Thanksgiving

Dear Washingtonians:

There are three things that we have to give thanks for this year, and two of them just happened. First, today the DC Court of Appeals issued its decision in the slots initiative case (http://www.dcwatch.com/election/init20ee.htm). The court overruled the Superior Court and the DC Board of Elections and Ethics, and found that the slots initiative is not a proper subject for an initiative. Best of all, the grounds on which it reached this decision rule out the possibility that gambling promoters could reword their initiative slightly and bring it back again. Federal law makes the possession and use of gambling devices such as slot machines illegal in the District of Columbia, and the Court of Appeals found that neither the city council nor a local initiative can overturn that federal law. Therefore, gambling promoters will have to get the US Congress to repeal that federal law before they can come back to town to try to establish a slots casino here.

Second, at a meeting yesterday of the council’s Committee on Education, Libraries, and Recreation, Councilmember Carol Schwartz introduced a motion to table the mayor’s bill to divest the city of the Martin Luther King, Jr., Library, and she and Councilmembers Barry and Gray outvoted the two supporters of the mayor’s bill, Councilmembers Patterson and Mendelson. Tabling this bill is only a temporary victory, because the politicians who want to loot this city of its most valuable assets to give them to their influential supporters are in a strong position, and they don’t pay attention to the citizens who are fighting to protect and preserve our city’s treasures. Mayor-elect Fenty has joined Mayor Williams in his campaign to give away this historic and architecturally important asset to an as-yet undisclosed beneficiary, and to replace it with a smaller, less convenient, more expensive central library. But Tuesday’s vote was a temporary victory; it gives the citizens time to rally more councilmembers to protect the public’s interest, rather than the private interests who want control over MLK; and we give thanks for it.

Third, we have to give thanks for you, the readers of and contributors to themail, and the supporters of DCWatch, who care about the District of Columbia as a city for its residents and who work to make it a better place to live.

Gary Imhoff and Dorothy Brizill
themail@dcwatch.com and dorothy@dcwatch.com

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

Bill to Construct New Central Library Suffers Major Defeat
Stuart Gosswein, sgosswein@aol.com

The DC council’s Committee on Education, Libraries, and Recreation voted to table Bill 16-734, the “Library Transformation Act of 2006,” which would have authorized construction of a new library on the old Convention Center site. The vote was three to table (Barry, Gray, Schwartz) and two opposed (Patterson, Mendelson), and it may signal the bill’s demise this session.

The Committee of 100 on the Federal City teamed up with the DC Library Renaissance Project in an effort to defeat the bill. They were joined by a number of activists across the city in support of the Martin Luther King, Jr., Central Library and their local libraries. Councilmembers were provided a four-page, side-by-side analysis comparing the old Convention Center site with the option of renovating MLK. The matrix demonstrated concern about moving forward with the old Convention Center proposal. For example, that site has no Metro stops within two blocks, while MLK has five stops serving every line. Additionally, a developer would only pay $115 million over a 99-year period for use of the MLK facility and its lucrative location.

Councilmember Carol Schwartz has consistently maintained that the old Convention Center site’s valuable real estate would generate more revenue to the city if placed through private development, such as retail or residential use. Councilmembers Marion Barry and Vincent Gray agreed that the issue deserves more scrutiny. The DC Library Renaissance Project and the Committee of 100 thanked these Councilmembers for their votes. They also commended Councilmember Kathy Patterson for holding a series of hearings on the legislation that provided the community with a forum for debating an issue filled with much passion. The DC Library Renaissance Project and the Committee of 100 believe the Council vote provides an opportunity to reconsider renovating the MLK facility. They support the convening of an architectural charrette to consider ways in which the building can also be further enlivened and transformed. The two organizations will now reach out to the former opposition, those who worked diligently toward their vision of a 21st Century library on the old Convention Center site, in an effort to achieve collectively the best central library possible for DC.

