Must Reads
Dear Readers:
Marilyn Simon and Dan Gamber, below, write about how the city
government is making driving and parking harder. Dan seems to give city
officials the benefit of the doubt by speculating that the confusion in
parking signs he notes may be just the result of officials’
incompetence or failure to think through the consequences of their
actions. But I think Marilyn is closer to the truth: it’s a deliberate
plan. The Fenty administration wanted to make parking and driving
inconvenient in order to force people to give up their cars. The Fenty
transportation planners think that people will meekly stay in the city
and put up with any amount of inconvenience. I fear the Gray
administration will follow in Fenty’s footsteps or bike paths. If the
city tells residents they have to rely on public transportation or
bikes, and tells businesses they have to rely on customers and employees
who come by bus or bike, and the suburbs provide residents and
businesses with ample parking for peoples’ needs, which part of the
region do you think will grow and prosper, and which part will stagnate?
#####
More must-read articles: Valerie Strauss’ column on Michelle Rhee’s
legacy, “What Rhee Has Wrought,” http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/dc-schools/what-rhee-wrought.html#more:
“Anyone who thinks that Michelle Rhee was a whiz as chancellor of DC
public schools and should be heading a national ‘reform’ movement
ought to read about a high school she attempted to ‘transform’ in
the nation’s capital. . . . The truth of her tenure is less
compelling. In fact, some parts are disturbing. The tale that my
colleague Bill Turque wrote about Dunbar Senior High School [http://tinyurl.com/37smp24]
reveals the bad assumptions and decisions Rhee made in trying to
transform a long-troubled school, and, further, exposes some of the
mindlessness driving modern school reformers today across the country.”
Marc Fisher’s wrote his online column today, http://blog.washingtonpost.com/story-lab/2010/12/post_4.html,
about the burglary of his house and the theft of his son’s laptop,
which will assure that his case will receive a lot more attention than
most burglaries in DC. Here is the key passage: “I thought this was as
close to a slam-dunk case as there could ever be. I thought that by
handing over the photo [of the burglar], I was delivering the police an
instant arrest. I thought wrong. Two officers confided that they and
their colleagues rarely press hard on burglary cases because the courts
almost always let thieves go with nothing more than probation. Maybe
that’s why four days after we handed over the photo, we were still
waiting to hear from the detective assigned to the case. Burglaries are
up 11 percent citywide this year, to a total that will top 4,000 —
most likely a reflection of continued hard times, especially since
virtually every other category of crime is down. DC police made 30
burglary arrests in the last two weeks of November, up from six in the
same weeks last year. Nationwide, police solved only 12 percent of
burglaries last year, according to FBI data; in big cities such as
Washington, the figure often is barely more than half that high. No
wonder the guy in our photo wore such a confident smirk.” Fisher
assumes that violent crimes in DC are falling, but Michael Cella would
claim that the numbers aren’t that clear. On Monday, Cella’s article
in The Washington Times was “Violent Crimes of All Kinds Are on
the Rise in DC,” http://tinyurl.com/22jkapd.
And if the police and the courts don’t take burglaries seriously in
DC, compared with the police and the courts in the suburbs, which part
of the region will grow and prosper then?
Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com
###############
On Monday, December 13, Mayor-elect Vincent Gray held a “Job
Creation and Economic Development Summit” at the downtown law offices
of Arnold and Porter. The stated purpose of the meeting was to focus on
the jobs crisis in the District which, in certain neighborhoods, has
resulted in an unemployment rate as high as 30 percent. According to the
press release from Gray’s transition committee, the stated purpose of
the meeting was to develop concrete solutions and create “strategies
and an action plan for delivering jobs to District residents.”
However, most of the discussions from the 94 invited participants
centered on the obstacles to job creation in the District and specific
problems that hinder the hiring of District residents — poorly
educated job applicants lacking basic skills, the decline of vocational
education, job applicants with felony arrest records, a cumbersome
regulatory process in the District, and a weak and poorly functioning DC
Department of Employment services. By the end of the summit, no formal
strategy or action plan was developed, nor was a single job commitment
made by any invited business or entity.
