Self-Dealing
Dear Complainants:
Let’s review. Chancellor Michelle Rhee negotiated millions of
dollars of grants from foundations that were given to the DC Public
Schools on the condition that the leadership of DCPS not be changed —
in other words, that she remain employed as schools chancellor (themail,
April 28). Civic activist Robert Brannum, president of the DC Federation
of Civic Associations, believed that it is self-dealing and a conflict
of interest for a government official to negotiate grants from
foundations to government that are conditional on her continued
employment. He filed a complaint with the Office of Campaign Finance,
seeking a ruling on the propriety of her actions, and the OCF found
sufficient grounds in his complaint to open an investigation.
In response, the Washington Post published an over-the-top,
shrill editorial that is nothing but a personal attack on Brannum for
daring even to raise a question about Rhee who, it asserts, must not be
questioned, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/07/AR2010060703784.html.
The Post’s editorial board asserted that, “It’s hard to
think that anyone could conclude that Ms. Rhee sought these monies to
ensure her continued employ [sic] as schools chancellor.” Since
the letters of agreement all make the donations conditional on her
continued employment, it is hard to think that the editorial board
really finds that hard to think. It is much more reasonable to believe
that the Post is simply protecting one of its favorites from
having to live up to the standards of conduct that it would apply to
other public officials. The Post gives Rhee credit for soliciting
these funds for DCPS, while at the same time pretending to believe that
Rhee had nothing to do with them— with seeking them, with negotiating
their terms, or with accepting them under those terms. The Post
correctly notes that the foundations’ letters of agreement were not
given directly to DCPS, but were in fact given to a nonprofit
organization, the DC Public Education Fund, with the express purpose
that it would funnel them to DCPS. The DC Public Education Fund was set
up by Mayor Fenty and Chancellor Rhee to advance their educational plans
and interests and to raise money for their programs. The only purpose of
the DC Public Education Fund’s involvement in the grants is to shield
DCPS from the legal ramifications of accepting the grants directly and
from the open public scrutiny that would ensue. The pretense that the
Public Education Fund is independent of DCPS and Rhee, when it operates
in their interests and at their direction, may be enough to provide a
legal smokescreen to allow Rhee to deny self-dealing, but it is far from
clear that that pretense is good enough to succeed. That is a question
that can only be answered by the kind of thorough investigation that the
Post seeks to discredit in advance.
The Post accuses Brannum of making “half-baked allegations,”
and it prejudges the investigation at the end of its editorial by saying
that, “it’s disheartening to see this kind of small-minded hounding
of those who seek to better reward teachers who do a good job helping
children learn. There would seem to be no better way to discourage
public service than to turn the District into a place where no good turn
goes unquestioned.” That’s bad enough, but in the past three years
we’ve become used to the Post’s judgments about local
politics being based purely on its being a cheerleader for the
Fenty-Rhee-Nickles administration rather than a fair and disinterested
observer. What’s worse is the Post’s actions since. After it
denied Brannum the opportunity to reply to its editorial, Brannum sent
the E-mail printed below. As a result, the Post published (online
only, and not linked to from the editorial) the item at http://voices.washingtonpost.com/local-opinions/2010/06/good_reason_to_investigate_mic.html.
The online item purports to be by him, but in fact was drastically
rewritten by someone at the newspaper. The paper has so little
confidence in its judgment and reasoning that it has denied him an
opportunity to reply in print and in his own words to an editorial that
attacked him and his motives personally.
#####
A reader sent the following correction, not for attribution: “About
General Logan’s bid for the vice presidency. There was no presidential
election in 1874. There was one in 1872 (Grant reelected), one in 1876
(Hayes won). I think you meant the election of 1884, when Logan ran with
James G. Blaine.” This elicited the following from Elizabeth McIntire:
“Sorry, I was counting from 1862; should have checked these posters.
And you should never trust me again, Gary!” Thanks to both and,
Elizabeth, of course I’ll trust someone who takes corrections with
such good humor.”
Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com
###############
On Tuesday, June 8, The Washington Post published an editorial
(“School Daze,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/07/AR2010060703784.html)
reacting to my request for an investigation of DC Public Schools (DCPS)
Chancellor Michelle Rhee. The editorial was critical of me for
requesting a DC Office of Campaign Finance investigation of Chancellor
Rhee for possible conflict of interest in the tentative contract
agreement (later ratified) between DCPS and the Washington Teachers’
Union.
My request for an investigation was not motivated by politics, but
rather by a public citizen’s desire to promote a principled public
policy, which the Office of Campaign Finance determined to be credible.
It was deemed a “cogent statement of facts alleged to constitute a
violation,” with a “reasonable cause to believe that a violation has
occurred.” Moreover, DC Chief Financial Officer Natwar Gandhi,
previously praised by the editorial board and others in the media as
impeccable, alluded in testimony before the council these private donor
funding conditions were unacceptable and he could not certify the
tentative agreement.
Most reputable newspaper editorial boards, after singling out someone
for editorial rebuke, particularly a private citizen, would print a
response. Not so with the new reform-minded editorial board of The
Washington Post. The editorial board of The Washington Post
not only declined to print an initial response from me, it also has
declined to print a shortened rewrite. Rather than permitting me to
express my thoughts in my own words, the editorial board offered to
print its own shortened rewrite expressing my thoughts of its rebuke of
me. I believe I should be able to speak for myself. Even Ms. Katharine
Weymouth, Publisher; Mr. Andrew Alexander, Ombudsman; and Mr. Howard
Kurtz, Media Critic, should find this refusal unacceptable.
The Washington Post editorial board is an unabashed supporter of
Chancellor Rhee and views any and all criticism of her as an attack on
the deity. It rarely publishes letters or op-ed submissions critical of
Chancellor Rhee’s initiatives or her leadership. To promote Chancellor
Rhee’s reform agenda, marginal improvements of DCPS are heightened
beyond rationality. To reference a point in my declined letter to the
editor, the constant embellishment of Chancellor Rhee’s
accomplishments will not make them true by repetition.
The editorial board of The Washington Post and other local
news outlets find it newsworthy to report Office of Campaign Finance
investigations into possible wrongdoing by members of the council of the
District of Columbia and the DC Democratic State Committee. However,
there seems to be a different standard for Chancellor Rhee. Given the
limited coverage by other “local reputable news outlets,” the news
media has exposed its own double standard and professional hypocrisy.
Although the editorial questioned the ripeness of my request for an
investigation, I am grateful that Ms. Jo-Ann Armao, education editorial
writer, and Mr. Bill Turque at least asked to read my request for an
investigation of Chancellor Rhee submission before commenting and
writing. This is something Mr. Michael DeBonis, newly hired blogger for The
Washington Post and Ms. Jonetta Rose Barras, columnist for The
Washington Examiner, and some “respectable journalists”
obviously do not believe is necessary to meet the standards of truth or
any other probable standards of journalism ethics. Evidently, the
dousing of green slime is not just the childlike feature of the
Nickelodeon channel. At the risk of bruising the reputation of Fox 5
News, I do commend its accurate reporting. Ms. Armao, Ms. Barras, and
Mr. DeBonis, joined by a cabal of journalists, are so protective of
Chancellor Rhee’s image to the point that they sacrifice principles of
fairness and accurate reporting. In this matter, it is their credibility
which stands at issue, not mine. Contrary to Ms. Armao, Ms. Barras, Mr.
DeBonis, and other ill-informed journalists, Chancellor Rhee is not the
only one in the District who cares about children and reforming District
public education. Chancellor Rhee is not a “rock star” in public
education reform, the “beacon of hope” for District children, or the
“sweet honey of the rock” education leader. Chancellor Rhee is not
an example of a “profile in courage.”