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

Council Action on Central Library Reopens Discussions
Richard Huffine, Federation of Friends of the DC Public Library, richardhuffine@yahoo.com

A new opportunity has been opened to engage the community in what the District needs to do to revitalize its public library system. The recent decision to table legislation that would have authorized the lease of the current Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Library gives us all a chance to revisit the issues and come together with a stronger resolve to fix ongoing problems and move forward as a city. In my opinion, the legislation being considered was too narrowly focused and left too many questions unaddressed about the financing and schedule of revitalization District-wide. While some in our community are concerned about a $290 million new central library, I am more concerned about how and when the District will initiate the $200 million effort to rebuild and refurbish its twenty-five branch libraries across the city. I am concerned that there is no timeline for delivery of four branches closed in December 2004, and I am concerned that there is no vision for how to make the current main library functional in the intervening five years it will take to build on the old convention center site.

The discussions to date have also left out issues and ideas for managing fleet, storage, and “back office” operations; functions that could be more cost efficient if managed off-site, away from the downtown location. Legislation passed in January 2006 authorized a Task Force to create an overarching strategic plan for the libraries but that group has yet to meet. The Library Enhancement, Assessment, and Development Task Force has not received its final appointment, a community representative appointed by the Mayor. Since Mayor Williams has agreed to cease appointments, it is now up to Mayor-Elect Fenty to step up and appoint the final member and get that effort underway.

I personally want to see the Council pass a comprehensive bill authorizing a number of initiatives to support the library revitalization. I want to see a clear commitment to rebuilding not only buildings but the public’s trust in its library services. I think we all need to look to Mr. Fenty and his emerging administration to step up and make his commitment to public libraries and their role in our communities known. Our councilmembers have bought us some time but it will be up to us to make sure the delay is worthwhile. So contact Adrian Fenty, attend the meetings he is holding in each Ward and make sure the libraries are on his radar for an early commitment within his administration.

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

Siting Charter Schools
D.W. Holmes, dw_holmes@yahoo.com

[From testimony given to the Public Charter School Board] Charter school locations have now become a matter of District-wide community concern. This could have been prevented and may still be mitigated by the action of this Board. The grant of chartering authority to a charter school must not be used as a license to locate without reference to the needs of the surrounding community and the safety of the students. In our case, a school with a good reputation evidently decided to test the limits; to conceal ownership of the proposed expansion property; to ignore residential zoning; to provide no playground and only three staff parking places; to choose a location with a highly dangerous traffic pattern and no adequate or safe way to drop off or pick up children; and, most important, to have no community consultation until grudgingly forced to it by community action. Arrogant organizations like this, claiming a residential site for a charter school as a matter of right, damage public perceptions of all charter schools.

I ask you to do better for our city. This Board needs to create a built-in, required, transparent process for informing and involving communities and their residents when charter school sites are considered. This is no more than is required for the siting of traditional public schools and private schools. There are similar legal restrictions on individuals establishing businesses in their own houses. Charter schools alone cannot be allowed to do whatever they want.

Charter schools can be welcome in city neighborhoods. They are a useful alternative to inadequate public schools, offering curricula and methods otherwise not available. There are appropriate locations for charter schools in our Ward and in our ANC. But charter schools must consult with their potential neighbors when considering location: the ANCs can facilitate this process. Just as important, this Board needs to require adequate school sites and appropriate facilities before an initial charter is granted, as well as when any subsequent schools are established under a charter. A certificate of occupancy alone, the current requirement, is nowhere near adequate. More attempts to finesse zoning regulations, child safety issues, and legitimate neighborhood concerns may be forthcoming. I hope this Board will assert responsibility for siting its charters and consult with the neighborhoods, especially as the city may grant you additional oversight and authority for those schools currently chartered directly by the DC Board of Education.

