Weed
Dear Cultivators:
The city council is moving ahead with legislation to legalize “medical”
marijuana. Councilmembers Catania, Mendelson, and Gray have proposed the
“Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 2010”
bill (http://www.dcwatch.com/council18/18-x.htm
— the URL will be changed to the bill number after the council assigns
it one), which amends the initiative that was passed in 1998.
DCIst has an article about the disappointment of marijuana proponents
with the restrictions, controls, and safeguards that the council has
written into the bill (http://dcist.com/2010/01/medical_marijuana_bill_leaves_suppo.php),
but there are two good reasons for them. First, loose and lightly
regulated marijuana distribution systems are bad in themselves. Second,
and more important to the councilmembers, if the council designed an
openly loose and lightly regulated system, Congress would overturn their
law. The city council has to at least pretend that it is doing its best
to limit the distribution of marijuana to “legitimate,” “medical”
uses. But the bill won’t work, if for no other reason than that the
details of its enforcement are left up to regulations to be written
later by the executive branch.
I would go into a rant here, but it has already been written by Dave
Stroup, http://whyihatedc.blogspot.com/2010/01/news-bullets-get-over-it-wednesday.html:
“Medical marijuana [is] poised to be the next contracting scandal. The
council has proposed medical marijuana legislation that would create a
system to grow and distribute the drug to patients in the District. The
legislation puts restrictions on where the proposed five dispens[er]ies
could be located, and Councilmember David Catania (I-At Large) believes
the regulations could serve as a model for other states. I’m mostly in
favor of ending the war on weed, as it takes up too much time and
resources for law enforcement. However, I can tell you I absolutely don’t
trust the District do to this correctly. We can barely enforce the laws
we already have, and creating a system to provide medical marijuana is
asking for fraud on levels that we haven’t seen in a long time. Since
there are still federal laws making marijuana illegal, the District
cannot import it from another state. Can you imagine a DC government run
(or audited) organization growing marijuana for ‘medical purposes?’
Is this a joke? Catania says it would be up to the mayor to enforce the
regulations. Do we want to leave this up to Fenty? As much as I don’t
want to shoot down this idea, it sounds so unrealistic and I imagine
will ultimately end with Congress shutting it down. Not to mention, how
the heck are we going to pay for this? The council would like to provide
the drug at a subsided cost for low income people. The creation of this
infrastructure and enforcing the regulations will be a huge burden, and
keep in mind for everyone else marijuana will still be illegal, so it
won’t take much of a load off of MPD. Sorry to rain on everyone’s
Cheech and Chong parade.”
Will this end badly? No, the question is who on earth expects it to
end well?
Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com
###############
Bogus Parking Tickets, Bogus DMV Appeal
Process
Jack McKay, jack.mckay@verizon.net
Can a car be parked beyond a “no parking” sign, and yet be
legally parked? Yes, courtesy of a 2006 law that says that a car with a
Residential Permit Parking (RPP) sticker can, on an RPP-posted block, be
parked as close as 25 feet to an intersection, whereas the “no parking
to intersection” signposts are placed 40 feet away. But getting
Metropolitan Police Officers and Parking Enforcement personnel to
understand that the law governs the situation, and may differ from the
signpost, has been an endless struggle. So far I have four successful
challenges to such bogus tickets: “the ticket is dismissed.”
In a vain effort to educate one Parking Enforcement officer, I
intentionally parked a second time in a spot where “M. Long” had
issued such a ticket the day before, this time with a prominent note
explaining why the parking was legal. Fat lot of good that note did, as
Officer Long happily wrote me another ticket, same place, same bogus
violation, my note clamped underneath the ticket, ignored. Well, given
two identical tickets, I sent in two identical denials, with a letter
that has become a fill-in-the-date form. Three months later, ticket #1
was dismissed; a DMV Hearing Examiner by the name of Oyobio accepted my
explanation of the law. Another month on, and ticket #2 — oops — was
upheld! My identical explanation of the law this time was rejected by
the very same Examiner Oyobio. Guess he wasn’t feeling cheery that
day.
Very well, I paid the bogus ticket, but I also filed an appeal,
figuring that somebody at DMV must know the actual parking laws. That
was in July 2008 — yes, a year and a half ago — and there’s not
been a peep from DMV. I guess, since the District has my money, they’re
content to take their sweet time in considering an appeal. “You should
anticipate a delay in receiving the order,” says the letter from DMV.
Or is “delay” down at the DMV a euphemism for “never”?
