themail.gif (3487 bytes)

September 30, 2007

Coverage

Dear News Hounds:

Dorothy, in the last item in this issue, comments on the general dissatisfaction that many citizens who are involved in DC politics and civic affairs feel about local press coverage of the issues that affect us. Most of the time, the major complaint is that coverage is skimpy and inadequate, and that important issues are buried or ignored, but in the past week there have been several good articles that I’d like to recommend.

Community newspapers have been beating the majors on reporting the significance of the city council’s emergency bill on the West End real estate deal, both for the West End neighborhood and for the future of public property throughout the District. Elizabeth Wiener has written two comprehensive articles on the issue in The Northwest Current, “West End Deal Stirs Demand for Reform,” September 26, and “Request for West End Reversal Stalls,” September 19. Both are front-page articles linked from http://www.currentnewspapers.com/archiveweek.php?n=1&year=2007. The InTowner provided equally good coverage in a front-page article in its September issue by Anthony Harvey, “West End Library Site Transfer to EastBanc Controversy Now Part of Larger Issue about District’s Embrace of Public-Private Deals.” The issue is in the InTowner archives, linked from http://www.intowner.com. That article, by the way, includes without comment the best argument for believing the EastBanc proposal — to build a fire station, a branch library, and new condominium units on the same site — is ill-conceived and not thought through. It shows the architect’s conceptual drawing of the project, with the fire station on the first floor, the library on the second floor right above it, and the condos on the upper floors above the library. Can anyone hear the problem?

Several articles covered various aspects of DC government’s continuing problem with government officials at the highest level who are deeply interested in rewarding themselves and inflating their salaries, at the expense both of the taxpayers and of their subordinates. The DC Auditor’s report on the bonuses paid to top officials in the Williams administration was well covered in two articles in the Times, by Jim McElhatton (“Bonus Practice Scaled Back, Under Review,” http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070928/METRO/109280093/1004) and Matthew Cella (“DC Officials Got Improper Bonuses,” http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070930/METRO/109300051/1004). Yolanda Woodlee got the front page in the Post for her article on the Auditor’s report: “Report: Williams Officials Given Undue Bonuses,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/29/AR2007092901512.html?hpid=moreheadlines.

Michael Neibauer had the field to himself on another aspect of the government’s hiring policies, “DC to Crack down on Hiring Outsiders,” The Washington Examiner, http://www.examiner.com/a-962159~D_C__to_crack_down_on_hiring_outsiders.html. And Jim McElhatton had two other big articles. While the Williams administration inflated top officials’ salaries using bonuses, the Fenty administration just wants to raise the salaries themselves to unprecedented levels: “Fenty’s Salary Scale ‘Scary,’” http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20070927/METRO/109270059/1004. And it continues to award contracts with questionable value to the residents to friendly and well-connected insiders, “DC Runs up $1 Million Lobby Bill,” The Washington Times, http://www.currentnewspapers.com/archiveweek.php?n=1&year=2007.

Then there’s a well-written column that I think is fundamentally wrong, but I’ve run on too long, so I’ll argue with it another time: Colbert King, “Coming Soon: The Real Schools Battle,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/28/AR2007092801399.html?sub=AR.

Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com

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

Another Frontal Lobotomy for an Oversized Scapegoat
Len Sullivan, lsnarpac@bellatlantic.net

The notion that our national capital city can lower the embarrassingly high crime statistics among its poor people (mostly kids) by reshuffling the organization of its local police department seems to me hopelessly simplistic. It ranks right up there with blaming teachers for the lousy test scores of poor kids, and bailing out a failing hospital as a panacea for DC’s third world health statistics. Chief Ramsey was no technocrat and had few college degrees, but he came to understand that he could not resolve the counter-cultural problems of the poor with uniforms and cruisers on the street. He couldn’t stop the crimes before they happened, and he couldn’t solve most of the crimes after they happened when committed within the community of the disaffected.

How will Chief Lanier’s reverted structure and whiter management lower the incidence of crime rather than just move it around? How will the changes raise the closure rate on serious crimes? Is anyone tracking (or publishing) the paltry share of DC’s crimes that the MPD does solve? What did we gain by the summer overtime splurge? The Fenty administration appears to be instituting superficial, headline-grabbing actions that are irrelevant to the slow and steady effort required to change the culture of the disadvantaged. I wager that 4,500 less unwanted, poorly-parented kids, and 4,500 more responsible, hands-on fathers would do more to reduce all the city’s ills than reshuffling its 4,500 hapless MPD employees, its 8,000 struggling poor-health personnel, or its 11,000 frazzled school workers. It would surely beat grotesquely overpaying DC’s agency heads and their senior deputies to joust with the wrong windmills.

