themail.gif (3487 bytes)

May 25, 2008

Full Disclosure

Dear Disclosers:

I don’t usually print politicians’ press releases in themail. In fact, unless they’re announcing an event or a public hearing, I don’t recall that I’ve ever done it before. But a press release today from Councilmember Phil Mendelson is worth reproducing in full, if only because I don’t have to add anything to it to make the point I’ve made many times before. Well, I will add only three little words, the sweetest words ever to pass the lips of a grumpy political observer, made grumpy by what he observes: “Told you so.”

“Today, Councilmember Phil Mendelson (D, At-Large) sent correspondence to a number of agency heads within the Public Safety cluster, addressing their unwillingness to provide important budget information to the council and ultimately, to the public. The budget documents are public information, and not only were directly relevant to the FY 2009 Budget, but also are critical to future understanding of how the performance of an agency relates to its budget. It is essential that the council be able to understand the needs and wants of each agency. An important aspect of this has been each agency’s budget enhancement requests, commonly referred to as Form B. These submissions detail the agency’s unfulfilled needs and priorities.

“In years past, the Executive has either freely provided this information, or furnished the council with it upon request. The provision of this information not only demonstrated a cooperative effort in producing a final budget, but also exhibited recognition of the council as a coequal branch of government and a partner in the process of developing the city’s budget. The Executive’s FY 2009 budget process, however, departed from this earlier model — and from the mayor’s own FY 2008 process — by removing important and necessary detail in its submission to the council. Furthermore, requests for additional information, and even questions directed at Executive witnesses during oversight hearings, met with resistance or outright refusal.

“Pursuant to DC Official Code §2-536, budget requests, submissions, and reports that agencies, boards, and commissions prepare for consideration by the Office of the Budget and Planning during the budget development process are specifically public information. ‘What we are asking for is perfectly reasonable,’ stated Mendelson. ‘A transparent budget, and cooperation in providing necessary detail on the proposal, ought to be the rule rather than the exception. I call upon the mayor and his agency heads to follow the law and release this public information.’”

On second thought, I do have something to add. Calling public attention to Fenty’s secrecy in fiscal matters is a good first step, whether that secrecy is the result of the administration’s incompetence or of something more sinister. But just calling attention to the administration’s refusal to obey the law and provide budget details won’t do a thing to change its ways. What the city council needs to do is to take the next step, and to say to the administration, “If you won’t give us the information, we won’t appropriate the funds. No transparency, no money.” Of course, it’s hard for Mendelson to do that with the public safety agencies under his committee’s purview; they provide vital public services. But the city council as a whole could refuse to fund agencies that are bloated, not doing necessary jobs, or not doing their jobs well. It could start with the Executive Office of the Mayor.

Gary Imhoff


Idling Tour and Other Buses
Joan Eisenstodt, jeisen at aol dot com

I’ve written twice to DC Councilmember Jack Evans and have received no reply to my questions about idling tour buses. In reading what I could find with a web search, it appears that studies have been done (even in this neighborhood, albeit three years ago) to show the pollution to the air when these buses idle. Alas, nothing seems to be done about it. There are regularly at least two buses and other tour vehicles idling near the corner of 10th and E Streets, NW, and frequently there are many more. The noise and pollution are horrific. We can’t understand why, with the cost of gas so high, the buses idle for so long, sometimes waiting for a group to leave Hard Rock Cafe. There seems to be nothing done to stop them. Any ideas?


Noise Bill Nurtures Quiet Free Speech
David Klavitter,

In addition to protecting my family’s right to enjoy our home quietly in the District of Columbia, a noise bill pending before the DC city council actually enhances our democratic process. Under the “Noise Control Protection Amendment Act of 2007,” B17-0177, unamplified voices would remain exempt from the District’s noise ordinance. What does this mean? It means 100, 1,000, or 100,000 people marching in DC will have no (zero, nada, nothing) restrictions on how loud their unamplified voices can be. And that’s the way it should be.

When large numbers of people are energized about an issue, they should dominate the public debate — not one person with a big amplifier. As a matter of fact, DC’s current law violates the right to free speech for those without, or with smaller, amplifiers. Let’s let the people prevail — not special interest groups who, when lacking real voices, resort to artificial bullying with amplifiers to get their way.