To criticize Chancellor Rhee is not to hinder high quality public
education, to stop the reform of DCPS, or to sacrifice the future of
District children. I, as well as others in the community, on the
strengths of our beliefs to do what is right for all children, will
fight for all District children. Ms. Armao, Ms. Barras, Mr. DeBonis, and
other reporters, imply that because I, as well as others in the
community, challenge Chancellor Rhee, we thus do not support high
quality public education for children of the District of Columbia and do
not want to reform DCPS; they misrepresent themselves as intelligent.
###############
As someone who, over the past twenty years, has closely monitored the
work of the DC Board of Elections and Ethics and the Office of Campaign
Finance, and who has filed numerous complaints with both bodies, I could
not let the current controversy concerning the complaint Robert Brannum
filed with the OCF on June 2 regarding School Chancellor Michelle Rhee
go by without comment. Bill Turque reported in Tuesday’s Washington
Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/07/AR2010060703046.html:
“The District’s Office of Campaign Finance will investigate a
complaint, filed by an outspoken critic of Schools Chancellor Michelle
A. Rhee and Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, alleging that Rhee violated the law
by soliciting donations from private foundations that reserved the right
to pull their funding if there was a change in the school system’s
leadership. Cecily E. Collier-Montgomery, the office’s director, told
Robert V. Brannum on Friday, in response to his complaint, that there
was ‘reasonable cause to believe that a violation has occurred’ and
that ‘a full investigation is warranted in this matter.’”
The media response has been troubling. Jonetta Rose Barras wrote in
her June 7 column in The Examiner, titled “Slaying the
Chancellor, Sacrificing the Children,” http://tinyurl.com/2532rzb,
that DC residents should “question the competence” of OCF for
investigating Brannum’s complaint. She went on to write that “it’s
all politics,” and to argue that Brannum’s complaint aims “to
derail Mayor Adrian M. Fenty’s reelection, including discrediting his
education reform platform and sullying Rhee’s reputation.” JoAnn
Armao, in her June 8 Washington Post editorial, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/07/AR2010060703784.html,
writes, “it’s disheartening to see this kind of small-minded
hounding of those who seek to better reward teachers who do a good job
helping children learn. There would seem to be no better way to
discourage public service than to turn the District into a place where
no good turn goes unquestioned.”
Under District law, a citizen has a right to file a complaint with
the DC Office of Campaign Finance if and when they believe the District’s
campaign finance and/or ethics laws have been violated. After an initial
review and inquiry of the complaint, the OCF’s director and general
counsel only then make the determination as to whether to launch a
formal investigation. Under OCF’s process, frivolous or unfounded
complaints do not result in a full investigation. In the past, I have
filed complaints involving public officials with the OCF and, indeed, in
the past the Washington Post has always welcomed “independent”
investigations of public officials by the OCF (especially Marion Barry).
I am truly concerned that, if the media chooses to ridicule citizens who
file complaints, however motivated or justified those complaints may be,
it may have a chilling effect on the willingness of citizens to come
forward and report violations of the District’s campaign finance and
ethics laws.
###############
I want to make an open confession to readers of themail. I am an open
government policy wonk. In all honesty, I’ll pursue sunshine in places
most sensible people would shy away from. Like the Wilson Building.
Because nothing satisfies a craving for transparency like a good FOIA
request, I spent several years (yes, I admit it, years) pursuing the “National
Capital Revitalization Corporation and Anacostia Waterfront Corporation
Freedom of Information Amendment Act of 2006” and then the “NCRC and
AWC Freedom of Information Amendment Act of 2007.” In 2006, the bill
was introduced by Councilmembers Ambrose, Mendelson, Patterson, Catania,
Schwartz, Graham, Brown, and Cropp. In 2007 it was reintroduced by
Councilmembers Mendelson, Catania, Schwartz, Graham, Brown, Cheh, Gray,
Wells, and Thomas. You know the saying, practice makes perfect. I
literally carried that bill around the Wilson building for weeks,
stalking councilmembers for their signature: I caught a couple coming
off the dais after a hearing, and a few more in their offices.
