Posts
Good morning and Happy Hanukkah! The budget hearing ended after midnight, so some reporters may be sleeping in (you know who you are). DCGC may have to tweet stories that appear after 7:30.
BTW: Hint: DCGC adores potato latkes.
Best, Karyn-Siobhan Robinson a/k/a DC Government Clips
D.C. Government/D.C. Council media clips: Wednesday, December 1, 2010.
Missed yesterday? http://bit.ly/e7XKps
Twitter: DCGovClips
Budget
D.C. budget plan triggers debate on possible tax hike - Washington Post
Fenty seeks cuts in jobs, services to fix budget gap - Washington Times
D.C. needs to cut up the credit cards - Examiner
Cutting grandparent subsidy is penny wise, pound foolish - Examiner
Proposed Gap-Closing Plan Relies Heavily On Cuts - DC Fiscal Policy Institute
Wearing Solutions on Your Sleeve, Plus: David Catania’s Greatest Hits - Housing Complex (Washington City Paper)
Transition
D.C. Mayor-elect Gray to make 1st White House visit Wednesday, meet with Obama - Washington Post
Are people missing Adrian Fenty already? - Examiner
D.C. Government
D.C. board of elections wants to expand early voting - Examiner
Robin-Eve Jasper will leave D.C. Department of Real Estate Services - DeBonis (Washington Post)
Social services with nowhere else to go end up at D.C. General complex - Washington Post
How can DC fix the liquor license process? - Greater Greater Washington
Politics / Metro / Other
Washington Teachers' Union president George Parker loses run-off election - Washington Post
Henderson: "data craziness" is taking a toll - D.C. Wire (Washington Post blog)
Why the Statehood Green Party is 'withering into near-oblivion' - DeBonis (Washington Post)
D.C.-area home prices lead nation in September - Washington Business Journal
D.C. hotels poised for growth in 2011 - Washington Business Journal
Restaurant business back on track - Washington Business Journal
Veterans Affairs signs fourth NoMa lease - Washington Business Journal
Missed
Can free-spending D.C. Council stick to budgeting basics? - Examiner
Of Interest (links only)
Post Watch: Barbarians at the Gate
New digital news sites are raiding the Washington Post's readers and profits —and grabbing some of its best reporters
By Harry Jaffe
Washingtonian
November 2010
Budget
D.C. budget plan triggers debate on possible tax hike
By Nikita Stewart
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/30/AR2010113006474.html
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/30/AR2010113006474.html
Wednesday, December 1, 2010; B05
D.C. Council members debated a possible income tax increase Tuesday as a stream of advocates for low-income residents, small-business owners, labor leaders and others lamented the proposed cuts in Mayor Adrian M. Fenty's gap-closing budget plan.
At the all-day hearing, some council members and advocates called Fenty's spending plan shortsighted and unfair, setting a stage for likely measures that would squeeze more dollars out of the city's wealthier households to help close an estimated $188 million budget deficit.
Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6) said the mayor's approach significantly reduces programs in human services, but "at the same time, I haven't been asked to pay one additional cent."
"This is one village, and we're all in this together," said Wells, chairman of the Committee on Human Services.
Fenty's spending blueprint keeps his promise of no new taxes by mainly relying on program cuts, such as $2.4 million from job training for adults, $2.6 million from financial assistance to grandparents caring for children and $2 million from placement services for developmentally disabled residents. In his plan, the mayor also calls for reducing the popular summer jobs program and delaying the start of a program requiring public schools to serve students more healthful meals.
At Tuesday's hearing, the most discussed possible tax increase was a 1 percent hike in income taxes for those earning more than $200,000. No council member has introduced legislation seeking the increase, but the possibility alone triggered intense debate.
In one of the more heated exchanges, council member David A. Catania (I-At Large) challenged conclusions presented by Ed Lazere, executive director of the D.C. Fiscal Policy Institute, which conducts research on city budget and tax issues. In making the case for a 1 percent tax hike, Lazere said that, according to a city analysis, the increase would generate $75 million. But Catania labeled the figure as "false," saying his calculation showed the increase would generate just $6 million for the remainder of fiscal 2011.
After he testified, Lazere provided a written analysis from the office of the chief financial officer showing that a 1 percent increase on residents earning $200,000 or more would produce $45 million in fiscal 2011 and an additional $66 million in fiscal 2012. The D.C. Office of Tax and Revenue shows that about 12,000 District income tax filers in 2008 earned more than $200,000.
When he released his plan last week, Fenty said his budget proposal represented "tough decisions" during an economic downturn. "These are tough economic times for residents across the city, and we cannot afford to ask them to shoulder a bigger financial burden," Fenty said. "We found efficiencies and cut nonessential spending in a plan that will keep our government moving without harming service delivery."
Tuesday's council debate mirrored arguments among council members in May, when the mayor and council were shaping the fiscal 2011 budget. At that time, the council rejected a proposal by council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) to raise the income tax rate on residents earning $350,000 or more a year to 8.9 percent. (Currently, the rate for residents making more than $40,000 is 8.5 percent.)
Six months and an election later, the city government is now faced with an estimated $188 million deficit in that same budget. Graham likened Fenty's plan to "Reaganomics," saying the theory that the wealth of rich residents would "trickle down" to the less fortunate doesn't work.
Council member Marion Barry (D-Ward 8) said the mayor's lame-duck status gave him cover. "This is what I call a 'don't care budget.' He has nothing to lose by proposing this budget," Barry said.
Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray, who takes office as mayor in January, did not voice an opinion on the potential tax increase. In May, he voted against Graham's legislation.