###############
JBG Lawsuit Against DC, Marriott Over the
Convention Center Hotel
Richard Layman, rclaymandc@yahoo.com
To me, the interesting thing about the lawsuit that JBG has entered
against DC, claiming favored treatment of Marriott and special dealing,
is that it is about the absolutely same behavior that was exhibited by
DC council in entering into a special relationship with the Sang Oh Choi
interests to redevelop the Florida Market area of DC. See “Lawsuit Is
Newest Roadblock for District’s Long-Awaited Hotel” from the Washington
Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/17/AR2010011702213.html.
This is a rare fight among actors who are normally co-working team
players within the Growth Machine. As the Washington Business Journal
suggests in this article, “What’s behind JBG’s convention hotel
lawsuit?” (http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2009/10/05/story2.html):
“The lawsuit, which was filed in Superior Court on Sept. 4 — two
weeks before the developer lost an administrative bid appeal — puzzled
and dismayed many observers, who questioned why the company would fight
over a contract it had not even pursued. Several sources interviewed for
this story spoke on the condition of anonymity, as they were either not
authorized to speak to the media or they wanted to maintain
relationships.
“One possible scenario, sources close to the deal said, is that JBG
is using hardball tactics to gain leverage in an unrelated business
dispute at the Marriott Wardman Park, which JBG owns with Los
Angeles-based CIM Group. CIM joined JBG’s administrative bid protest
but is not a party of the lawsuit, according to court records. The
target of the lawsuit, in other words, is actually Marriott, not the
city, sources say.”
We should all be familiar with the concept of separation of powers.
Generally, laws that cover the executive branch are not extended to the
legislative branch, unless specifically called for in the law, with the
approval of the legislative branch. It happens that DC contracting and
procurement laws, at least right now, exempt DC city council actions.
The laws only cover the executive branch and its dealings. Note that I
am not a lawyer, but that was my understanding based on the multi-year
somewhat unsuccessful/somewhat successful advocacy against the Sang Oh
Choi urban renewal program for the Florida Market. So JBG is likely to
lose the suit on the merits, not because they are wrong to be concerned
about special deals from city council — although in normal
circumstances their concern about this likely extends only to the
contracts they get in this fashion — but because the city council
lacks the same legal requirements over contracting that pertain to the
executive branch. That, to me, is the real issue here.
Which is another irony, given that the city council is making a point
of how the executive branch has been breaking the law on contracting,
which came to their attention first over special contracting to friends
of the mayor, which by the way, columnists at the Examiner, Harry
Jaffe and Jonetta Rose Barras, don’t seem to think is a big deal.
See “Gray Wants to Give Fenty Administration More Time on
Contracts,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/16/AR2010011602747.html;
“Firm Got Millions after DC Council Ended Contract,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/08/AR2010010803663.html;
and “DC Council Ends Deal with Fenty’s Friend’s Firm,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/15/AR2009121505028.html,
from the Post for more on the issue. Look up the old Examiner
columns on their web site yourself.
###############
More Campaign Suggestions for Jack Evans
Peter Tucker, pete10506@yahoo.com
Last week I wrote you a letter with some suggestions for your
possible run for chairman of the DC city council (“Campaign
Suggestions for Jack Evans,” themail, January 10). Unfortunately, I
haven’t heard back from you. That’s okay. I know you’re busy
working hard as both a councilmember (annual salary: more than $125,000)
and a lobbyist for Patton Boggs (annual salary: $240,000). In my letter,
I urged you to “be very careful about what you say and do with regards
to the proposed Convention Center Hotel.” The reason is simple:
legally, you are treading on thin ice. After spending years working on
this project, all of the sudden you (somewhat suspiciously) began
recusing yourself from voting on the issue just two days after being
asked if you had a conflict of interest. And you’ll recall that when
the Federation of Citizens Associations and the Committee of 100
followed up with a joint letter asking about the extent and nature of
your lobbying on behalf of Marriott, you simply ignored them (http://www.dcwatch.com/comm100/100-090710.htm).
Despite your hard work this summer in getting the council to approve
$272 million in public funds to help Marriott build a hotel next to the
Convention Center, the deal looks like it may fall apart. JBG, a
competitor of Marriott’s, is suing the city because they claim the
process for awarding the massive contracts lacked transparency. An
article in Monday’s Washington Post (“Convention Center Still
Waits for Hotel,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/17/AR2010011702213.html)
said: “Behind the scenes, DC Council member Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) is
trying to get the parties [JBG and Marriott] to resolve their dispute,
according to those with knowledge of the talks. Evans declined to
comment.” While it was wise of you to decline to comment, it’s not
enough: for legal reasons, it would be helpful if your name didn’t
appear anywhere near discussions surrounding the Marriott deal
(remember, you felt your involvement was inappropriate, so you recused
yourself).