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

DPW Thanksgiving Schedule
Mary L. Myers, mary.myers@dc.gov

In observance of Thanksgiving Day, DPW offices will be closed on Thursday, November 23. Most Department of Public Works services, with the exception of leaf collection, will be suspended for the day. There will be no residential trash collection or recycling service on that day. Additionally, there will be no DPW parking enforcement, including rush hour, meter and residential parking restrictions. All services, including booting, towing parking enforcement and rush hour restrictions will resume on Friday, November 24.

Citywide trash and recyclables collection will slide one day. Households that normally receive city service on Thursday should set out trash and recyclables for collection on Friday. Friday’s trash and recyclables will be picked up on Saturday. To see DPW’s entire holiday trash collection schedule, visit the web site at http://www.dpw.dc.gov and select Holiday Schedule. You may also click on Agency Calendar for all DPW events.

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

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

The Devil’s Road
Bob Levine, rilevine@cpcug.org

[Re: “The Devil’s Road,” themail, November 19] I drive this road [Benning Road] every day to go to work and it’s just another example of DC ignoring everything in DC except northwest DC.

You’re lucky not to be shot driving on Benning Road, NE, because there is very little police presence in a neighborhood with a great deal of violence. The poor road condition is just another sign of the city’s collapsing around us.

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

Voting Rights and Turnout
Michael Bindner, mikeybdc at yahoo dot com

DC Vote’s Executive Director seeks pressure [themail, November 19] to pass the Davis Norton bill granting DC representation in the House only, along with granting Utah an additional seat. Many are calling this one-third voting rights. Unless Utah redistricts in such a way to guarantee the seat of its Democratic member, Nancy Pelosi will make sure it dies. She has already stated that Delegate Norton will have her Committee-of-the-Whole vote, which is one-sixth representation. There is also the issue of severability, which does not necessarily bind the courts. If the Courts follow the Adams v. Clinton/Alexander v. Daley decisions they must overturn DC’s seat, but may not overturn Utah’s, which leaves them with an additional vote (not a big deal with a solid Democratic majority). It also provides an additional vote in the Electoral College for Utah, no matter what happens in court. Of course, those who object can’t divide, since the additional seat has no impact on the total number needed for election is still 539/2=269.5 or 270. The Rohrbacher bill also grants Utah a seat, but it also grants representation through Maryland’s Senators and does not have the constitutional problems the Davis Bill has. While it does give the GOP that one electoral vote, that would depend on who the candidates are and how the campaign is run. If the Democrats are too dumb to run a fifty-state strategy they deserve to pay for their folly. The major difficulty with Rohrbacher is the "what’s next" factor. Providing Senate representation may take the drive out of any further progress toward statehood or greater self-determination. However, this is assuming that future congressional tyranny will cease. If it does not, the drive for statehood remains.

As to voter turnout, let me reiterate that the number of registered voters is inflated by bad Board of Elections and Ethics rules for removing people from the ballot. In DC it is not automatic, like it is in most places (where if you miss election after election, they assume you moved or just don’t care). The answer to this problem is not to bemoan low turnout, it is to clean up the voter rolls.

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

Paper Trail
Harold Goldstein, mdbiker@goldray.com

While Dennis Jaffe [themail, November 19] may not equate a paper trail with casting ballots by paper, others do. And articles in the media certainly imply as much. Even in Maryland after the primary problems, there were calls to go back to paper ballots. To me, calls for a paper trail, without some useful specifics, do not contribute in any useful way since they tend to just rouse the public against electronic voting. Electronic machines now point the way to the future, and implications otherwise are counter productive.

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

Electronic or Paper? Both
Dennis Jaffe, DennisJaffe @ Gma i l . c om

I am repeating a sentence I wrote in the November 15 edition of themail so there is no mistake about my views on electronic voting machines: Unless DC’s electronic machines come with a verifiable paper trail, I’ll continue to stand with the four out of five voters who say, “Paper, please.”