DC Gets Federal Reality Check
Dennis Moore,

While taxpayer funds and resources continue to be squandered through shell game budgeting schemes, federal investigators are tightening a velvet noose around a number of District government operations. A detectable trail of money and contracts continues to leak through the hands of DC officials, hands that many may wish they had never shaken. Evidence will be both legally indisputable, and devastating to hardworking taxpayers and voters. As the District of Columbia gets closer to a major fiscal meltdown, operatives inside and outside Mayor Adrian Fenty’s administration continue to manufacture gimmicks to disguise our financial demise. Sources affirm the claim, “Hard money they can’t replace is being spent to give the appearance of normalcy.” What’s most scary is that, “Several important public services will become unaffordable due to questionable expenditures.”

The DC council may be forced into special hearings to provide extraordinary transparency in order to avoid criticism and scrutiny of themselves for being complicit in this avoidable fiscal meltdown. Nevertheless, there will be a few significant perp walks by officials who will serve as examples of the most egregious corruption. However, some of these perpetrators won’t go quietly through federal prosecutions. They will want and need to talk. There will be unexpected heroes who will do the right thing, and villains we have suspected all along. In the meantime, aside from the expanding economic recession the rest of America is facing, District residents may want to make a fail-safe financial plan of their own. Most important, don’t count on the reliability or effectiveness of school, social, employment, housing, homeless, and police services. Despite a patchwork of temporary and feel good gimmicks, these public services will become the most stressed. District government officials will unjustifiably press more DC police officers into controlling the crime-related consequences of incompetence, corruption, and phony governance.

The chickens of systemic mismanagement, budgeting scams, and deeply rooted corruption are coming home to roost in the worst way in the “Nation’s Capital.” This is the one time when the cavalry represented by federal agents and prosecutors may hear quiet cheers from taxpaying District citizens tired of taxation without expectation.


Age Discrimination
Rebecca Shannon,

As a fifty-seven-year-old, I find the most offensive part of Peter Nickles comments: “strong, young, able stars” [themail, May 25]. I strongly support the Fenty administration in many ways, but the notion that “young” is in any way better than the alternative is reprehensible bias. The Fenty administration has already opened the doors to age-related discrimination claims, and I see more coming down the pike. I’m rooting for the old guys.


Nickles’ Focus on “Young Stars” Discriminatory?
Rachel Thompson,

It seemed to me, when I read the May 23 Post story “DC Attorney General Fires 11 Staff Members,” that Peter Nickles’ statement about wanting to replace fired workers with “strong, young, able stars” was blatantly discriminatory, in the hiring context. Isn’t it against the law to advertise for or choose workers based on age? Isn’t this a strong message that anyone who isn’t “young” shouldn’t bother to apply for a job in the AG’s office? If would be grateful if someone with experience in employment law could comment on this. (For background, The Post wrote: “The DC attorney general’s office told 10 lawyers and a manager this week that they are being fired . . . because of the workers’ poor performance and as part of an effort to transform the agency into what interim Attorney General Peter Nickles called a ‘first-rate law firm’ with ‘strong, young, able stars.’”]


Metro Has It Far from Right
Ralph Blessing,

Contrary to what Ed Barron wrote in the last edition [themail, May 25], Metro has quite a ways to go to get it right when it comes to moving folks to and from Nats games. Metro would have you believe that they have added trains to the Green line for game days and nights, but that wasn’t my experience on Sunday, especially going to the game.

For us, the most practical way to get to the game on a weekend is to park free at the Ft. Totten Metro station, then catch the Green Line straight to Nationals Park. But Sunday, when we arrived at the station about an hour before game time, we were greeted with a platform more crowded than most weekday mornings during rush hour. And the message board said it would still be another ten minutes before a train arrived. Not sure how long of a wait it was for some of the folks who were there when we arrived. Worse yet, that train after that one was an additional fourteen minutes, according to the message board. Is that Metro’s idea of more trains?

Oh, I forgot, Metro’s definition of “more” is to run extra Green Line trains between Navy Yard and Mt. Vernon Square. But for those of us (and there are quite a few) who continue on the Green Line to Columbia Heights, Ft. Totten, or Greenbelt, Metro seems totally indifferent.


Does the Fenty Administration Understand “World-Class City” Transportation Needs?
Len Sullivan,

Two lead stories in a recent Washington Post Metro Section (May 9) point up the severe dichotomy produced by lack of realistic local, regional and national planning for the future growth of our national capital city and metro area. One presented a fanciful vision of DC’s near-term urban growth without addressing its failing transportation infrastructure. The other pointed to the pathetic lack of support for maintaining, much less expanding, the city’s already outdated hub-and-spoke Metrorail system. Meanwhile, the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development is suggesting higher density regionally fed developments outside downtown, while professing no transportation expertise, and DDoT is focused on enhancing local movement options for residents.