The tone for the summit was set by the individuals the Gray
transition chose to invite: corporate executives (e.g., CVS, Care First
Blue Cross, Giant Foods, Macy’s, Comcast, Amtrak, the Washington
Post, Safeway, Verizon, Neiman-Marcus, PNC Bank, Walmart, WMATA,
Fannie Mac, PEPCO, the Washington Nationals), developers (e.g., Akridge,
Donohue Construction, Sigal Construction, Bundy, Rand Construction),
colleges and universities (e.g., Georgetown, American, Gallaudet,
Howard, George Washington, UDC, Trinity, Catholic), and nonprofits
(e.g., Sibley Hospital, Smithsonian, AARP, NEA). The invitation list was
largely drawn from the membership of the DC Chamber of Commerce, whose
president and chief executive officer, Barbara Lang, co-chairs Gray’s
economic transition committee. Notably absent from the meeting were
individuals and organizations who could speak directly about the
problems and hurdles facing the unemployed in the District. The list of
list of meeting participants prepared by the Gray committee and Gray’s
Plan for Jobs and Economic Development, which was distributed to the
participants and hewed closely to the plan prepared during the primary,
are at http://www.dcwatch.com/election2010/101213.htm.
###############
Eliminating Parking Minimums Will Impact Our
Neighborhoods
Marilyn Simon, MJSimon524 at yahoo.com
The DC Office of Planning is proposing eliminating parking minimums
in many areas, and it recently released a map of those areas. Parking
minimums mitigate parking spillover problems that can affect the quality
of life in our neighborhoods. The Office of Planning repeatedly assured
the Zoning Commission that off-street parking minimums would be retained
in areas where a potential spillover effect exists, but this is not the
case. The office recommends eliminating parking minimums near many
single-family and row-house neighborhoods, including areas that already
have significant spillover problems.
The Office of Planning claimed that the DC Department of
Transportation has tools to mitigate the impact of this recommendation.
Yet the tools presented mainly involve residential parking permits and
do nothing to mitigate the impact of eliminating parking minimums or to
address existing spillover. Further, the Transportation Department
representative clearly stated that residents of new apartment buildings
— the very buildings that would not be required to provide adequate
parking for residents, employees, or guests — will be eligible for
residential parking permits and visitor parking permits. This means
that, rather than having the developer provide sufficient off-street
parking, apartment dwellers will rely on the already crowded streets of
nearby neighborhoods, leaving the residents there to either pave their
small back yards or park farther from their homes.
Many of DC’s successful transit-oriented neighborhoods lie near
areas where planners propose to eliminate parking minimums. These are
walkable low-density neighborhoods, near transit, where many residents
use transit for commuting, but also rely on cars for other
transportation needs. Many of the houses lack adequate off-street
parking, and those residents rely on on-street parking. And many of
these neighborhoods already have tight on-street parking conditions, as
neighborhood streets are shared by residents, shoppers, local business
employees and commuters who drive to Metro. As a result, residents
frequently find it difficult to park near their homes. DC’s current
parking minimums are the lowest in the area and are far below the actual
vehicle ownership for residential buildings. Currently, only one space
for every two to four apartments (depending on the zone) is required.
Because of this, spillover parking in many single-family neighborhoods
near apartment and mixed-use zones is evident.
Regulations should not be changed based on an unrealistic expectation
that future residents will own fewer vehicles or none at all. The
District’s transportation system is efficient at carrying commuters to
the employment core, but for many households it is not robust enough to
meet most transportation needs. On January 10, the Zoning Commission
will consider the Office of Planning’s proposal. The record (ZC Case
08-06, B-15) will remain open for written comments until December 20 at
3:00 p.m.
###############
Gabe Klein’s rush to experiment has resulted in some serious
confusion for those wishing to park — or perhaps call it bait and
switch. Example: 17th Street, NW. In front of 1636 17th Street, NW, is a
parking ticket machine, with a big “2” — which means that there is
a two hour limit and you must pay at the machine. However, if you go
down to the corner of 17th and R you see a sign that says “no parking
loading zone, for commercial vehicles only, 7:00 am to 6:30 p.m.,
Monday-Saturday.”
Now many drivers will look at the machine and presume they can park.