Despite one interpretation, my preference is not that we run elections in DC or nationwide by paper ballot. Rather, it is that we have electronic voting machines with a voter-verifiable paper record, allowing voters to confirm that the choice they cast electronically was recorded correctly. If the voting system that I favor is not available to me, then I would continue to prefer to stand with 80 percent of DC voters in casting my ballot by paper. Also, the paper ballot that I prefer as my second choice for voting is the one DC currently uses, which is scanned electronically — not, as was suggested, the one called the "butterfly" ballot that had punched out, missing, flying and other kinds of chads.

Again, for the record, I do favor electronic voting machines which come equipped with a voter-verifiable paper record. And I don’t favor chadded-butterfly ballots. Nor have I ever, red-herringed assertions to the contrary. Finally, I’d like to acknowledge that my provisional ballot, cast in the November 7th election, was “accepted.”

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

Do We Need Paper Trails?
Bryce Suderow, streetstories@juno.com

This is a response to the ongoing debate in themail about paper ballots versus electronic voting. Do countries in Europe use electronic voting machines? Do they have paper trails? Do they think paper trails are important?

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

Pass the DC Voting Rights Act
Kevin Kiger, kkiger@dcvote.org

The Association of State Democratic Chairs unanimously passed a resolution supporting the enactment of the DC Voting Rights Act, H.R. 5388, legislation that would give DC residents a vote in Congress for the first time ever. The resolution was passed at a meeting held in Jackson Hole, Wyoming this past weekend. Indications are strong that Congress will take up H.R. 5388 during the "lame duck" session in December, and this unanimous resolution from Democratic leaders adds to the already broad bipartisan support for the DC Voting Rights Act.

Recent statements of support made my Representatives Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Steny Hoyer (D-MD) as well as statements from the White House have boosted the bill’s momentum. Swift action and strong backing from Utah Governor Huntsman and the Utah state legislature are playing an important role in bringing this legislation to a vote.

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

A Rolling Trojan Horse?
Timothy Cooper, worldright@aol.com

Ilir Zherka notes in “Join the Final Push for the DC Voting Rights Act” [themail, November 19] that “we can bring the dawn of a new democracy to DC if we all keep up the hard work over the next few weeks.” He is of course referring to the well-intentioned but deeply flawed DC voting rights legislation, that if passed, and deemed constitutional, would afford DC residents a voting representative in the House of Representatives as well as an additional House seat in the House for the state of Utah. But is it constitutional? Since no Congressional Research Service or US Department of Justice legal analysis has ever been conducted on Congress’s inherent power to legislate a single vote for DC in Congress, for reasons that remain perplexingly unclear, DC Mayor Williams/Fenty, the city council, DC Delegate Norton, and the House Governmental Reform Committee are relying in major part on the highly partisan legal opinions written by 1) Kenneth Starr, who was hired by the House Governmental Reform Committee under Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA), and 2) DC Appleseed, to support their novel theory. But there are other noted constitutional scholars, including Prof. Jonathan Turley of George Washington University, who take strong exception to the theory and have been largely ignored. We do so at our possible peril. It should be noted, for instance, that in a recent DC voting rights case, Adams v. Clinton (2000, US District), the courts commented "how deeply Congressional representation is tied to the structure of statehood" and that "the Constitution does not contemplate that the District may serve as a state for purposes of the apportionment of congressional representatives"; and in Michel v. Anderson (1994, US Appellate) the courts held that a House rules change granting DC and territorial delegates a vote in the Committee of the Whole would be unconstitutional but for a so-called "savings clause" that prevented the nonvoting delegates from voting if their vote proved decisive because DC and territorial residents were not "people of the several states"; and in Clarke v. US (DC Circuit, 1989) and Palmore v. US, 411 US 389 (1973), the courts held that Congress enjoys plenary authority over the District under Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 17 only so long as Congress does not "contravene any provisions of the constitution." Can Congress simply ignore Article I, which confers the right of congressional representation on the so-called “qualified” people of the several states, without making DC a state or a part of a state or by passing an amendment?

