Explaining DC’s Zoning Fights
Dear Fighters:
Megan McArdle writes an always interesting and frequently provocative
column for The Atlantic. On January 24, she posted a piece, “Can
the Rise of the Internet Explain DC Zoning Fights?,” http://tinyurl.com/7wq587v/.
Here’s the beginning: “Many of the urban planning debates that take
place in DC are in fact proxy battles over gentrification. Almost no one
on either side ever actually voices the core conflict, which is that the
poorer, mostly black current residents do not want gentrification to
force their community out of their affordable and centrally located
homes, and the newer, mostly white residents want the sort of services
(and property values) that materialize when a neighborhood gentrifies
— and that the presence of one community is an obstacle to the goals
of the other. Since no one wants to come right out and say this, the
debate focuses on procedural issues: noise, parking, safety, ‘respect
to the community.’” Read the whole thing, and come back here to
comment, if you wish. Surely we can provide more knowledgeable comments
that the Atlantic readers.
Gary Imhoff
gary@dcwatch.com
###############
DC Council — Enablers of Corruption?
Mary Brooks Beatty, mbbeatty@aol.com
Here’s what we know from court records, investigative reports, and
the Inspector General’s report regarding the iGaming scandal: 1) the
iGaming legislation was slipped into a budget bill by Councilmember
Michael Brown and enacted without a Committee or public hearing. DC
Lottery community hearings were held across the city only after passage
of the law. 2) Councilmember Brown received $240,000 in 2010 from
Edwards, Angell, Palmer & Dodge, a law firm with clients who benefit
from online gambling. Brown did not disclose this conflict of interest
until after passage of the legislation, and did not recuse himself from
the vote. 3) Through court documents, it is apparent that at least four
members of the council have been intimately involved in choosing the
local partner who will receive a 51 percent equity share of the proceeds
from the thirty-eight million dollar contract. 4) The local partner was
not vetted through the standard contracting process. That is, no IRS
audits, no record-keeping audit, no scrutiny of management, no scrutiny
of past performance — nothing except a simple criminal background
check. Most of the references listed in the bid by the local partner had
never heard of the company, and work that they claimed to have performed
was performed by other contractors. In addition, the terms of the
contract were substantially changed in 2009 to include Internet gaming,
without a rebid. 5) The local winner of the contract rewarded their
connections with political contributions, including $4000 to
Councilmember Michael Brown.
Conclusion: the Inspector General’s report which concludes that
there was no ethical wrongdoing in all this seems to be more political
theater than an attempt to get to the truth. Because councilmembers seem
to believe that they can conduct their business hidden from the public
(even having the Inspector General cover for them), it makes you wonder,
what else don’t we know? The problem is larger than iGaming. It is
about the systemic problems within DC council. It’s a lack of
transparency that creates doubt about everything that the council does,
and after the deals are done, the lengths that they will go to keep the
public from the truth.
I believe that every member of council is an enabler to the
embezzlement by Councilmember Thomas and any other corruption, because
they don’t demand accountability. They don’t let the public in.
Democracy, if not dead, is gasping for breath in the District. Some
members of council have stated that they must “restore the public’s
trust.” I couldn’t agree more. For this issue, the only way to
restore public trust in the mayor’s office and the council is to
repeal this law and start fresh. It is the only way that voters can
trust that our interests are being considered ahead of the personal gain
of councilmembers.
###############
Microsoft’s Partnership with DC Looks Like
Bad News
Phil Shapiro, pshapiro@his.com
The partnership announced today by the DC government and Microsoft
looks like bad news from where I sit (see news story at http://tinyurl.com/8455hwd).
Large corporations of all types have just one goal — to maximize
profits at any cost. When they say they want to “partner” with you,
it’s not because they’re suddenly feeling philanthropic. When the DC
government should be looking to expand use of cloud computing services
and open source software (Linux, OpenOffice, Firefox, etc.) to save
taxpayers money, it’s moving in exactly the opposite direction. Apple,
which is now pulling in about a billion dollars in profit per week, is
heading down the exact same path as Microsoft. (See my PCWorld
blog post of this week at http://tinyurl.com/8xlj38p.)
It’s time a Community Technology Summit was held in DC so that the
values and priorities of DC residents can inform DC government tech
policy. I’m wondering how transparent the agreement between Microsoft
and the DC government will be. Will the public even have access to it?
Were there perhaps some oral understandings in this partnership that
didn’t make it into print?