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

How TOPA and Greed Killed My Affordable Housing
Deborah Akel, dakel@earthlink.net

By now you’ve probably heard of the Tiverton, the last affordable housing in the West End, which sits smack in the middle of the hotly contested Square 37. This humble four-story walkup, built in 1929 (and considered a high-rise in its day), is now dwarfed by surrounding high-rise luxury condos and hotels. We’ve endured eight long, noisy, dusty years of demolition and construction around us. Hundreds of new condos were built, but not a single one within the reach of low- or middle-income folks. I suppose it was inevitable that our days were numbered.

Last year, our landlord put the Tiverton up for sale. Our tenant association voted to exercise its rights under DC’s Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA), which gives tenants the first right to purchase their building if the landlord decides to sell or convert it. Tenants soon got wind of the possibility of lucrative cash buyouts, and factions began to form. There were long-term tenants who considered the Tiverton home and wanted to stay. There were young, transient tenants with dollar signs in their eyes. And there were the undecideds: recent immigrants and those too busy or too intimidated to get involved, who relied on the board for leadership.

We learned we could qualify for low-interest financing to purchase the building ourselves. As owners, we could retain more control, value, and affordability. But this option was dismissed. We were told it would take too long and would limit our equity, and that not enough tenants were interested in buying to make it viable. It was suggested that we partner with a for-profit developer instead. Soon, the greed factor reared its ugly head. A group of young tenants pressed the board for quick, high cash buyouts. Some of them were planning to move out anyway and didn’t want to wait any longer than necessary. They complained when the board announced that buyouts would be based on length of tenancy. Not fair, they said. So the board capitulated and decided to give the same buyout to everyone, whether they’ve lived here for two years or twenty years.

The results of three polls showed that tenants were evenly divided among buying, taking a buyout, and renting. Yet the board saw its mandate as negotiating for the highest cash payouts. In the end they achieved their objective, but it came at the expense of those who wanted to buy their homes. The developer has said he couldn’t offer us lower purchase prices because the board was focused on maximizing buyout amounts. And so, the buyout rules. It trumps both the discount offered to purchase our homes and the value of staying as a renter.

Is this the outcome that the council intended when it enacted TOPA? To emphasize high cash buyouts instead of affordability? To entice tenants to vacate their homes with large sums of money? To give the lion’s share of benefits to tenants with one foot out the door? Don’t get me wrong -- I’m not suggesting that we eliminate TOPA. With rampant condo conversions killing off affordable housing, we need tenant protections more than ever. But TOPA needs to be amended to ensure that its goals of creating homeownership, preserving affordable housing, and minimizing tenant displacement are met. I would argue that high cash buyouts do not accomplish these goals.

Furthermore, there seems to be little recourse for tenants who are unhappy with the decisions of their board. The courts have ruled that TOPA provides no individual rights outside the tenant association. This can be problematic when your long-term home is entrusted entirely to a board whose authority and decisionmaking cannot easily be challenged.

After this long, arduous process, I recommend the following amendments to TOPA: 1) affordable homeownership should be favored over high cash buyouts. While buyouts should remain an option, they should not be emphasized at the expense of affordable purchase prices. 2) Some degree of individual rights outside of the tenant association should be granted. 3) Benefits should be based on length of tenancy. This will help to discourage collusion and prevent short-term tenants from capitalizing on cash buyouts over the interests of long-term tenants.

The deal is done. The Tiverton, which has provided affordable housing to DC residents for almost eighty years, will soon be market-rate condos, and the District has lost yet another affordable rental property. The West End has officially become the dominion of only the very wealthy. As we say goodbye to the last bastion of diversity and affordability in the West End, I hope that our lawmakers will take note that even the protections of TOPA are not enough to prevent tenant displacement or stem the loss of affordable housing for low- to middle-income residents. Long live the Tiverton.