Should the DC Voting Rights Act pass, it will surely be challenged. Likely, a restraining order will be issued preventing DC’s representative from voting until all constitutional questions have been determined. But what if, at the end of a protracted litigation, DC’s single House vote is declared unconstitutional, but Utah’s extra seat is upheld? Will the legislation fail as a whole or will only DC’s portion be strike down? The current legislation contains a so-called “nonseverability” clause that states that if any provision in the bill is declared invalid “the remaining provisions… shall be treated as invalid”; but there’s ample precedent to suggest that courts aren’t bound by such boilerplate language (Bizko v. RIHT Financial Corp held, for instance, that “a non-severability clause cannot ultimately bind a court. . .”). Without more specific language about Congress’s true intentions regarding severability, the courts will turn to the legislative history for clarification. Statements made by the Committee Chairman, the Committee Report and the Floor Debate will be crucial. Otherwise, Utah could walk off with its extra House and electoral vote, with DC never casting a single vote. That’s hardly the dawn of a new democracy for DC. To me, it looks more like a Republican Trojan Horse rolling down Pennsylvania Avenue in the full light of day.

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

The Fenty E-Transition
Malcolm L Wiseman, Jr., Washington Free DC, mal@wiseman.ws

“Fairly advanced computer knowledge” isn’t required at all for participation in the Fenty E-transition. You have to have basic skills that anyone who uses the web already has to some degree.

Using E-mail, logging onto an Internet server program, typing messages and clicking “OK” isn’t anywhere near “fairly advanced computer knowledge,” even on a scale including users only. Advanced computer users, “knowers,” and professionals take years to become “fairly advanced,” anyway a lot longer than it takes to read some instructions and use a web log.

If you are participating in this forum, then you are capable of participating in the E-transition.

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

We Need the New Comprehensive Plan Now — Not!
Richard Layman, rlaymandc@yahoo.com

We all the know the "not" joke, featured in the new Borat movie. More importantly, we need to think long and hard about the comprehensive plan, especially in terms of DC and its legacy of great planning, starting from the very beginning with L’Enfant, and carried forward by the McMillan Commission, and the Legacy Plan vision from NCPC in the late 1990s. Just because thousands of people (including me) went to meetings doesn’t necessarily mean a great final document was produced, and I would hope that all the people who contributed their time and energy wouldn’t, just like our mothers told us, “jump off the Brooklyn Bridge just because your friend would.” Quality, not just quantity, should be what matters here.

This isn’t to disrespect the effort put into the plan, or the work of the Office of Planning. They had a lot to do in an extremely accelerated time frame. Because of that acceleration, the document is far from perfect. Rather than go ahead with something less than ideal, many of us are asking for more time to produce a truly excellent document that guides the land use and business of the city into the 21st century, and this isn’t merely a matter of “letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.” L’Enfant set a high bar, one that we should recognize when trying to rush something through for the sake of rush. We are the stewards of DC’s built environment, and the decisions that are made today, for good and bad, shape the Washington that we leave to our children and grandchildren, to the citizens of the United States, and to the world (as well as to students of planning history).

There are serious gaps in the Plan. The Transportation Element is weak. Transportation Demand Management should be made the primary transportation policy, and it isn’t. Urban Design should be laid out as the primary organizing principle concerning what gets built. It isn’t. Because the city’s competitive advantages rest on its historic architecture and urban design, oriented around the pedestrian, as well as the provision of great mobility that is not dependent on automobility, not emphasizing and strengthening these elements allows the continued diminishment of the city and its built environment. And there are many other issues that need to be more thoroughly addressed as well. Additionally, the amendment process to the plan while it is before City Council allows for a great deal of change without any substantive citizen input, and time for review. I have been informed that within the last couple weeks, Holland and Knight, the law firm with the most active real estate practice in the city, submitted two hundred pages of suggested amendments to the plan. Two hundred pages!

As it is, the Land Use and Area Elements do not have justification statements for why particular recommendations are made, making it easy for lobbyists to change the plan despite the original intent. And without real time to review the proposed changes, not just from Holland and Knight, but from other developer interests, puts citizens at a real disadvantage.

