultural, and political agendas were not based on race. You cannot
ignore the large numbers of blacks and Latinos who live at or below the
poverty line despite their number in the general population. As for as
culture goes, race is a part of culture when you are nonwhite, hence the
racial/ethnic categories (as defined by Census) African-American,
Hispanic/Latino, Asian. Of course, no one should vote for candidates
based on their color, but I agree that the assumption is that if they
are of the same race that they will understand your issues. People of
color understand the intricate complexities of race and therefore do not
tend to just let race alone guide their voting decisions.
Interestingly though, I have observed that those who say that race
does not matter or that they “only see people and not color” (or
some variation of that comment) tend to be white. Bottom line: it’s
okay to see color (it’s a beautiful thing!), it’s not okay to
discriminate based on that.
###############
Leadership and Character,
Not Race or Class
Kathryn A. Pearson-West, wkpw3@aol.com
Race should not matter in elections in the 21st century; however,
divisive issues, practices, and perceptions rear their ugly heads when
there is heated competition in local elections. Sometimes it appears
that some citizens, white and black, are voting in blocks, and that the
hue of one’s skin can be the ultimate deciding factor among fairly
equal candidates. Voting patterns might support that notion to an
extent, but most often citizens vote their consciences and their
interests, and not race. To most what matters is what is in the minds
and hearts of those that seek to lead. At a recent service at Howard
University’s Rankle Chapel, Vernon Jordan mentioned that there is a
"mythical colorblind society." Perhaps this year’s election
will bring us closer to the concept of a society that is not so race
conscious and that advocates the principles of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther
King who said, "I have a dream that my four children will one day
live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their
skin but by the content of their character."
Race need not be a determining or influencing factor in this year’s
election. The candidates are exceptional. Candidates like A. Scott
Bolden, Vincent Gray, and Kathy Patterson are strong enough on their own
and need not engage in racial politics. They are good at championing
causes. As Bolden espouses, “we need to stop practicing the politics
of race and the politics of mediocrity and start practicing the politics
of results and excellence in leadership.” There is no reason why one
would not expect predominately white areas such as Wards 2 and 3 to vote
similarly as predominately Black Wards 7 and 8 when the candidates are
talented and capable and are promoting the issues of concern and value
to the majority of the voters. Bolden, Gray, and Patterson are
campaigning vigorously in all eight wards and seem to be delivering
messages that resonate with voters. Yard signs begin to tell the tale
that something is catching on. DC voters should turn out strong for
candidates like Bolden, Gray, and Patterson, not because of race or
class, but because they are exceptionally qualified to lead people from
all walks in life. They are able to connect with citizens on both sides
of the Anacostia River and on both sides of the Park.
Should there be a need for a call to arms to improve voter turnout
for the September 12 Democratic primary, the call should not be one of
race baiting or a call for racial unity — white, black, brown, red, or
yellow. A. Scott Bolden, Vincent Gray, and Kathy Patterson should be
able to, can and will stand on records of service to the city, their
vision, and their ability to lead the city forward representing the
interests of the citizens of the District of Columbia. They can address
those issues dear to many and that tend to transcend color and
socioeconomic lines, e.g., education, public safety, taxes, healthcare,
technology, workforce housing, government spending and management,
University of the District of Columbia, economic development, childcare,
consumer regulatory control, clean neighborhoods, our youth, reputation
and image of Washington, DC, sports, and so forth.
Bolden, Gray, and Patterson are the types of candidates one dreams of
running for citywide election and should be encouraged. They are
generally charismatic, intelligent, knowledgeable on the issues,
articulate, and sensitive to the needs of the average citizen. They
appear to be able to work with the business, education, residential, and
faith communities. They have achieved a lot in their professional lives.
For example, A. Scott Bolden, candidate for At-Large DC Council, has
risen through the ranks of a major law firm to become partner and is
very successful. He is the son of civil rights activist parents and has
a strong work ethic. He believes that “to whom much is given, much is
expected.” Or as my father likes to say when he needs his four adult
children or grandchildren to help him with something, “But he that is
greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt
himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be
exalted” (Matthew 23:11-12). Bolden is appealing to all races and
socioeconomic classes and does not have to pull the race card to win.
Both Black and white and otherwise can be proud of his leadership,
accomplishments, talents, and abilities.