Past predictions of foreseeable rail system (and arterial) saturation, and their related vulnerability, have been disregarded by our traditionally xenophobic local officials for a decade, and are now being exacerbated by higher gas prices. DC’s so-called “transportation experts” have disguised their idiosyncratic social agenda by proposing street-choking local trolley systems and bicycle lanes rather than expanding the region’s first-class, high-density, off-street heavy rail system. Instead of long-range planning, DDoT is busying itself making sure the Douglass bridge can open for deep-draft ships with no place to go (the channel ends two hundred yards upstream), keeping pedestrians alive, and encouraging artists to disguise a downtown freeway overpass. DC has no plans to campaign for increased Metro funding when the new administration takes office.

The Fenty Administration needs to add substance to its fuzzy mantra of becoming a “world-class city.” It needs to prepare to press the incoming federal administration, as well as its thriving suburban neighbors, for a robust twenty-year mass transit, arterial roadway, and off-street parking expansion program. It could well require annual capitalization of a billion dollars. The absence of an ongoing program will surely constrain DC’s economic growth and assure increasing national embarrassment for its ineptitude. If DC hopes to be a symbol of American vitality and foresight, it sorely needs an authoritative, nonpartisan Commission to recommend systemic solutions to its already emerging long-term, multifaceted transportation fiasco.


Whose Hopes and Dreams?
Robin Diener,

June is a big month for DC Public Library. The final designs for four libraries, closed four years ago, will be presented to the public. It has been just under two years since Chief Librarian Ginnie Cooper came to town. After putting in place interim libraries to serve during rebuilding, she hired architects, at twice the federal rate (according to the Examiner), solicited community input with Hopes and Dreams meetings, and held more public sessions as designs progressed. So what are we getting? See the design drawings that have been presented so far at

Here are some highlights. The US Commission on Fine Arts, which has oversight of public building design in DC, is conflicted; it offers general praise but raises specific concerns. Its letter to DCPL is at DCPL expects to achieve LEED certification at the silver level from the US Green Building Council; see There will be no cafes. DCPL has decided that the numbers don’t add up. There will vending machines instead. All of the libraries will have Wi-Fi and many computers. None of the libraries will have a dedicated computer lab like new libraries throughout the rest of the world, including ones you can easily visit in Maryland, Virginia, and Baltimore.

DC’s Blue Ribbon Task Force Report on Libraries (November 2006) called for libraries that would serve as gathering places and community centers. Each new library will have one large meeting room for seventy-five people and at least one more for ten to fifteen people. (The lack of meeting space was one of the chief reasons the original designs were rejected by the Library Trustees in September 2005, nine months after four libraries had been closed for rebuilding.) The meeting rooms will be accessible beyond library hours. They will be located on the lower levels, with the exception of Tenley, where they will be on the second floor. The Friends of the Library groups will no longer have full access to extra storage space, as was traditional in many branches, but will have to handle their activities, including book sales, out of a 12 x 12 ft room.

The Blue Ribbon Report stressed literacy and technology as priorities. Children’s literacy, particularly preschoolers’, will be targeted. We have yet to learn of any significant adult literacy programming for branches, in spite of our requesting it for four years. Some small rooms for one-on-one tutoring will be provided.

More specifics by neighborhood:

In Tenley, the community has for two years battled a public-private partnership scheme, supported by the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development Neil Albert and the Ward 3 councilmember, to erect housing on a sliver of land shared by the library and the public elementary school next door. ANC3E’s commissioners and special committee members did miles of legwork to research the facts as the deal continually shifted. After dutifully exploring each new twist, the ANC passed resolutions against each incarnation. ANC3E’s web site is a wealth of information: DCPL’s Trustees, a semi-autonomous body with approximately $16 million in public money in hand for each of the four libraries, has refused to support the community, even though their own mixed-use policy says they will not endorse proposals that lack citizen backing (see In fact, the Library adopted a timeline and designed a building in deference to a possible mixed-use development, instead of exploring creative ways to take advantage of the library and school proximity, and possible enhancement of much needed public green space. Nonetheless, library users in Tenley say they are happy with DCPL’s plans. It’s ironic that the people who inveighed against the public-private scheme are willing to accept a building designed to accommodate it. Folks in Tenley say they are being politically practical. But they may be settling for less than the best from an opportunity that only comes along once every fifty years or so.