I am appalled by the various groups continuing to advocate for the plan, acknowledging deep faults, but making the argument that it could be a lot worse, that nimby opposition makes it miraculous that it is as good as it is. If they aren’t advocating for Urban Design and Transportation Design Management first and foremost, then their objectives aren’t about maintaining city livability, they are about something else.

Why are we so willing to accept, if not mediocrity (my apologies to Barry Miller, Ellen McCarthy, Don Edwards, and others for using that word) something that is much less than great? I am so tired of hearing the powers-that-be bandy about how Washington is a “world-class city” when time after time we do not even attempt to achieve from the outset, “world-class outcomes.” Since when is a demand for excellence seen as something to be derided?

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

Reality Can Be Tiresome
Ed Delaney, profeddel@yahoo.com

As there’s not much news on the cap-busted ballpark since the parking garage debacle got resolved to no one’s satisfaction, here’s a reply to comments in last week’s themail [November 19] directed this way from Bill Coe: “On the one hand, his insinuations and unrelenting pessimism over the ballpark project are growing tiresome.” For someone who’s in the “Mayor Williams was right” camp even after the public costs soared for what is going to be a cut-rate ballpark dare to its site (while teams like the Athletics are planning to use almost all private financing and spend less than half than DC will on their new ballpark), I’m sure the constant analysis of facts that suggest otherwise would grow more and more tiresome. You may as well get a blanket, because as long as I’m bringing facts to the table and backing them up on a project whose principals have successfully advanced their material interests at the public’s expense from free luxury suites to stadium revenue and development projects (with only doggone Malek missing the gravy train at the last minute), the snooze fest of accountability will roll on! (I’ll at least keep myself awake with a clear picture of what‘s going on.)

This is DCWatch, not Pollyanna’s Parade, so I‘m not going to give a pass on the deceit, doubletalk, and just plain clumsy governance that has led public costs for this project to this absurd level and put the city in a position that Jack Evans tells us “we have to comply” to the wishes of a private monopoly just because we got a team. I suppose the submissions from Gary and Dorothy describing less-than-flowery descriptions of actions by city officials and private interests like the gambling lobby (and quite often, the two cross over) should also be summarily dismissed due to fatigue with the less-than-rosy picture they paint. If you don’t like reading facts on the ballpark boondoggle in a blog dedicated to citizen discussion and oversight of city services and expenditures, feel free to log into “Ted Lerner‘s Nats-O-Rama” or some other pom-pom waiving Nats board or blog for the latest sunshiny discussion of steel-in-the-ground bliss.

“He regularly posts basically the same two or three paragraphs, making the same points over and over again.” Regularly, the only facts on a specific subject regarding the baseball boondoggle have been published once and never again, as was the case with the City Paper‘s revelation in its October 7, 2005, cover story that the DCSEC first rejected then bowed to MLB‘s request after months of pressure to have the city change the stadium design in a budget-breaking manner which included a 7500 sq. ft. conference center and an entire concourse level of luxury suites and club seats, or the gem from the Washington Business Journal (February 21, 2005) in which city officials actually acknowledge the substandard Metro upgrade that “might create a logjam on sold-out game days that could keep hundreds or even thousands of fans milling about South Capitol Street and the surrounding area,” a fact that is so outrageous and is going to be talked about nonstop when it affects those thousands of fans that I find it relevant to be pointed out on a regular basis given its continued relevance, on top of the media blackout of this key fact.

You might also have relevant baseline information repeated in the coverage of stories from the Post and Times, like their continued repetition of key details and prices associated with parking garages saga in each story, as it’s standard practice for the purposes of consistent information and tying together key points. Since they and I aren’t going to assume that everyone has read each and every submission on a subject, the material is going to be repeated as needed in each case, whether its thousands of stranded fans or the outrage of the discovery of fifty-three oil tanks at the current site after the CFO, the DCSEC, Evans, Miller, and the mayor’s office acted in unison to dismiss the possibility of environmental contamination and budgeting for its remediation at the precise moment that the (drum roll, please) Brigade was trying to make costs fit at the current site.