Talking about race at this juncture in 2006 is divisive and
counterproductive and diminishes the very real accomplishments and
message of the candidates running citywide. Yet, still be mindful that
race and class do still matter in America and need to be discussed in
other forums. Look at some of the policies affecting communities
throughout the United States and one will see that there are still
issues in this regard. But in the nation’s capital we will take the
high road and not look at race or class as a barometer for success, at
least not in elections. We can hate or love, support or oppose equally
on the issues and on the candidates. Race and color are God-given
birthrights. It’s what you do in life that matters beyond that and how
you overcome obstacles and how you lift up those coming behind you that
look to God’s glory for help, but also to city leadership for a leg up
the proverbial ladder of success.
Clearly there is a need in the nation’s capital for strong
advocates for and representatives of the citizens, regardless of color
— black, white, red, yellow, or brown, race, gender, or ethnicity.
There is too much at stake in this year’s pivotal elections.
Washington, DC is diverse, cosmopolitan, and a true melting pot. Let’s
not be distracted by racial undertones or become racially polarized.
Simply elect the best candidate, and that will automatically include
candidates both Black and white. Look at their credentials, their
resumes, and their body of work which should speak volumes of what is
possible and what good work is anticipated from them. Their leadership
is beyond black or white.
In the 2006 elections, leadership, talent, vision, effectiveness,
accessibility, character, and the ability to relate and connect to
citizens matter most of all during these changing times. And so does a
candidate’s faith and beliefs count when the least among us, the not
so affluent and mighty, and those that have been here to weather the
storm during the bad times need a worthy champion. They need a champion
that will enable them to keep the nation’s capital as the place where
they live, worship, or maintain their businesses. Let them enjoy a
growing and prosperous booming urban center beyond the rhetoric of
election campaigning. Let us all, in the words of Henry David Thoreau:
Go confidently in the direction of your dreams! Live the life you’ve
imagined.
###############
I am amazed that some 150 years after the slaves were set free, all
it still takes is a call from one white man to ask members of the black
community to publicly castigate one of their own, and like obedient
servants they attack. We are one wounded race. The point I was trying to
make, and unfortunately was lost, is that if blacks were to turn out at
all elections, like we do when Marion Barry is running, then we could
possibly make real change that would positively affect the quality of
life for all District residents. In my opinion, that is the dilemma for
this current group of local politicians who haven’ yet tapped into
what truly resonates, energizes and mobilizes the disenfranchised
segment of our community to vote.
When I arrived in this city, back in May of 1995 as a young TV
journalist, I was profoundly disappointed in the inequities that exist
in our nation’ capital. How could the federal government allow this to
happen? How could our local officials be so insensitive, incompetent,
and inept? And where was the black church? Very few seemed to care. The
majority of members of the black community who had achieved some measure
of success through education, skin color, and/or assimilation had
essentially turned their backs on the rest of their community. I
remember thinking that Chocolate City was bogus. Yes, we had the
numbers, but little else. Then I did a little research as to why this
proud native Washingtonian community wasn’t more united, and I found
that just as in other big cities around the country, even before the
white power structure was legally forced to allow blacks certain
accommodations; we practiced our own form of discrimination against each
other. If you don’t believe me, just ask some black Washingtonians who
were around during the glory days of Dunbar High School. In most cases,
if you weren’t light-skinned or related to a teacher or doctor, then
you were persona non grata.
If we had unity and voted as a block, think of the issues we could
address which could ultimately benefit all ethnic groups. If we realized
our true potential as a special interest voting block, we wouldn’t
have the problems to the degree that they exist today; i.e., truancy,
illiteracy, drug abuse, AIDS epidemic, disparities in health care,
unemployment, the lack of vocational education and crime. I have to
believe we can still fix this. However, these areas must be addressed
before we broach the issue of disparity in economic distribution. Black
folks must understand the connection between their vote and their
survival. In that voting booth, everyone is equal. We do this by
electing candidates who truly understand that by fixing the lowest rung
on society’s ladder everyone benefits. If everything is great as some
would want you to believe, and all Washingtonians have an equal
opportunity to achieve success, then why are certain sections of this
city more desirable to live in versus others? Some would have you to
believe that race in 2006 couldn’t possibly be the reason.
###############
I went back and read Mr. Alexander’s post [themail, March 26],
having read all the responses [themail, March 29] first. I agree with
most all of his observations, but it is silly to conclude that a black
politician will address the needs of the black community better than a
white politician would. There are plenty of counterexamples in office
right now.