Benning is even more contentious than Tenley. A small group there sued to force DCPL to fulfill requirements for ANC notification, with which the library has subsequently complied. The citizens were not able, however, to convince the judge to order that the building be preserved until environmental and financial impact statements had been filed. The structure, which was structurally engineered to have another floor added, was thus demolished without any engineering report or other formal assessment of its condition. When the preliminary design for the new library was first unveiled, those in attendance were underwhelmed (several said it seemed a lot like the old library) and overwhelmed by concern it would not be large enough. (It is somewhat larger than the old library). Meanwhile, in July the library trustees received a development proposal for a land sale consisting of an exact swap — no loss of public land — and cash, for the current library land. (Located on a rise that overlooks the Anacostia River and the Capitol, the property is ideal for condos.) The plan would make the library the focal point of a new town center planned on land adjacent to the demolished library site. The community asked about the new development, and the Commission of Fine Arts noted a need to acknowledge the “context.” Yet DCPL obfuscated at three design meetings, until finally admitting on April 19 that the trustees had rejected the proposal without ever seeking community consultation, and in spite of strong interest from the ward’s councilmember and the deputy mayor. Unhappiness over community exclusion from the planning process is overshadowing consideration of DCPL’s new design for the old site. (It is, however, located half a block from DC’s most dangerous intersection for pedestrians – another reason some support moving it.)

In Anacostia, attendance at design meetings has been lower than in Tenley or Benning. Groups that serve the neighborhood, such as Bread for the City, had not been contacted to attend design meetings, but when we spoke with them, they envisioned opportunities for their clients to receive literacy services, to have computer access, and to bring their children along while they do a job search online or study for the GED. At an April 19 hearing of the DC Council Library Committee, citizens asked that the new building’s design acknowledge nearby historic Anacostia, and that meeting rooms not be located in the lower level, an oft-heard request at the library listening sessions two years ago. As of the last round of drawings, the meeting rooms were located on the so-called “lower level.”

The Watha T. Daniel branch library, in Shaw, is unfortunately located on a traffic triangle that has always posed problem, but the site is also prominent enough to showcase the library to passersby. Perhaps to that end, DCPL has planned a nearly all glass structure. Architects responded to the community’s desire to move the entrance, but as of the last design meeting had not yet resolved requests for the front door to be more prominent. The isolating location, a lack of amenities in Shaw historically, and the younger population gentrifying the area support community requests for a cafe in the new library. DCPL is contemplating a coffee cart.

Is this really the best we can do, after decades of neglect, after four years of messing around with plans, not to mention lives? Youngsters who entered the seventh grade in 2004 will have gone their entire high school careers without a neighborhood library by the time new ones open in late 2010. Are these the state-of-the-art buildings we were promised? Will they deliver the services communities want and need? Do they even qualify as twenty-first century? The chance to build a new library doesn’t come around often — every half a century or so. Citizens must insist that DCPL listen to them, if they expect to be provided with the libraries of their hopes and dreams.


Numbers Don’t Add Up for Soccer Stadium Financing Scheme
Ed Delaney,

From “A coalition of DC councilmembers is drafting legislation that would authorize Mayor Adrian M. Fenty to spend $150 million in public money to subsidize construction of a soccer stadium for DC United in Southeast Washington, city government sources said. The city would finance construction bonds with excess tax revenue being collected by the District to pay for the baseball stadium. City financial officials project that the District will collect about $20 million more each year from taxes on businesses and stadium sales of tickets, food and merchandise than required to pay for Nationals Park. That additional money could be used to fund a soccer stadium, DC Chief Financial Natwar M. Gandhi has said. Business leaders, who have already been in contention with the Fenty administration over a reduction in the size of a commercial property tax cut, have said any excess revenue could go toward retiring the thirty-year baseball stadium bonds early and relieving businesses of their tax burden more quickly.”