###############
I testified (for a whole two to three minutes, I should add) to the
most recent council meeting of the Committee of the Whole, on the
Effective Teaching Act, and I was told there would be further
opportunity to testify on related questions in the future. Implicitly we
were talking about training for advanced education at universities and
colleges, but there was a startling omission of any reference to the
standing, existence, or utility of the University of the District of
Columbia and its present Community College to complete the picture of
public provision for education of its present (and future) residents and
citizens. I think that this is a gap in our thinking that ought to be
and must be filled, if we are to think of educational opportunity in its
fullest sense: many of the present schools underperform on tests that we
ourselves have imposed to tell us how they are doing. At the very least,
the University should take notice of this, and set up a safety net to
correct this underperformance elsewhere, but it can only attempt to do
this in closest relationship to the District’s educational
administration, and the curriculum that the latter has set up —
including its failings.
###############
What Is Our Mayor’s Agenda for DC Tax
Revision?
David Schwartzman, dschwartzman@gmail.com
On January 11, our mayor and past mayor Tony Williams, the local
architect of balancing the budget on the backs of the poor, had a lunch
meeting (The Reliable Source of the Washington Post, January 12).
The subject: revising the DC tax code. We first heard about our mayor’s
intention to have a new Tax Revision Commission appointed this month
from The Current in its last issue of 2011 (December 28, A3).
This article also cited the mayor’s preference to appoint Tony
Williams the Commission’s Chair and his apparent charge to the
Commission: could our city raise more revenue by lowering, you read it
correctly, lowering the tax rates for high-income residents in the hopes
that more would move in. The alleged support for this approach was cited
as the drop in the number of affluent residents after Maryland raised
its income tax rate, a temporary hike that was terminated after 2010.
Gray acknowledged this could have been the result of incomes dropping
during the recession, which is exactly the explanation provided by the
Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (“Five Reasons to Preserve
Maryland’s ‘Millionaires’ Tax,” January 8, 2010). This
conclusion is also supported by a recent study done by Phoenix Marketing
International, which tracked the number of millionaire households
(defined by liquid assets) in the fifty states and DC from 2006 to 2011.
The number did go down from 2008 to 2009 in Maryland while the
millionaires tax hike was in place, but the same thing happened in DC
and Virginia, by approximately the same percentage, with no tax hike on
their millionaires. In 2011 there were 15,603 millionaire households in
DC (5.88 percent of the total), the highest numbers in the last six
years. DC has a tax base capable of better meeting the needs of its low
income residents: In 2009, the year with the most recent data available,
DC taxpayers with incomes over $100,000 had a taxable income of $11.1
billion, for over $200,000 the taxable income was $7.5 billion (IRS tax
statistics). Now the taxable incomes of wealthy DC residents are very
likely even higher. The overall tax burden in DC (District sales,
income, and property taxes), and the suburbs remains regressive, with
the highest rate falling on families earning $45,000, who pay 10.5
percent of their income in DC taxes, with a steadily falling rate up to
the income of DC millionaires, who now pay an effective rate of less
than 7 percent after the small rate hike passed last year and the
federal deduction offset are included, about the same rate as the
poorest families earning $12,000 a year (ITEP, Who Pays?).
It highly misleading to argue that wealthy DC residents will leave
the District if they are required to pay slightly higher rates, given
the advantages of living here, namely lower commuting costs and
especially time, cultural opportunities, and other advantages. Who will
buy their high-priced homes if they move? The wealthy have been steadily
moving into the District in the last two decades, despite the
consistently lower tax rates of suburban Virginia. Further, the
advantages noted for living in the District justify a modestly higher
overall tax rate for wealthy residents than what the same income
residents would pay in the suburbs, at least 1-2 percent higher, judging
from historical comparisons for the last few decades.
The last Tax Revision Commission gave us Tax Parity, with most of the
tax reduction going to the wealthy, freezing in our regressive tax
structure and helping to grow income inequality since 1998. We deserve a
better deal this time. With more than $200 million cut in DC’s budget
for low income programs since 2008, the medicine the Tax Revision
Commission should prescribe is hiking the tax rate on the wealthy and
targeting this revenue to restore and expand these programs, while
providing some tax relief for low and middle income residents, including
seniors. And how about supporting long overdue PILOTs (Payments in Lieu
of Taxes) from the federally-tax exempt World Bank, IMF and Fannie Mae?
And going after Pepco Holdings for its persistent avoidance of paying
state taxes (see the ITEP report “Corporate Tax Dodging In the Fifty
States, 2008–2010,” December 2011)? The latest statistics show DC
has the highest income inequality in the nation compared to the fifty
states, with 47 percent of DC’s Black children living in poverty in
2010. While our mayor deserves credit for supporting free speech of the
Occupiers across the street, unlike many other mayors, the Occupiers’
message standing for the 99 percent, calling for economic justice is not
being heard in the Wilson Building. These issues should be addressed at
the Mayor’s One City Summit on February 11 at the Washington
Convention Center.