###############
March planning madness in the nation’s capital city is now
complete. The big three problems in this city’s high-profile evolution
have all fallen victim to pseudo-sociology. First the public health care
aficionados insist on trying to solve the disgraceful primary health
care problems of the city’s poor by building a fancy new hospital to
serve the rich. Then the public education gurus produce a master plan to
solve the city’s embarrassing long-term problems of illiteracy,
dropouts, and substandard test scores by at best nibbling away at vastly
oversized, outdated school infrastructure. And now DC’s Department of
Cyclists and Trolleys has produced a long-overdue “comprehensive”
transportation plan that is certain to worsen city congestion, and stunt
the city’s efforts to improve its marginal residential and commercial
tax base.
Describing its overarching (parochial?) goal a “safe, sustainable,
transportation system founded on choice and improved neighborhood
quality of life,” the plan promises that by 2030, there will be no
expansion of Metrorail (other than eight-car trains); no expansion of
the city’s arterial network (other than some better curbside parking
controls); a worsened traffic flow (by focusing on “great streets”
that “balance” pedestrian, cyclist, vehicular, and bus/trolley flow
with 24/7 heavy trucks, all at grade level); and no serious plans either
for high-density, off-street, city-owned parking facilities, or for
express routes for emerging new “personal transport systems.” This
new draft document justifies its lack of smart transportation growth by
invoking the new “Concept of Latent Demand.” This crutch is
supposedly based on new “research” showing that "urban traffic
congestion tends to maintain a self-limiting equilibrium" (i.e.,
“build it and they will drive on it”). Missing is any corollary
“Concept of Free Choice” (i.e., “don’t build it and they will go
where the economy hasn’t stagnated”), which is not an sound option
for the nation’s capital.
The city’s most influential current “long-range planners” (by
no means assembled in DC’s Office of Planning) do not appear up to the
job. The council’s oversight is no better, appearing to have no
citywide or regional consciousness at all. Among those running for
elected office this fall, have any demonstrated a natural bent to help
shape a strong future for our national capital city? Should the major
current planning decisions be delayed until new leadership is in place,
or is it likely to be even worse?
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS
DCPS to Update Communities on Facilities
Master Plan, April 3-6
Roxanne Evans, roxanne.evans@k12.dc.us
The DC Public Schools will hold a series of public meetings to gather
community input on the facilities master plan on Monday, April 3, 6:00
p.m., at Noyes Elementary School; Tuesday, April 4, 7:00 p.m., at
Patterson Elementary School; Wednesday, April 5, 6:00 p.m., at Thomas
Elementary School; and Thursday, April 6, 6:00 p.m., at Janney
Elementary School.
The District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS) is hosting several
community forums to gather community input on the Facilities Master
Plan, scheduled to be released in May. The sessions will enable parents
and community members to learn more about the district’s plan for
school consolidations and modernizations, with a focus on the use of
buildings that will no longer be used by DCPS for standard K-12
enrollment. With the completion of its Master Education Plan earlier
this year, DCPS has been studying the impact of the district
restructuring on the current inventory of 16.2 million square feet of
building space. The meetings will address such issues as enrollment
trends and projections; updates on facility conditions; consolidation
program objectives for school facilities; and potential future use for
buildings that will no longer serve day-to-day DCPS enrollment,
including alternative DCPS student use; or use as a community resource,
charter school, or another alternative/adaptive reuse purpose. This may
include public-private partnerships and opportunities for co-location of
programs. For more information, visit http://www.k12.dc.us.
###############
Transportation Forum and WMATA Metrobus
Hearings, April 5, 6, 10, 11
Sheila Willet, nccowl@aol.com
On April 5, 10, and 11, WMATA will conduct public hearings (Docket
B06) on the proposed fare and parking increase for four holidays on
Metrorail and Metrobus and the elimination of Metrobus Service and
routes in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia. All hearings
will be held at 7:00 p.m. The dates and locations are Wednesday, April
5, Arlington County Board Office, Courthouse Metro Building, 2100
Clarendon Boulevard, Room 302, Arlington, Virginia; Monday, April 10,
Takoma Park Middle School Cafeteria, 7611 Piney Branch Road, Silver
Spring, Maryland; and Tuesday, April 11, Jackson Graham Building, 600
Fifth Street, NW.