But if they are not commercial vehicles, they get a $50 ticket. Or, if
you are a vehicle with commercial markings, you can park free while
spending the day drinking at the Tavern. And restaurant owners who use
their own private vehicle to procure supplies from a farmers market may
not park there while provisioning their restaurants. (One of the
objectives of the 17th Street reconfiguration was providing delivery
zones to reduce double parking.) And DDOT wasted a lot of money
installing the parking machine.
Another example of parking confusion is the 3400 block of
Connecticut, northbound. That is the commercial block with the parallel
access road on the east side. The Connecticut Avenue side of the
separator now has a confusing set of signs about loading zone, rush
hour, and pay to park. At 1:00 p.m. last Friday, the result was that
there were no vehicles parked on the Connecticut Avenue side of the
separator.
Another example: the south side of the 1300 block of U Street, NW,
has had four different parking payment systems in the last few months.
One of the systems was a parking machine smack in front of a stairway to
a restaurant, which narrowed the walkway to about two feet. (DDoT
answered a complaint about that machine by saying that the location was
required by Americans with Disabilities Act!) This is no experiment, it
is mass confusion.
A further result in many areas has been a reduction is street parking
spaces. In addition to the above, that is the case on 15th Street, NW,
where the bikeway (which I love to use) has resulted in the elimination
of several spaces.
As for double parking for deliveries: given the configuration and
traffic flow on 17th, this has never been a significant problem. But it
is a horrid problem on the U Street, NW, commercial strip. Commonly, a
delivery vehicle is double-parked at the approach to an intersection.
When someone wants to turn left at the same place, traffic stops
entirely. No delivery zones have been created on U as various parking
systems were installed.
On another theme, pedestrian protection: a few months ago, northbound
15th at U had the signal changed to provide a few second advance green
for pedestrians crossing U. That seemed to work very well. But then a
couple of weeks ago that system was replaced by a new signal with a left
turn arrow for 15th northbound. It would be nice to have someone who
thinks things through before acting.
###############
How DPW Services Will Be Affected by Christmas
and New Year’s Day
Linda Grant, linda.grant@dc.gov
Here is how the services of the Department of Public Works will be
affected in observance of Christmas, December 25, and New Year’s Day,
January 1, 2011. DPW crews will follow the normal collections schedule
and pick up trash and recycling Friday, December 24, and Friday,
December 31. This applies to both once-a-week and twice-a-week
collection neighborhoods. Trash and recycling containers should be put
out for collection no earlier than 6:30 p.m. the night before collection
and removed from public space by 8:00 p.m. on the collection day.
DPW will suspend enforcement of parking meters, residential parking,
and rush hour lane restrictions Friday and Saturday, December 24 and 25,
and Friday and Saturday, December 31 and January 1. Also, DPW will not
tow abandoned vehicles.
The Ft. Totten Transfer Station, located at 4900 John F. McCormack
Road, NE, will be closed Friday and Saturday, December 24 and 25, and
Friday and Saturday, December 31 and January 1. Bulk trash drop-off
services will be available Monday, December 27, through Thursday,
December 30, 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. The next Saturday household
hazardous waste/e-cycling/document shredding drop-off day is January 8,
8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., (these services are available the first Saturday
of the month, except holidays). Directions to Ft. Totten: travel east on
Irving Street, NW, turn left on Michigan Avenue, turn left on John F.
McCormack Road, NE, and continue to the end of the street.
Leaf collections will be made from most “Area B” neighborhoods,
except on Christmas Day and New Year’s Day. Area B residents should
rake their leaves into their treebox spaces by the Sunday before their
collection weeks.
To view DPW’s trash and recycling holiday schedule for the
remainder of the year, click on http://tinyurl.com/36x5o5a
or call 311. Residents also can use DPW’s Web site to view the
2010-2011 leaf collection schedule by selecting Leaf Collection and
clicking on “Check Leaf Collection Status in Your Neighborhood” (http://leaf.dcgis.dc.gov/)
and entering their address.
###############
Response to Anonymous from a Gray Volunteer
Robert Marshall, befamous@msn.com
I am a Gray supporter/volunteer who has served as a volunteer in both
Mr. Gray’s campaign to be elected council chair and, more recently, as
mayor. My reasons for doing so include my belief in Mr. Gray as an
individual and in the issues that he has championed.
On several occasions, I have had the good fortune to meet and
interact briefly with Lorraine Green. Based on those chance encounters,
I am impressed with her loyalty to Mr. Gray, her professionalism,
astuteness, and her genuine concern and dedication to our city and its
people.