I must conclude this letter with the same words of warning with which
I ended my last letter: “I’m fearful that by continuing to be
involved with the Marriott deal you are not only jeopardizing your
chances of becoming chair, but you may be at risk of becoming the
subject of an ethics investigation. If you run for chair, I wish you the
best of luck. And if you are the subject of an ethics investigation, I
wish you the best of luck with that, as well.”
###############
Changes in Agency Direction
Harry Gates, hgates3539@aol.com
You may recall that about this time last year, despite his lack of
zoning and management experience, Jamison Weinbaum was nominated to be
Director of the Office of Zoning. The nominee was handpicked by Neil
Albert, Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, to fill the
vacancy left by the departure of Jerrily Kress. Some time ago, Jerrily
Kress recognized there was a problem with zoning order compliance.
Conditions, imposed as a means of making special exceptions, variances,
and PUDS less objectionable, were not being implemented. ANC
commissioners and city residents found themselves without recourse
except through DCRA. To help rectify the situation, the council approved
a new Compliance Specialist position for OZ, but earlier this month
Director Weinbaum terminated the Compliance Specialist, who was being
effective, saying the office is moving in a new direction. Is compliance
being put on the back burner in the Office of Zoning?
Shortly after the removal of the Compliance Specialist, a January 13 Northwest
Current article noted, “Zoning official opts not to enforce ruling
on Burleith addition,” the Zoning Administrator (a DCRA employee)
justified his decision not to enforce the BZA ruling because of, “fairness
to the parties involved, the severity of the violation, the harm to the
public and the availability of DCRA resources”
Given the apparent course reversal at DCRA and the Office of Zoning,
one cannot help but wonder if these agencies are ignoring their
responsibility to ensure zoning orders are enforced and in compliance.
What recourse do residents of the city have when agencies decide to
change direction? Is subverting compliance and enforcement a way to
remove obstacles to development in the District of Columbia? It appears
the administration cannot stomach the law being enforced against its
friends and contributors, and is ensuring that will not be a concern for
them in the future.
###############
Good Teachers from The
Atlantic
Pat Bitondo, pbitondo@aol.com
Here is the link to The Atlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/201001/good-teaching.
I must add that I disagree with most of the article, and I can’t help
but wonder whether Ms. Rhee is the cause of Mr. Taylor’s leaving.
###############
More Environmentalists and Environmentalism
James Treworgy, jamietre@gmail.com
I know where Mr. Grahame [themail, January 17] is coming from. But
the problem is that even though a lot of people claim to be interested
in making changes to their lifestyle to help the environment, few people
are willing. If we agree that the bag tax is pretty inconsequential as
far as its impact on actual trash is concerned, then why aren’t we
willing to fund the cleanup of the Anacostia with real money instead of
good vibes? The authors of the bill themselves believe that revenue will
decline steeply after only a couple years as people adapt to the tax and
far fewer bags are handed out. Yet, it seems clear that bags have very
little to do with the bulk of trash in the Anacostia. So in a couple
years, the revenue stream from this tax is mostly gone, but the sources
of trash are not. And we are left with a very inconvenient, regressive
tax that generates little revenue.
I don’t believe it would be impossible to pass a bottle bill in
this city. Why do you think this would be any harder than the bag tax?
The last time anyone even tried was over twenty years ago and the city
was a lot different back then. But if we can’t muster either, and the
goal was actually to clean up the Anacostia, then I can’t understand
why we didn’t just figure out how much it’s going to cost to keep it
clean every year and appropriate it. Instead we have this bag tax that
has nothing to do with removing significant amounts of trash, but
everything to do with appeasing some people who want to feel good
without really understanding the consequences of the tax — which may,
actually, be harmful to the environment in the big picture.
Being an environmentalist is about a lot more than just saying you
are one. It’s about making choices that are much harder than “paper
or plastic.” This tax makes people who think they are
environmentalists feel good, annoys everyone else, and will be unlikely
to keep the Anacostia clean. But more importantly it wastes valuable “green”
political capital and will make future efforts harder to sell. I would
much rather have seen this capital spent on a bottle bill, which has
been proven to be very effective, even if it took longer.