Eventually, versions of the bill brought forward by Mr. Brown passed as
emergency and temporary legislation in 2007, on votes of 11-Yes,
2-Vacant.
As exciting as that was, I think what’s most notable (apart from my
obsession) is who didn’t sign as a co-introducer. Although I didn’t
manage to corner every councilmember in person, I contacted everyone’s
office –- more than once, of course –- and met with a number of
legislative aides n a series of meetings. I even sat in at-the-time
Councilmember Fenty’s waiting room one day while a staffer took it to
him to look over, but he declined to sign on. The moral to this story?
In 2006, I actively campaigned for the opponents of some of the
councilmembers who cosponsored or voted in favor of the final
legislation; I guarantee it wasn’t my personal charm that won them
over. While Comrade Lenin was of the opinion that, “A scoundrel may be
of use to us just because he is a scoundrel,” I came away with a more
optimistic view. It’s entirely possible to hold opposite views on
issues, like public-private partnerships, but still share common values
on government’s role in ensuring transparency and accountability. It’s
too bad not everyone acts the same way when they have the chance.
###############
Any new Freedom of Information Act legislation must include a
provision to assign a confirmation number upon receipt of each FOIA
request. Otherwise, there would be no way to judge the fidelity of the
required annual FOIA report.
The annual report should show the category of each FOIA request,
though that detail need not be in the summary report presented. At least
the requester could determine whether his report is accurately included
in the annual summary.
Some years ago I made several FOIA requests which were not addressed
according to FOIA requirements, even after I lodged written objections.
I could not identify my disappointing results in the glowing annual
reports. I would not believe the annual FOIA report under the current
FOIA reporting practices. GIGO (garbage in, garbage out).
###############
Public Libraries as Business Incubators
Phil Shapiro, pshapiro@his.com
Dozens of public libraries in other states have closed down in this
current recession.. Our own libraries in DC haven’t suffered that fate
yet, but they conceivably could. What can we do to support libraries —
other than to yell louder for funding? (Yelling louder doesn’t work
— believe me.) Here’s one idea I wrote about recently, at http://tinyurl.com/25hyqbq:
In this Internet age, getting into the entrepreneurial groove is
easier than early times. In the coming months I’m going to be
distributing some of my own creative work via Amazon’s Createspace. (http://createspace.com).
Amazon let’s me focus on the creative aspects of my product and they
take care of orders and distribution. Sure, they take a cut of sales,
but I’m only too glad that they do. If the creative product I create
has real value, tweets and blogs will get the word out about it.
Can we get our collective creative groove on at the library? I don’t
know. Should we try? What would be the cost of not trying? Libraries are
houses of ideas. Can ideas keep libraries aloft?
###############
Help Green DC. Deals For Deeds has teamed up with Casey Trees
Foundation. For every two hundred fifty people who sign up for free at http://www.dealsfordeeds.com/treedc,
Deals for Deeds will plant a tree in the District! Please help spread
the word, and remember it’s totally free to sign up.
The Plant a Tree in DC campaign will culminate with a tree planting
ceremony in the fall. For more information, please visit http://www.dealsfordeeds.com/treedc.
###############
Ward 5 Has No Middle School
Raenelle Zapata, mail@change.org
The Ward 5 Council on Education invites you to sign the petition “Ask
why Ward 5 is the only ward without a middle school,” on Change.org.
Click this link to view the petition: http://www.change.org/ward5coe
###############
[Re Codgers, themail, June 2] I don’t think it is so much about age
as politics. Liberals have never met a tax they don’t get excited
about. They make enough money to be able to pay taxes and still feel
virtuous. Those of us who don’t make that much money — they consider
us cretins.