WMATA proposes to eliminate selected late night trips on District
routes 80, 82, 94, D4, D6, E2, G8, H2, H4, L2, M6, N6, V7, and V8;
Maryland routes A12, C4, J2, K6, Q2, Y9, and Z8; and Virginia routes 1F,
2A, 3E, 4B, 9A, 10A, 10B, 23A, and 38B. Eliminate all weekday service on
District routes 5B; H5, H7, M2, and W9; and Virginia route 4S and
off-peak service on routes 13A and 13B. Eliminate all weekend service on
District routes N8 and X6 and Virginia routes 4H, 13A, 13B, and 24P.
WMATA proposes to reinvest the savings from eliminated service on
eighteen bus routes to reduce overcrowding and improve schedule
adherence (8 in DC, 4 in MD, 6 in VA).
Fare Change. over the last five years, there has been a 19 percent
increase in rail ridership and a 40 percent increase in bus ridership on
Martin Luther King, Jr., Day, President’s Day, Columbus Day, and
Veterans’ Day holidays. It is proposed that weekday bus and rail
service be provided to meet customer demand. Also proposed is a change
to charge peak fares and weekday parking fees on these holidays. The
full public notice can be viewed at http://www.wmata.com/about/community/B06-2.pdf.
Free open forum, “Maintaining Independence: The Role of Public
Transportation as We Age,” will be held on Thursday, April 6, from
1:00-3:00 p.m. at Sumner School and Museum, 1201 17th Street, NW. Senior
mobility and independence will be discussed from a regional public
transportation point of view. Panelists include: Jon E. Burkhardt,
Senior Director at WESTAT Research; Elizabeth Boehner, Director of the
Montgomery County Area Agency on Aging; and Jana Lynott, Director of
Transportation Planning, Northern Virginia Transportation Commission.
The forum is sponsored by the National Capital Chapter of the Older
Women’s League. For additional information send an E-mail to nccowl@aol.com.
###############
National Building Museum Events, April 5-6
Lauren Searl, lsearl@nbm.org
All events except Construction Watch Tours at the National Building
Museum, 401 F Street, NW, Judiciary Square stop, Metro Red Line.
Register for events at http://www.nbm.org.
Wednesday, April 5, 9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m., Careers in Construction EXPO
2006. Through many hands-on activities, the EXPO introduces middle and
high school students to the skills needed and training available for a
variety of rewarding careers in the construction industry. Free.
Suitable for seventh-twelfth graders. Registration required through
school. For further details visit http://www.nbm.org/construction_careers.html.
Wednesday, April 5, 6:30-8:00 p.m., Spotlight on Design: Emerging
Voices: dECOi/George Yu Architects. Mark Goulthorpe, founding principal
of dECOi in Paris, France and Cambridge, MA, will present his firm’s
work ranging from pure design to architecture and urbanism. Los
Angeles-based George Yu will discuss, among other projects, the creative
workspaces of the Sony Design Centers in Los Angeles and Shanghai. Both
architects were selected as “emerging voices” by the Architectural
League in New York. $12 Museum and Architectural League members; $17
nonmembers; $10 students. Prepaid registration required. For more about
each firm visit http://www.nbm.org.
Thursday, April 6, 6:30-8:00 p.m., Women in Architecture: Three
Tracks to Success. According to the American Institute of Architects (AIA),
women comprise only 12 percent of AIA members but over 40 percent of
students now enrolled in architecture schools. Three successful
principals of women-owned architecture practices — Suman Sorg, FAIA,
principal of Washington, DC-based Sorg Associates; Joan Goody, FAIA,
principal of Boston-based Goody, Clancy & Associates; and Carol Ross
Barney, FAIA, principal with Chicago-based Ross Barney + Jankowski, Inc.
-- will discuss their careers in a profession where the number of women
is on the rise. $12 Museum and AIA members; $17 nonmembers; $10
students. Prepaid registration required.
###############
Open House at Arts and Academics Charter
School, April 7
Alicia George, ajgeorge@earthlink.net
The Academy for Learning Through the Arts (ALTA), a free DC public
charter school that opened its doors last September, has space available
this coming fall for students in grades pre-K-6 (and will add seventh
and eighth in the future). ALTA offers a demanding yet caring
environment, highly-qualified teachers, a focus on individual
responsibility and respect, and an innovative curriculum that integrates
learning in the arts with core subjects.