###############
In response to Daniel Carozza’s article of January 22: Mr. Carozza
is clearly well-informed. There are several issues at work regarding Mr.
Ellerbe’s proposed schedule change: 1) reduced total personnel. He is
either lying or incompetent if he thinks that reducing personnel will
somehow reduce personnel fatigue. He certainly has not explained how he
plans to reduce the workload by more than one quarter, to match the one
quarter reduction in personnel. 2) Reduced shift lengths. Every study
specific to firefighters shows the twenty-four hour shift to be the best
for both the public and the firefighters. Firefighters are “on call,
in station” at night, which allows them to nap, and keep a normal
circadian rhythm. More needs to be done in regards to firefighter’s
sleep health and cognitive performance, particularly in busy places like
DC, but Mr. Ellerbe has no peer-reviewed evidence to support a shorter
shift.
3) Night time work. Everyone is at a performance deficit at night. It’s
part of being human. It’s impossible to get people to adjust to being
nocturnal. In other industries that require twenty-four-hour operations,
they shift as much work as possible to the day shift. The fire
department is no different: there are almost twice as many employees at
work during the business day as there are at night. However, most fatal
fires occur at night, and public demand for EMS stays strong into the
wee hours of the morning. It isn’t feasible to significantly reduce
the departments staffing level at night any further. Google and some
other high-tech companies have incorporated sleep “pods” into their
break areas — perhaps hospitals should do the same for their night
shifters. 4) Back-to-back night shifts. Chronic sleep deficit plays at
least as large a role in cognitive deficit as acute sleep deficit.
Working back-to-back nights allows for this chronic deficit to develop,
and each night worked makes for a larger deficit. This deficit is
exacerbated by bad sleep prior to the night shifts — bad sleep that is
virtually guaranteed by having to work three twelve to thirteen hour
days immediately prior to beginning the night work. Even
inside-the-beltway commuters are apt to only have nine or so hours at
home between these long days at work. Nurses on the night shift
typically only work three twelve-hour shifts a week (not six!) and don’t
rotate between days and nights. They also are much more likely to be
relieved from duty on time, as they rarely find themselves on the other
side of the city when their shift is up. Finally, the effect of the long
shift — the acute sleep deficit — can be partially ameliorated by
allowing firefighters to nap between runs at night — something that DC
has allowed for the last two centuries, and that every other fire
department in the world does.
5) Long Distance Commuters. There are exactly two members of the more
than eighteen hundred members of the department who live in North
Carolina. More than half the department lives within twenty miles of the
US Capitol, and more DC firefighters live in DC than is the case in
Montgomery or Fairfax Counties. In any case, there are only so many
things a firefighter can do in the case of a major emergency — we are
limited by equipment and vehicles rather than personnel. This is
especially so since the department cut back on overtime at the apparatus
shops. The area around Half Street and I Street, SW, is littered with
defunct fire apparatus. We have no reserves to speak of. We have ample
personnel within an hour of DC. As far as fire department operations are
concerned, it’s a non-issue. It is, however, a rallying cry for a
district that really really wants to have a commuter tax. 6) Contract
Negotiations. The union that represents firefighters hasn’t had a new
contract since it expired in 2007. Mayor Gray was elected, at least in
part, for his apparent willingness to meet with labor. Having the
department head campaign for schedule changes in the public rather than
at the bargaining table isn’t negotiating in good faith. Not all union
busters are Republicans from Wisconsin. 7) History of Harassment. The
chief has gone to stations in the department and told the junior members
there that they would be laid off. He has transferred personnel in
retribution for assumed personal slights, including the entire officer
corps of one battalion. He’s had personnel actions held up by the
courts in the past. He has been the subject of sexual harassment
settlements. He’s had fire companies transferred out of their response
area to be on display at crime hot spots — without so much as an hour
of training for those personnel, nor with any regard to the (relatively
crime-free) neighborhoods the companies vacated. He has harassed people
for having tattoos. He has stated that people who live in DC, but didn’t
go to high school in DC “don’t count.” He has changed the uniform
order five times, each time costing members unreimbursed out-of-pocket
expenses to come into compliance. He’s issued rain gear to favored
personnel, and refused it to the bulk of the force. He’s required
every fire station to display a portrait of him — a department first.
He’s refused to update a failing ambulance fleet. He’s stopped any
non-mandated training. He attempted to promote his brother. He attempted
to claim a homestead credit while he lived in Florida. He attempted to
bilk the pension fund out of $600,000. He’s refused to defend any
claim against the Firefighter-Paramedics of the department, right or
wrong. He’s done nothing to stem the tide of Firefighter-Paramedics
leaving the department (thirty or so out of about one hundred twenty).