If we’re going by the estimates of the DC government, the team should be drawing 38,000 this year (Post, June 30, 2005) but is in fact only drawing 29,151 per game over the first two months in its new ballpark (a figure which is likely much lower in actual turnstile counts due to the corporate ownership and rental of club seats and suites in the new ballpark). That figure is not only well below city government estimates, but ranks the city’s attendance average seventeenth out of MLB’s thirty teams, a worrisome sign for the team, since the lean months of August and September are yet to come and the team is not likely to be in the pennant race. Moreover, it stands to reason that many season ticket buyers who bought plans at the ballpark due to unknown demand and the potential for Redskins-like sellouts at a new ballpark, might now realize with the ballpark drawing under 75 percent capacity even during its honeymoon period that good seats figure to be available for the foreseeable future. Thus, the team could see a number of plans being downsized or given up entirely, as occurred after the inaugural season at RFK Stadium.

With such red flags about the uncertain stability of the team’s ticket-buying fan base, it virtually amounts to fiscal Russian Roulette to tie hundreds of millions of dollars worth of public funding for a financially dubious project (a limited use, undersized stadium for a sport with limited ticket-buying appeal compared to baseball) to the tax revenue being ripped out of the business community and poured into the stratospheric costs of the ballpark. The city might be garnering more money from their taxation scheme than it first realized; it’s hardly being transparent enough on the actual figures for the public to easily make a judgment one way or the other. But, given the failure to meet previous attendance projections by 9,000 per game in the ballpark’s opening season, it could be that every excess cent will be needed to meet unforeseen costs and economic issues that unfold over the life of the ballpark’s payment plan.

Recent news on the bond financing front gives concrete examples of how unforeseen issues can result in markedly higher costs in the short and long term. It was recently reported that the ballpark “faces higher costs as investors avoid bonds used to build the facility.” (Bloomberg, March 31) Furthermore, reports about “the District’s fondness for variable rate bonds to pay for things like the Nationals’ ballpark” note the danger of that approach from the CFO: “the bottom is falling out of those variable rate bonds and it’s costing District taxpayers an extra $1.2 million a month in interest payments. One day the city is paying 4.5 percent interest, the next day it’s 14 percent. Ouch!” (, April 10) The same report noted that “the District’s annual audit cited the CFO’s office as a ‘material weakness’ in the city government,” which should give pause to those considering support for the latest soccer stadium financing scheme, as it is its embattled (and one might say “materially weak” at the moment) District CFO Natwar Gandhi who is suggesting the diversion of ballpark tax monies towards soccer stadium financing (Post, May 28). These revelations alone should make this latest sports stadium financing boondoggle DOA.

“DC United would be responsible for paying for any costs above $150 million, according to the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the plan is still being finalized. The legislation could be introduced at the council’s next legislative meeting Tuesday, if all goes smoothly, the sources said. DC United officials have been eager to complete a deal before the council goes on summer recess in mid-July, but the timetable is tight. After being introduced, the stadium legislation would require a public hearing, a committee markup and two council votes.”

Trust DC to try to sell the public on a deal that forces the team to pay for any costs above $150 million when we’ve just gone through a ballpark financing charade that said one thing and ended up with another. The $450 million Community Benefits Fund was to be financed by any excess ballpark revenue; now those funds are targeted for another giveaway of hundreds of millions of dollars of public money towards a stadium built for the use of a private business enterprise! Not a thing that is being floated in the media should be taken as a firm promise because of the city’s pathetic track record in this field. Not only that, but what is with the hurry with stadium legislation again? The plan isn’t finalized, but the city is putting it on an apparent fast track anyway. This spelled disaster the last time it came to hammering out a favorable deal for the city. If these clowns go down the same hastily traveled road again with this much public money at stake (especially as their current bond financing deal has reportedly cost an additional $14 million thanks to the variable rate fiasco), it’s time to vote them out and join Kevin Chavous, Sandy Allen, Harold Brazil, Kathy Patterson, Vincent Orange, and Linda Cropp on the sidelines after they backed the original ballpark boondoggle. (That goes for Jack Evans, too, whose mayoral dreams get buried deeper with every stadium-related rant.)

When will the city realize it’s OK to say no? Isn’t access to free tickets and luxury suites for three pro teams enough for the mayor and DC council? If the city is so undesirable to pro teams that they need to be bribed to keep them out of the burbs, maybe that says we need to re-prioritize instead of writing blank checks anytime a ball bounces past the DC council.



DC Public Library Events, June 1 and following
George Williams,

Sunday, June 1, 7:00 p.m., and Sunday, June 22, 3:00 p.m., Juanita E. Thornton/Shepherd Park Library. Piano recitals. All ages. Music students of Mary M. Hill will perform in a piano recital on June 1. Music students of Rose Marie Simms will perform in a piano recital on June 22.