It appears to me that Anonymous’ complaint [themail, December 12]
is simply that he/she did not receive the patronage (job) that
apparently was the motivation for his/her campaigning for Mr. Gray —
nothing more and nothing less. Failing to provide patronage jobs to a
particular campaign volunteer does not, in my mind, constitute abuse and
mistreatment on Mr. Gray’s nor Ms. Green’s part.
###############
The information posted [themail, December 12] about my mother,
Lorraine Green, was not just incorrect, it was disrespectful. People
will have their own opinions, so there is no use speaking to the name
calling and the slander. What I will respond to is the assertion that I
was hired by Kaya Henderson for a six- figure job. I am currently
employed by a communications company in DC, and I have never been
considered for a job within Kaya Henderson’s agency, nor do I plan to
work for DC Public Schools in any capacity.
###############
I see you weren’t so quick to relax your long-held ban on
publishing anonymous contributions for a post in support of Vince Gray
and his team. Yet some whining naysayers you happen to agree with get to
play by new rules set solely for them. With regard to the report on Ms.
Green’s tenure as interim Inspector General for Amtrak, I would stress
that the negative report is the work of two Republicans. Ms. Green, of
course, was twice appointed to federal posts by President Clinton, a
Democrat. Duh.
[I wrote that someone with a connection to Vince Gray’s transition
team submitted a message complaining about criticism of the transition
effort. The problem with the message wasn’t that it was anonymous; it
was that the submitter wanted it published without a sentence revealing
his connection to the transition. More importantly, Brigid tries to
dismiss the criticism of Lorraine Green’s appointment as an interim
Inspector General at Amtrak, and her subsequent actions in that office,
because it was made by Republicans, as though that automatically
discredits it. But that’s how our system works; two competing
political parties criticize each other and each other’s nominees, and
keep watch on each other. Judge the reports for yourselves on their own
merits. The report from Senator Grassley and Representative Issley,
critical of Amtrak’s firing of its Inspector General and of Lorraine
Green’s role in the issue, is at http://tinyurl.com/22jvbtt;
the reply memorandum supporting Amtrak, by Democratic staffers of the
Senate Commerce Committee, is at http://tinyurl.com/2ey2wnh;
and Senator Grassley’s press release criticizing the Democratic reply
is at http://tinyurl.com/2bpgwra.
— Gary Imhoff]
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS
Fundraiser to Support Love Thy Neighbor,
December 18
Ann Loikow, aloikow@verizon.net
A Fundraiser to Support Love Thy Neighbor’s Work Teaching
Nonviolence to Children in Palestine will be held at the Universalist
National Memorial Church, 1810 16th Street, NW (corner of 16th and S
Streets), on Saturday, December 18, at 7:00 p.m. It is sponsored by the
Universalist National Memorial Church, Love Thy Neighbor, the American
Palestinian Women’s Association, and Sabeel DC Metro. A traditional
Palestinian dinner will be served and the Glade Dance Collective will
perform “The Wall.” $25 donation requested. RSVP: joyceibrahim@gmail.com
###############
Mae Reeves Vintage Hat Party at WNDC, December
21
Pat Bitondo, pbitondo@aol.com
The Mae Reeves Vintage Hat Party, Tuesday, December 21, 6:30-8:30
p.m., reception and show at the Woman’s National Democratic Club, 1526
New Hampshire Avenue, NW.
’Tis the season to be jolly! And what better way to revel and
rejoice than to see beautiful women showing off spectacular hats. Come
crowned in your own lovely hat at the party of the season. Donna
Limerick, Mae Reeves’ daughter, will bring models sporting the vintage
hat collection. Jan DuPlain will co-MC the event and we will also have a
jewelry store set up for your last-minute holiday shopping.
In April 2009, the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African
American History and Culture (NMAAHC) acquired part of Reeves’
extensive hat collection, antique furniture from her millinery shop, and
other personal items to tell the story about her illustrious career. Her
fifty-year collection will be part of a permanent fashion exhibit at the
museum, expected to open in 2015. Members $25, nonmembers $35; register
at https://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/5880/p/salsa/event/common/public/?event_KEY=20726
###############
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.