Again, the accuracy of what I submit is what I’m concerned with, which is why what I post is a whole lot more than mere insinuations but is backed by relevant and documented facts that have borne out throughout this process. The fact that you’re even taking the time to level shots and try to discredit or encourage fatigue with the facts that keep coming out about this boondoggle while encouraging people to get excited over steel in the ground (never mind the out-of-control costs at the site and how environmentally compromised that piece of ground is, as we still wait for an extensive and independent impact study to be conducted on it for the answer) suggests I’m getting to those who don’t like us looking too closely at this train wreck of a ballpark project and tells me I should keep doing exactly what I’m doing, even at the risk of a mid-paragraph yawn from those who know the details on how the ballpark turned into a cut-rate “Buick or Ford” greenhouse.

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

CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS

Mayor Williams on WETA, November 27
Julie Drizin, jdrizin@weta.com

Mayor Anthony Williams will be a guest on WETA 90.9 FM’s daily local call-in show “The Intersection” on Monday, November 27 from 11 a.m.-12 p.m. Host Rebecca Roberts and the mayor will take calls from listeners and discuss the mayor’s accomplishments and legacy. Listeners are invited to send questions in advance or during the program to intersection@weta.org or call 1-888-511-9382 during the program.

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

School Superintendent’s Master Facilities Plan Hearings, November 27, December 6
Gary Imhoff, themail@dcwatch.com

The DC Board of Education will hold public hearings on the superintendent’s Master Facilities Plan on Monday, November 27, 2006, 6:00 p.m., at Anacostia Senior High School, 1601 16th Street, SE; and on Wednesday, December 6, 6:00 p.m., at Cardozo Senior High School, 1200 Clifton Street, NW. Those who wish to testify should contact Ms. Heather Reynolds at 442-4289. Witnesses should bring twelve copies of their written testimony to the public hearing. Public testimony will be limited to three minutes for oral presentations. You may review the Master Facilities Plan online at http://www.k12.dc.us; click on MFP 2006.

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

Tenants’ Rights Empowerment Circle, November 28
Parisa B. Norouzi, parisa@empowermentdc.org

Protect tenants rights; save affordable housing! Attend the empowerment circle, Tuesday, November 28, 6:30 p.m., at the Reeves Center, 14th and U Streets, NW. RSVP to Linda, 234-9119. Learn your rights: tenants’ first right to purchase, or how to buy your building; tenants’ rights during condo conversion; tenants’ pitfalls to avoid. Presenters: Kofi Reed, University Legal Services; and Alzonia Hill, tenant leader. Please call to let us know if you can make it.

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

Every Kid Counts in DC, December 4
Kendra Dunn, DC Children’s Trust Fund, kdunn@dcctf.org

Please join the DC Kids Count Collaborative for the release of the Every Kid Counts in the District of Columbia 13th Annual Fact Book 2006 on Monday, December 4, from 9:30-11:00 am at The Urban Institute (2100 M Street NW, 5th Floor). Come hear about the important findings, get copies of the book, and enjoy breakfast. RSVP to Kendra Dunn at kdunn@dcctf.org or 667-4940 by November 29.

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

CLASSIFIEDS — SERVICES

Santa’s Inside Man, Holiday Home Design from a Pro
Mark Johnson, markjohn55@aol.com

“The weather outside is frightful, but inside it’s so delightful!” Let your guests sing your praises this holiday season with affordable assistance from a professional interior designer. Create a festive and exciting look for your holiday parties or start the new year with a brand new home design. Give me a call for a consultation and turn your house into the Miracle on Your Street. Or give a creative and different holiday gift — the gift of a home makeover.

In the DC Metro Area? I’m Ed at Design 23, also known as Santa’s Inside Man. Give me a call at 552-9211. It’s holiday time!

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

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.