To learn more, please visit http://www.alta-pcs.com,
call 232-4014, or come meet staff and parents at the Open House or one
of the community information sessions scheduled in April. Open House at
ALTA, 2100 New Hampshire Avenue, NW (at V Street between 15th and 16th),
Friday, April 7, 9:00 a.m.-11:30 a.m.; Library Information Sessions,
Tuesday, April 4, 6:30 p.m.-8:30 p.m., Mt. Pleasant Branch; Monday,
April 10, 6:00 p.m.-8:00 p.m., Shepherd Park Branch.
###############
The Cultural Institute of Mexico, April 7-8
Barbara Ruesga-Pelayo, bruesga@sre.gob.mx
Friday, April 7, 9:30 a.m., Woodrow Wilson Plaza, 1300 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW. Reservation, 691-4000. The Cultural Institute of Mexico and
the Woodrow Wilson International Center present “The Central Role of
Borders: Social and Cultural Dynamics of the US-Mexico Border,” by Dr.
Jose Manuel Valenzuela. Dr. Valenzuela, has a Ph.D. in social sciences
from the Colegio de Mexico. At present, he is a researcher associate
with the School of the North Border (Escuela de la Frontera Norte). He
received the Fray Bernardino de Sahagú award in social anthropology for
his book “A la brava é cholos, punks, chavos, banda” (Tijuana,
1988).
Saturday, April 8, 7:00 p.m., Music: Nortec at George Mason
University, Dewberry Hall of the George W. Johnson Center, 4400
University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030. Free admission. Directions: http://coyote.gmu.edu/map/maphtml/gwjc.html.
Pre-concert talk by José Manuel Valenzuela, author of the book Paso
del Nortec (This Is Tijuana) (Trilce, Mexico, 2005).
###############
Strategies to End Poverty and Inequality,
April 7-9
Joe Libertelli, jlibertelli@udc.edu
Please join us on Friday-Sunday, April 7-9, for Strategies to End
Poverty and Inequality, a symposium hosted by the UDC Law Review and
organized by the UDC David A. Clarke School of Law in conjunction with a
wide array of local and national public interest legal organizations.
The symposium will take place at the UDC David A. Clarke School of Law,
located atop the Van Ness/UDC Red Line Metro station at 4200 Connecticut
Avenue, NW. Park under the campus for $8/day off Van Ness Street.
Wheelchair accessible.
Montgomery County Councilmember Tom Perez has joined the
distinguished list of presenters, which includes the leaders of many of
America’s top civil rights law organizations such as: Barbara Arnwine,
Executive Director, Lawyers’ Com. for Civil Rights Under Law; Peter
Edelman, Georgetown Law Center, Chair, DC Access to Justice Commission;
Helaine Barnett, President, Legal Services Corporation; Theodore Shaw,
Director-Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund; Prof. Edgar
Cahn, UDC-DCSL and President, Time Dollar Institute; Wade Henderson,
Executive Director, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights; Alan
Houseman, Executive Director, Center for Law and Social Policy; JoAnn
Wallace, Executive Director, National Legal Aid and Defender
Association; and Florence Roisman, Indiana University School of Law.
Following the first day of the Symposium on Friday, April 7, at 6
p.m., please join us in the Firebird Inn for the fourteenth annual
Joseph L. Rauh Lecture by Theodore Shaw, Director-Counsel of the NAACP
Legal Defense and Education Fund. Immediately after the Rauh Lecture you
are invited to gather in with the School of Law and its supporters in
celebration of its recent full accreditation by the American Bar
Association -- a celebration co-hosted by Mayor Williams, Carole Clarke,
DC Bar President John Cruden, the DC Legal Aid Society, Neighborhood
Legal Services, the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless, and the
entire Council of the District of Columbia! For more information and to
register to attend any part of the program, RSVP to JLibertelli@Udc.edu
or to Delores Jackson at 274-7349 and indicate which part of the program
you wish to attend. There is no charge for the symposium, Rauh Lecture
or celebration.
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — FOR SALE
Stamp Out Taxation Without Representation
Andy Catanzaro, catanzaroa@gmail.com
Stamp your way to freeing DC! For only $10.00 you can get your own
rubber stamp with the slogan, “Stamp out taxation without
representation in Washington DC!” and a one-year membership to the
Stamp Act Congress (http://www.stampactcongress.org).
Join us in fighting to free DC from taxation without representation.
E-mail catanzaroa@gmail.com or
go to the site and order through Paypal.
###############
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.