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

Roosevelt High Stadium Field Looking Good
Malcolm Wiseman, Washington Free DC, mal@wiseman.ws

Just now there are exuberant drum rolls and volleys coming on a warm, south breeze from Roosevelt Senior High School to my back porch. Their drumline practicing reminds me that I recently drove by the stadium on Upshur and saw the beautiful athletic field that is coming into shape. A full-scale soccer game was in session with bright-colored uniforms, students and fans in the stands, etc. The turf is so green that it can’t be grass! Or was it blue? Anyway, like I said, it’s beautiful. They have something to beat drums about! Teach them statehood.

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

Jack Evans Gets Paid $332,500 for Double Dipping DC Taxpayers
Paul D. Craney, DC Republican Committee, press@dcgop.com

City Records show that DC councilmember Jack Evans (Ward 2-Democrat) was paid $92,500 as a council member and reported earning a Patton Boggs salary in 2006 of $240,000 a year, a raise of more than $50,000 above what the firm paid him in 2005. Mr. Evans is chairman of the DC council’s committee on finance, overseeing the DC Office of the Chief Financial Officer, which is handling the lobbying contract.

Mr. Evan’s defense is that he doesn’t vote on issues pertaining to Patton Boggs as a councilmember. The only catch is that DC council has never voted on a Patton Boggs contract because the contract does not exceed $1 million a year. "Mr. Evans is the chair of a committee on DC council who oversees lobbying contracts all while working for a lobbying firm who benefits from a lucrative DC lobbying contract. Mr. Evans’ actions clearly demonstrate a conflict of interest that taints our political system for personal gain," stated DC Republican Committee Chairman Robert Kabel.

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

Mail Delivery
Bryce A. Suderow, Streetstories@juno.com

I have been doing research on mail delivery in the District of Columbia. Here’s what I have learned thus far. 1) Mail does not reach the carriers until 11 a.m. 2) Although machines are supposed to separate the mail, the machines often fail and letters for other parts of the city are given to the carriers. 3) The supervisors force the carriers to rush through mail delivery, typically allowing them about fifteen minutes per block. This causes a lot of errors. If the carriers slow down to insure more accuracy, they are written up. 4) Morale is very bad and the absenteeism rate is very high and many carriers have quit their jobs. Often the remaining carriers work nine-hour days, six days a week. 5) This is a system in crisis. Poor management insures that mail delivery will be late and to the wrong addresses.

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

Voluntary Agreements
Clyde Howard, ceohoward@hotmail.com

Voluntary agreements negotiated as a condition for liquor licenses are the worst form of legal blackmail that can be fostered on a business owner. It is so demeaning and so binding that it borders on interference with a for-profit corporation. In my mind that is grounds for a legal challenge up to and including the Supreme Court. In one way these agreements can be good for controlling businesses that refuse to abide by the laws on the books, but in another way they can be nothing more than vindictiveness put in legal form, designed to intimidate business owners into kowtowing, bending to the ridiculous wishes of residents who are out of touch with reality. These residents remind you of the ones who move next to an airport and complain about the noise. These agreements are also being used by residents to remove older, established businesses from their neighborhood to be replaced by more upscale and luxurious companies, hoping that will enhance the value of their homes.

Voluntary agreements instituted by the Alcohol Beverage Regulation Administration, ABRA, against business owners by the residents are not really voluntary in the strict sense of the word. How can an agreement be voluntary if the business owner who refuses to sign it or negotiate it is confronted by a penalty of not obtaining his or her liquor license? Where does the voluntary part come in? Agreements in the most part are arbitrary and can be racist, in that they are in the most part directed at a particular class of business owner. And it seems that business owners are normally at a disadvantage in that they are unable to operate unless they are forced into these agreement. If this is how the residents treat an owner who is trying to make a living, how can they then expect that owner to support what they would like to do for the community?

These problems have come to the forefront because to gentrification. These complaints arose because the newcomers have expected a country-club-style atmosphere that does not exist in a vibrant city. Most of these entertainment businesses have existed for many years, and they now find that their business is no longer wanted. There has been instances where people of influence have generated, through closed door meetings, special meetings, and clandestine meetings, grounds to stack any formal meeting involving business owners in their attempts to acquire liquor licenses or retain their liquor licenses. What these voluntary agreements have done is to bring out the vicious venomous behavior of residents who want to destroy a person’s business after building it up and fighting to keep it going. I just want the ones who have fought against business owner’s attempt to maintain their business enterprises to remember that what goes around will come around.