In his FY2012 Budget Document response to questions asked in council,
he mentioned that “higher than normal attrition rate” was one of the
benefits of the schedule change. It is clear that it is his goal to
cause attrition among the ranks of firefighters by causing an unstable
and stressful working environment. This also happens to be a clear and
present danger to the public.
###############
DC Fire EMS at Risk
Lt. Terry G. Williams, ltmeanman@verizon.net
I was hired in 1986. We were under a 24/48 shift, and I found that
there was not enough time to recover from one shift to the next. But
when you’re young and doing a job that you love, it doesn’t matter.
We then went to a 24/72 shift, and I thought that I could work forever.
Then with age it’s not so easy. Five years ago I was placed on day
work position, where I was working a forty-hour work week for ten months
It took the whole ten months to adjust to day work. I was then sent back
to shift work and had to readjust again.
Chief Ellerbee has worked this shift for most of his career and has
benefited from its advantages, but he is quick to change all of our
lives by taking this shift from us — the shift that has been shown to
be the best for our line of work. Why does the shift need to be changed?
Ellerbee states saving money and safety because the firefighters and EMS
employees will be working shorter hours. By changing the shift to 3-3-3,
there will be more people commuting in and out of DC during peak rush
hours (regardless of where the DCFD employees live). Instead of a
commute during off hours (because most firefighters are at work one and
a half hours prior to the 7:00 a.m. shift change) these men and women
will need to leave their families and sit in traffic. And for what? To
work more hours, and make less money? The DC Fire Department has a 98
percent efficiency rating and an overall approval from the citizens that
we serve.
One last thing, DCFD has been the logo since day one. Ask anyone and
they’ll refer to us as DCFD. No need to change it. In the words of
many people, if it’s not broke don’t fix it. This would not be a
change in the right direction.
###############
DC Fire Department’s Proposed Shift Change
Matthew Palmerton, mjpalmerton@verizon.net
I realize all government entities are interested in saving money.
However, there is a difference between being frugal with minimal risk
and saving money at the potential expense of fireman’s lives and the
lives of the public put in danger due to costly errors and mistakes from
sleep deprived first responders. What time tested research has Chief
Ellerbe laid out that proves the 3-3-3 shift saves money? Why would the
city entertain this notion when other fire departments/EMS are shedding
the 3-3-3 shift because it causes poor performance, excessive sick leave
usage and abuse, and low morale?
Along with the added liability that the city will be held accountable
for, what deep thought has been given about the human factor in all of
this? The proposed shift is unnatural and impractical. These men and
women are not machines that can change their primal operation at the
touch of a button. We can’t promote the city as “family friendly”
if the first responders who are charged with saving and protecting other
families cannot maintain a healthy relationship with their own.
I also don’t believe it makes sense for the Chief to spend money on
posting pictures of himself in all of the fire houses in the District
when response times are poor, apparatus is falling apart, firehouses are
infested with bed bugs and stations are being condemned due to lack of
maintenance. If implemented, the shift change would be another colossal
mistake for our great nation’s Capital emergency personnel.
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS
George Dalton Tolbert: The Life of a US Senate
Photographer, January 26
Patricia Bitondo, pbitondo@aol.com
George Tolbert IV is a man with an addiction. He travels throughout
the United States and worldwide to get his fix. Tolbert is hooked on
photography. His passion and talent has led him to the halls of congress
where he captured moments in American history by photographing national
events such as the President’s State of the Union address; joint
sessions of Congress; inaugurations; committee and constituent hearings.
In addition to individual portraits of senators and committees, he has
traveled internationally on senatorial missions to document their
official visits to foreign lands.
His work has been published in Newsweek, Time Magazine, The
Washington Post and other national publications. Tolbert retired
from the Senate in 2006 but his passion for photography is still a
driving force. Tolbert, a charismatic personality, will relate how he
became the US Senate Photographer and relate some of the historic events
and people he photographed. At the Woman’s National Democratic Club,
January 26. Bar opens at 11:30 a.m., lunch at 12:15 p.m., lecture
presentation and question and answer session from 1:00-2:00 p.m. Cost:
members $25, nonmembers $30, and $10 lecture only
###############
Spotlight on Design Lecture with Rogers Marvel
Architects, February 2
Stacy Adamson, sadamson@nbm.org
The National Building Museum presents Innovative Architects. Robert
Rogers, FAIA, and Jonathan Marvel, AIA, discuss their New York-based
firm’s work, including concepts to beautify the security components
and improve the visitor experience at President’s Park South, located
between the White House Grounds and Constitution Avenue in Washington,
DC. Thursday, February 2, 6:30-8:00 p.m., at the NBM, 401 F Street, NW
(Judiciary Square Metro, Red Line). $12 members and students, $20
nonmembers. Prepaid registration required. Walk-in registration based on
availability.
###############
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.