Monday, June 2, 7:00 p.m., Juanita E. Thornton/Shepherd Park Library. Clarinet and flute recital. All ages. Sharon Pabon will present her music students in concert.

Tuesday, June 3, 6:30 p.m., Cleveland Park Library. Pulitzer Prize winner Natalie Angier will discuss her book, The Canon: A Whirligig Tour of the Beautiful Basics of Science. A book sale and signing will follow the program.

Tuesdays, 4:00 p.m., Palisades Library. ’40’s film noir. June 3, The Lady from Shanghai; June 10, The Big Sleep; June 17, The Killers; June 24, Out of the Past.

Tuesdays, 6:00 p.m., Martin Luther King, Jr., Library, Auditorium A-5. Popular movie Tuesdays. Young adults, adults. June 3, The Golden Compass; June 10, The Great Debaters; June 17, National Treasure 2: Book of Secrets; June 24, The Bucket List.


National Building Museum Events, June 3
Jazmine Zick,

June 3, 12:30-1:30 p.m., Smart Growth: Green Infrastructure Strategy for Storm Water Management. Jennifer Molloy of EPA’s Office of Wastewater Management and Nancy Stoner of the Natural Resources Defense Council discuss their new collaborative efforts to develop and implement a Green Infrastructure Strategy for storm water management. Free. Registration not required.

June 3, 6:30-8:00 p.m., Spotlight on Design: 2008 Pritzker Prize: Jean Nouvel. In this exclusive lecture, Jean Nouvel, 2008 Pritzker Architecture Prize Laureate, presents his work, which is celebrated for its elegance, innovation, and sensitivity to context. $20 members; $10 students; $30 nonmembers. Prepaid registration required. Walk-in registration based on availability. Both events at the National Building Museum, 401 F Street, NW, Judiciary Square stop, Metro Red Line. Register for events at



Hospital Industry Training Program, May 29
Tracy DaCosta,

The University of the District of Columbia and The Hotel Association of Washington, DC, currently have a program tailored by professionals of the hospitality industry to give District residents high quality customer service experience. Specifically, our front desk training program components are designed to prepare and orient trainees with organizational and management skill set familiarity. We are looking for energetic individuals who are over the age of eighteen years old, have a high school diploma or GED equivalent, work history, and a District resident. This is an excellent opportunity for anyone that desires a career change in front desk or house keeping. If you have any questions, please contact Bennett, Brooks & Dyson Consulting, LLC at 888-643-9994.

Please visit the Hotel Association of Washington, DC, at 1201 New York Avenue, Suite 601, on Thursday May 29, at 4:30 p.m., for the mandatory recruitment and prescreening. Front Desk and Housekeeping training classes will be held simultaneously at Walter E. Washington Convention Center, 801 Mount Vernon Place, NW. The dates and times for the new classes scheduled are: Saturday, May 31, 9:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m., first class; Saturday, June 7, 9:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m., class and job shadowing; Saturday, June 14, 9:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m., class; Saturday, June 21, 9:00 a.m.-11:30 a.m., class review; 12:00-2:00 p.m., final exam. If you have any questions, please contact Tracy DaCosta at 289-6016 ext. 224 or by E-mail at



Unusual Cat Ready for Adoption!
Pat Yates,

Lester is funny, feisty, friendly, and a tad goofy. This one-year old, very long-legged, somewhat slender boy is also quite beautiful, with hair that is mostly medium — but with longish tufts behind his ears (in long years of fostering, I’ve never seen that before!) and a stunning, mixed gray/white/black long haired tail. He loves attention and naps, and sleeps in our bed all night long, between our two heads. He came to live with us on May 21, and is already pretty much used to our three cats, our dog, and the various people who troop through our apartment just off Thomas Circle. Please E-mail me, and I’ll send a picture. And you are welcome to come meet him.

If Lester is not quite the cat you are looking for, please take a look at others that are available at the DC Animal Shelter (from whence Lester came to me):  Cats and kittens abound at this time of year.


themail@dcwatch is an E-mail discussion forum that is published every Wednesday and Sunday. To change the E-mail address for your subscription to themail, use the Update Profile/Email address link below in the E-mail edition. To unsubscribe, use the Safe Unsubscribe link in the E-mail edition. An archive of all past issues is available at


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