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

Priorities
Harold Foster, Petworth, incanato@earthlink.net

This city can find $600 triple large for a space-age playpen by the river for millionaire players, multimillionaire team owners and the suburban patrician wannebes that keep the Christians-and-Lions racket in business. But somehow (frightfully sorry as the British would say), we just cannot seem to scare up the $80 million needed to upgrade and modernize the only full-service medical facility east of North Capitol Street.

Yeah, right. Billions for baseball, not a penny for biopsies and bedpans. When Rome got this silly, the Goths and Vandals were already outside the gates, ready to put her out of her misery.

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

Tenley and West End: United We Stand
Mary Alice Levine, maryalicelevine@starpower.net

As a Tenleytown resident who is grateful for the help of Robin Diener in the fight for the Tenley Library, I am horrified by the many inaccuracies in Mr. Coe’s post (“Keep Our Baby out of West End’s Bathwater,” themail, September 26). Mr. Coe says with regard to the much talked about Janney School-Tenley Library-Developer public-private partnership (PPP), “No one in Tenley argues (as they do in West End) that such an agreement would amount to a giveaway of public property.” Huh? We Tenley residents are arguing exactly this point. The community is to some extent split, but I would contend that most in our community, save some Janney parents, politicians, and developers, think this is a sweetheart deal for some lucky developer. And absolutely no one is promising workforce housing, though this rumor is appeasing some of us.

Mr. Coe goes on to say, “the developer proposes to finish rebuilding the library earlier than currently planned by the District.” Wrong again. The developer has never claimed to be able to finish the library before 2010, the year in which DCPL itself plans to finish the construction. Analysts in the DC government say that such an agreement would delay the library construction by at least two years. And unless this agreement causes the Janney construction project to jump the queue on the DCPS modernization schedule, there is no hope that Janney will start its renovation before 2013, when it is slated for renovation without the PPP. Considering the fact that the School Without Walls PPP was nine years in the making, the Janney School renovation could actually be delayed by hearings and other red tape involving the PPP.

It is very true that the DC Public Library system is holding public meetings on what should be included in the new Tenley Library. Chief Librarian Ginnie Cooper is admirably going ahead with library plans as though there will be no PPP. It’s wonderful. But all bets for a good library that will serve community needs are off if the DCPL Board caves or is forced to accept a deal with a developer. In that case, Tenleytown may not ever see an adequate library, and we certainly won’t see one in 2010 or anytime soon. I’d like to thank Robin Diener of the DC Library Renaissance Project and all those in Empower DC and the People’s Property Campaign for including Tenleytown in their fight.

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

DC Auto
Gabe Goldberg, gabe at gabegold dot com

Bob Levine asked [themail, September 26] whether anyone knows “how and to whom to report a car with District plates that is driving in an unsafe manner.” I use a form on the Fairfax County police web site to do just that: https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/police/traf_sfty_report.htm. I’m told that filing a report causes a letter to be sent to the owner of the reported vehicle and (I think) a record to be kept of the report. I’m not sure how much effect that has on drivers who are reported, but at least it’s something. I wish enforcement could be a bit more severe, but I understand that there’s a limit to what can be done based on something not seen by an officer.

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

Richard A. Stack on Dead Wrong
Phil Shapiro, pshapiro@his.com

On Saturday evening I attended (and videotaped) a spellbinding book talk by American University professor Richard A. Stack, talking about his book Dead Wrong: Violence, Vengeance, and the Victims of Capital Punishment. The talk was given at The Culture Shop, a store on Cedar Street, NW, right near the Takoma subway stop. For those who might be interested, this book talk can be seen in two thirty-minute video segments at http://tinyurl.com/yqbxqy.

I wish this book talk could be automatically downloaded to your personal portable video viewing device, placed into the “local authors” folder. That day is not too far off. An E-mail alert would notify you that a new local author could be viewed on your device — at a time and place that fits into your schedule. Do keep the rest of us posted about local authors you know about that deserve our attention.

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

The WMATA Debate
Richard Layman, rlaymandc@yahoo.com

Batting it back and forth with Larry Seftor [themail, September 26]. My point about consultants for transit was a little different from his. I agree with him that getting consultants “too close” to the contractee won’t necessarily yield the best outcome from the standpoint of citizens. On the other hand, having consultants who don’t know anything about transit won’t likely help too much either. I didn’t feel that his original post acknowledged that, but maybe I just can’t take a joke.