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS
Financial Town Hall Meeting, June 10
Michelle Phipps-Evans, michelle.phipps-evans@dc.gov
The DC Department of Insurance, Securities and Banking (DISB) warmly
invites you to a community town hall meeting focusing on financial
services, policies, and programs. Meet DISB Commissioner Gennet Purcell,
and ask her some of your burning financial questions, including those
about health care reform and financial reform. Also on hand will be
representatives from the US Securities and Exchange Commission and the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. You can find out about starting a
free bank or credit union account through Bank on DC, the District’s
newest financial initiative for the unbanked and underbanked. Also on
hand will be members from the DC Department of the Environment and FEMA
to discuss new floodplains in the District and flood insurance.
Be prepared to have a conversation on issues related to insurance and
reform, investments and retirement, mortgages and foreclosures, and
financial literacy and investor education resources in the District of
Columbia. Federal and DC government officials will be prepared to
provide up-to-date information on these topics and the ongoing financial
reform affecting the nation.
The second in a series of city-wide events will be at Roosevelt
S.T.A.Y. High School, 4301 13th Street, NW, on Thursday, June 10, from
6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. For more information, call 442-7832 or visit DISB’s
web site at http://www.disb.dc.gov.
Also, check Facebook and Twitter for updates.
###############
Department of Parks and Recreation Events,
June 13-14
John Stokes, john.astokes@dc.gov
June 13, 3:00 p.m.-6:00 p.m., Volta Park, 3400 Volta Place, NW. Volta
Park Day for all ages. Volta Park Day is a community day filled with
vendors, activities to honor the beauty in the park. Refreshment will be
served. For more information, call Shirley Debrow at 282-0379.
June 14-18, 3:30 p.m.-6:00 p.m., Trinidad Recreation Center, 1310
Childress Street, NE. Dynamite Basketball Session for ages thirteen
through eighteen. The Dynamite Basketball Team will host basketball
skills training sessions including tournament at the end of the week.
For more information, call Anthony Higginbotham, Site Manager, 727-1293.
###############
Washington Post
Town Hall Meeting on Crime Coverage, June 15
George Williams; George.Williams2@dc.gov
The DC Public Library and The Washington Post are hosting a
town hall meeting on how the newspaper covers crime June 15 at the
Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Library. Post Crime Editor Mike
Semel, Local Editor Emilio Garcia-Ruiz, and staff writers Keith
Alexander, Maria Glod, Paul Duggan, Tom Jackman and Josh White will talk
about what makes the news and how they avoid being sensationalist. The
discussion will begin at 6:00 p.m. A question and answer session will
follow the discussion. The Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Library is
located at 901 G Street, NW, near the Metro Center and Gallery Place
Metro stations. If you would like to attend, please E--mail jonesdj@washpost.com.
###############
Universal Design Consumer Forum, June 17
Carol Page, cpage@aarp.org
Join the free AARP DC Universal Design Consumer Forum, June 17, 10:30
a.m. to 12:00 p.m., to hear from Case Designs Executive VP Bill
Millholland about a range of stylish ways — some inexpensive and easy,
and some more complex — to update your home for safety and comfort.
Following the program, which will be held at the Washington Center for
Aging Services (2601 18th Street, NE), participants are invited to cross
the lawn for an outdoor lunch on the grounds of the Andrus House, a home
remodeled using universal design features in honor of AARP’s fiftieth
Anniversary in 2008. Thanks to host Christian Communities Group Homes,
participants who register in advance can also sign up to tour the
interior of the Andrus House. Call 434-7707 or E-mail dcaarp@aarp.org
to register.
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — SERVICES
My name is Paul, and I run a small firefighter owned and operated
handyman and renovation company called Consider It Done Handyman
Services. My business partner John and I are DC natives, and we are
firefighters in Maryland. We have more than ten years of experience, and
are starting this new venture. We can do everything from complete
remodels to “honey-do” lists.
Please feel free to give me a call at 422-6336 or E-mail at Paul@CallTheFiremen.com
to talk over your potential projects. We get the job done right, and
walk through your options with you to find a safe, affordable, and
durable solution to whatever problems you may be having with your home.
###############
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.