###############
Don’t forget that King also opposed the Vietnam War. On April 4,
1967, Martin Luther King in a speech entitled “Beyond Vietnam: A Time
to Break Silence” declared his opposition to the Vietnam War,
alienating millions of Americans, both black and white, for the war was
immensely popular. In a part of the speech he even compared America to
Nazi Germany: “What do the peasants think as we ally ourselves with
the landlords and as we refuse to put any action into our many words
concerning land reform? What do they think as we test out our latest
weapons on them, just as the Germans tested out new medicine and new
tortures in the concentration camps of Europe? Where are the roots of
the independent Vietnam we claim to be building? Is it among these
voiceless ones?”
Here are some links dealing with King’s stance on the war: http://www.antiwar.com/orig/bromwich.php?articleid=12844,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b80Bsw0UG-U.
The Liberal Media turned against him like rabid dogs. Time
magazine called the speech “demagogic slander that sounded like a
script for Radio Hanoi,” and the Washington Post declared that
King had “diminished his usefulness to his cause, his country, his
people” (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2564.htm).
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS
Department of Parks and Recreation Events,
January 24
John Stokes, john.astokes@dc.gov
January 24, 30, 8:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m., PG Sports & Learning
Complex, 8001 Sheriff Road Landover, Maryland. All Comers Track Meet for
all ages. Participants in the All Comers Track Meet will compete in
track and field events. For more information, call Edgar Sams at
425-2859.
###############
National Building Museum Events, January 25-26
Johanna Weber, jweber@nbm.org
January 25, 12:30-1:30 p.m., The Business Side of Smart Growth: Local
Assets, Local Approaches. Dale Roberts, owner of The Java Shack
Coffeehouse in Arlington, Virginia, discusses the role of small
businesses as catalysts for successful smart growth. Roberts explains
his partnership with other small, locally owned businesses to help
create a true urban village where people live, work, shop, and dine
close to home. Free. Registration required. Walk-in registration based
on availability.
January 25, 6:30-8:00 p.m., Parking Garages: Beauty or the Beast. Ned
Cramer, editor-in-chief of Architect examines famous architects’
designs for parking structures and challenges the field to transform
this humble form into works of beauty. This lecture complements the
exhibition House of Cars: Innovation and the Parking Garage, which will
be open for viewing. $12 members, $12 students, $20 nonmembers. Prepaid
registration required. Walk-in registration based on availability.
January 26, 6:30-8:00 p.m., For the Greener Good: Urban Agriculture.
There has been a growing movement to investigate the ecological impact
of how and where we produce our food. Urban agriculture has the
potential to provide nutritious food to underserved areas, reduce the
urban heat island effect, and just might save the planet. $12 members,
free students, $20 nonmembers. Prepaid registration required. Walk-in
registration based on availability. All events at the National Building
Museum, 401 F Street, NW, Judiciary Square Metro station. Register for
events at http://www.nbm.org.
###############
Councilmember Cheh at Ward Three Democrats,
January 28
Thomas M. Smith, tmfsmith@starpower.net
The Ward Three Democratic Committee will hold a community dialogue
with DC Ward 3 DC Councilmember Mary Cheh on Thursday, January 28, 7:15
p.m.-9:30 p.m., in The Great Hall, St. Columba Episcopal Church, 4201
Albemarle Street, NW (one block off Wisconsin Avenue at the Tenleytown
Metro station. The Committee will also consider a resolution to oppose
Mayor Adrian Fenty’s appointment of a new People’s Counsel. For more
information, contact Thomas M. Smith, Chair, Ward Three Democratic
Committee, 364-7130, tmfsmith@starpower.net,
or see the web site at http://www.DCWard3Dems.org.
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — HELP WANTED
Research Intern, DC Lawyers for Youth
Donald Sherman, dsherman@dcly.org
DC Lawyers for Youth (http://www.dcly.org)
is looking for a college student (junior or senior) or recent grad to be
an unpaid research intern. Candidates should a resume and a brief (one
paragraph) statement of interest to dsherman@dcly.org
no later than COB on Monday, January 25.
We are looking to hire someone relatively soon. Tasks would include
doing nonlegal research, drafting blog posts, drafting letters, and
other administrative work. We’d like a commitment of ten to fifteen
hours per week, which could be done at any time, as long as deadlines
are met. Folks with an interest in law and great research skills would
be good candidates. In addition to valuable work experience, working for
DCLY would be a great opportunity to network with young attorneys and
local juvenile justice advocates.
###############
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 http://www.dcwatch.com/themail.
All postings should 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.