I don’t think WMATA is poorly run or rampant with featherbedding. Yes, the pension stuff is an issue and should be addressed. But some of the problems are a result of the odd governance and funding structure and the overly politicized decision making structure that results, as well as the first example of serious physical aging of the system. Not to mention the militaristic organization that was created by Jackson Graham.

Transit systems in many cities such as Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia are in financial crisis. WMATA needs more money, but it is not on the ropes and suggesting massive service decreases, etc. Instead, WMATA is experiencing ridership increases. Given the cost increases in electricity, oil, and natural gas, I just don’t see why people think that WMATA is immune from needing more money, or why WMATA would be an exception compared to all the other transit systems across the country that are faced with similar problems and issues, and seeking fare and subsidy increases. I will say that like everyone else, I’d rather not pay more for transit if I don’t have to, but I would rather have a highly functioning system providing a great deal of service.

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

More Fallout from City’s Knee-Buckling to MLB and Developers
Ed Delaney, profeddel@yahoo.com

From: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/27/AR2007092701932.html?sub=AR: “Metro board voted yesterday to sell a parcel of land near the stadium to the Akridge Co., setting up a confrontation with a competing firm that could create transportation challenges for the opening of the ballpark in the spring. But Monument Realty, which owns several acres nearby, filed a formal protest. Company officials have said that Monument was promised first dibs on the site by the DC government and Metro several years ago when the company was named ‘master developer’ of the area and given the task of building an integrated ‘ballpark district.’ Monument principal partner Jeffrey T. Neal has threatened to file a lawsuit to stop the sale. In a letter to Metro last month, Neal also said Monument might slow its renovation of the Navy Yard Metro station, the closest stop to the ballpark, if the company does not win Metro’s bus garage property.” Real leadership from the city should have come immediately after District officials had received notice of the threat from the developer to actively sabotage the completion of a valuable and needed commodity such as a Metro station (with many of the improvements designed to increase accessibility to the physically challenged), assuring that the work would be completed on time and that a private concern would not be allowed to sabotage it. Instead of leadership, we’ve gotten silence on the specific matter despite its being disclosed to the city in August, and we’ve gotten rhetoric from Fenty instead of results from anyone: “We’re looking to finish the Metro on time and steer as many people to public transportation as possible. Having parking around the stadium is a critical, critical issue, and we’re working beyond diligently to find as many areas as we can for cars to park.”

The city’s latest parking solution features RFK Stadium’s parking lot, which is just one of a plethora of reasons the RFK Stadium site should’ve been chosen and not the current nightmare of a site that can’t get the basics right and whose soaring costs resulted in the compromises that yielded the cut-rate, concrete greenhouse look of the ballpark, which seems more in line with the Public Storage building to its north than the jazzier office buildings springing up around the area (let alone looking like the most expensive ballpark in history) along with the massive garages where a retail and entertainment district should’ve been.

Monument’s claim is completely without merit, but that didn’t stop their threatening approach to the matter. Being one of the AWC’s designated “master developers” along with Cornish, Forest City, and Western Development (Herb Miller’s outfit, which is suing the city on equally dubious grounds), did not equate to a free pass around the bidding process for land at or near Monument’s assemblage of parcels. Monument and its people know this, but given the manner in which developers were able to help prompt the destruction or long-established private residences and businesses at what became the site of the new ballpark, this developer is the latest to try the strong-arm approach related to ballpark development, to the point that it clearly resembles blackmail of the “do what we say and no one gets hurt” variety.

Not only is Herb Miller still sponsoring an extremely frivolous $140 million lawsuit which has been easily discredited with a glance at the facts (see themail, September 17), but out-of-town developer Victor MacFarlane rushed to use strong-arm tactics on the city government when support for DC United’s stadium plan faltered. The ability of Miller and other private interests to reportedly influence the DC council so strongly into its midnight knee-buckle that ratified the horrible baseball agreement basically as-is (despite the council’s tremendous amount of leverage at its disposal to craft a vastly better deal for the city) is no doubt contributing to the bullying and strong-arm tactics that are now becoming commonplace.

Such tactics kept the current site in place with its lack of vistas, parking, and infrastructure improvements compared to the RFK Stadium site, where the city would have moved the project had developers not howled with displeasure. It’s ironic that the city is now trying to sell the supposedly unworkable and undesirable RFK Stadium site as an appealing place to drive to for games and then shuttle from there after having trashed its location compared with M Street, SE, in order to prevent a move. The use of shuttles from other Metro stations and parking lots because of the lack of parking, etc., also compromises a key source of revenue that the ballpark was supposed to generate via pre-game and post-game patronage of retail and entertainment options surrounding the ballpark. If your trip to the ballpark has big enough slices of time taken out with shuttles to and from a remote lot or Metro station, you won’t be killing much time before or after a game by spending time and money in the ballpark district, especially if your trip to the ballpark coincides with rush hour. This of course presumes that there would have been a ballpark district rather than the city’s prime part of the district covered up with massive garages and most of the adjacent development being office and residential development already underway before the ballpark and spurred by the massive revitalization of the area by the arrival of the DOT and the increase of personnel at the Navy Yard.

Developers have failed the city by convincing them to keep the current train-wreck of a site with all of its shortcomings over the RFK Stadium site, which at least had an adequate Metro station, parking, and the road infrastructure needed for a new stadium. I’d advise the city to smack Monument back to reality over Monument’s blatant threats of reprisal if they don’t get to bypass the bidding process in place to acquire the WMATA garage property. Acting to drop Monument from the master developer role would be a start. However, given the city’s self-chosen role as anvil to the hammer of several developers and private interests (especially MLB), I can see the city giving Monument dibs on some other city asset just to keep things hunky-dory (and to keep those individual campaign contributions coming).

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

CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS

The New District Government, October 3
James S. Bubar, Jbubar@aol.com

The DC Bar’s District of Columbia Affairs Section will be hosting a forum on the largest change in District administration since Home Rule. We begin the new fiscal year with new school leadership, a fully constituted council, and a restructured administration, as we continue to work for a vote in Congress. Come join the new mayor, council chair, DC delegate, and others as we hear what they have to say at this District-wide event honoring the new administration and recognizing all of the changes.

The event will be held on Wednesday, October 3, 6:30 p.m.-8:00 p.m. (doors open at 6:30 p.m., program begins at 6:45 p.m.) at the John A. Wilson Building, 1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, 1st Floor Foyer. The event is free but you are requested to register in advance at outreach@dcbar.org.

Cosponsors include the Bar Association of the District of Columbia, University of the District of Columbia David A. Clarke School of Law, DC League of Women Voters, DC Appleseed, DC Vote, Consortium of Universities, ACLU-NCA, D.C. Bar Litigation Section and DC Consortium of Legal Services Providers.

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

Tenley and Anacostia Neighborhood Library Design Community Meetings, October 3, 4
Archie D. Williams, archie.williams@dc.gov

The DC Public Library is hosting a second round of Community Meetings to work with the community in designing and constructing the neighborhood libraries. The Freelon Group, which has been retained as the architects for the momentous task of designing two of the libraries, is presenting its preliminary concepts to the community.

Preliminary Tenley-Friendship Neighborhood Library Design, Wednesday, October 3, 6:00 p.m., Tenley-Friendship Interim Library, 4200 Wisconsin Avenue, NW. Anacostia Library Design, Thursday, October 4, 6:00 p.m., Anacostia Interim Library, 1800 Good Hope Road, SE, at 18th Street, SE.

Please feel free to contact Archie D. Williams from DCPL, archie.williams@dc.gov, if you have any questions regarding these events.

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

The Local Press as Watchdog, October 4
Dorothy Brizill, dorothy@dcwatch.com

Practically daily, DC residents who are involved in city politics and community affairs discuss the downturn in reporting local news, particularly at the Post. The Society of Professional Journalists will host a panel discussion on the press’ coverage of District issues on Thursday, October 4, at 1:00 p.m. at Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Library, 901 G Street, NW. The program is being presented as part of the SPJ’s national convention by its Project Watchdog, a "national initiative designed to inform the public about how members of the media do their jobs. Specifically, its goal is to educate readers and viewers about the importance of a free and critical press."

The panel will consist of Mark Segraves, WTOP radio; Harry Jaffe, Washingtonian and Washington Examiner, and myself. After the panel presentations, the bulk of the program will be a question-and-answer session and dialogue with the audience. The program is free and open to the public. For information about Project Watchdog, visit http://www.spj.org/projectwatchdog.asp, and for information on the SPJ convention, go to http://www.spj.org/convention.asp.

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

themail@dcwatch is an E-mail discussion forum that is published every Wednesday and Sunday. To subscribe, to change E-mail addresses, 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.


Send mail with questions or comments to webmaster@dcwatch.com
Web site copyright ©DCWatch (ISSN 1546-4296)