Gray began Tuesday's hearing by saying he was expecting witnesses to say, "Don't cut this. Don't cut that."
"Many of these decisions are going to be tough," he said. "Everyone is going to have to take a hit."
He later said that the tone for the day was set by Judith Sandalow, executive director of the Children's Law Center, the largest legal services nonprofit in the city. She said the slashing of assistance to grandparents, "which will certainly lead some families into homelessness and some children into foster care, is akin to cutting off a limb."
But Sandalow also presented a list of alternative cuts, including administrative reviews that she said could save $1 million.
Some council members offered more ideas about revenue enhancements.
Catania said he would support an across-the-board income tax increase, such as an additional $25 on every $10,000 earned. Council member Jack Evans (D-Ward 2), chairman of the Committee on Finance and Revenue, suggested that District employees who do not live in the city take a pay reduction and that contractors take a 10 percent cut in current agreements with the District.
Graham noted that the tax on parking in downtown garages has not been increased since 1976. He said any increase would affect commuters most.
Raising the garage tax from its current 12.5 percent rate to 18 percent could result in $19 million in annual revenue, according to data provided by Graham. The amount does not account for the loss of customers who could balk at an increase.
Fenty seeks cuts in jobs, services to fix budget gap
Others look to taxes, fees
The Washington Times
7:13 p.m., Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Mayor Adrian M. Fenty has proposed his plan to right-size an unbalanced budget, which the public scrutinized Tuesday during a D.C. Council hearing at which several lawmakers and stakeholders proposed a host of new taxes and fees.
Mr. Fenty's plan to close a $188 million budget gap for 2010 slashes agency budgets - including police, schools and social services - by $161 million. But with lawmakers, unlike the lame-duck mayor, still facing a potential $375 million deficit for 2011 when budget deliberations begin anew in the spring, city leaders are weighing raising current taxes and imposing new ones to push back spending pressures.
They also want to work around a federal law that prohibits the city from levying property taxes on federally owned land and on such federally protected entities as Fannie Mae and the Daughters of the American Revolution.
"We need to start to be more creative about making folks pay a fair share," said Democrat Mary Cheh of Ward 3. "They should pay something in lieu of taxes."
Union Station was cited an example. The rail station is exempt from property taxes because it is situated on federal land, but lobbyist David Wilmot urged the council to pass legislation that would tax Union Station businesses.
A new land-use levy imposed on the businesses could "generate about $10 million to $11 million this budget year," Mr. Wilmot testified, urging lawmakers to move quickly "with Republicans coming into [Capitol] Hill."
While the District is bound by law to sustain a balanced budget, city officials also are moving with a sense of urgency because the Republicans who won a House majority last month already have vowed stricter oversight of D.C. affairs.
Some D.C. leaders revealed their tax-raising strategy on Tuesday.
"There are taxes other than income we can consider," said Democrat Jim Graham of Ward 1, who also plans to reintroduce legislation that would raise income taxes on wealthy residents. "The Off-Street Vehicle Storage and Use Tax principally involves downtown garages. It is 12 percent and has not changed since 1976 and is principally paid by commuters. Raising the rate to 18 percent would produce $19 million annually."
Mr. Graham and Michael A. Brown resurrected their arguments to raise taxes on the wealthy.
Council member David A. Catania, at-large independent, said he and his colleagues shouldn't engage in "class-warfare finger-pointing" and proposed "modest, broad-based" tax increases.
Not all stakeholders agreed with the lawmakers' tax-and-spend direction.
The council "should institute an across-the-board spending cut," said Robert Brannum, president of the D.C. Federation of Civic Associations.
"Folks at the top of the income bracket have their attackers, and folks at the bottom have their defenders, but folks in the middle are fighting for survival," said Mr. Brannum as people scheduled to testify streamed in and out of the council chamber.
The witness list included more than 160 stakeholders eager to testify on the mayor's plan, which also proposes eliminating 250 jobs.
Pay freezes and governmentwide furloughs of city workers also are on the table, although teachers are exempt because of a hard-fought contract negotiated by Interim Schools Chancellor Kaya Henderson during the Rhee administration.
Long before Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray, the mayor-elect, began the hearing, the council chamber was packed with social-service advocates ready to reject out of hand what Mr. Fenty deemed the "very tough but necessary decisions" to produce a balanced budget in the final weeks of his administration.
The mayor cut some of the same programs for which many of the advocates had fought during budget deliberations in May.
Lawmakers hope to have a final budget-cutting package ready for Mr. Fenty's signature before they recess for Christmas.
D.C. needs to cut up the credit cards
Examiner
Andrian Fenty's final budget proposal as mayor does not include tax increases but does cut some popular programs.
There's good news and bad news in Mayor Adrian Fenty's last budget proposal as chief executive of the District of Columbia.
The good news is that the revised fiscal 2011 budget does not include any tax increases for D.C. residents. In October, Fenty also ordered city agencies to cut their total expenditures by 10 percent and issued a mayoral order freezing government hiring.
However, cuts to popular programs were also needed to plug a $188 million budget hole. These cuts are not only necessary, but many are long overdue, including a major reduction in the mayor's Summer Youth Employment Program. The revised budget scales the summer jobs program back to the original six weeks and limits it to 12,000 participants instead of the free-for-all that went millions over budget and paid teenagers to do nothing.
Council members will soon be besieged by advocates for this and other programs on the chopping block. But they need to keep their focus on the big picture.
In the past six months, Chief Financial Officer Natwar Gandhi reduced the city's 11.75 percent debt load, which was perilously close to its 12 percent borrowing limit, to 10 percent. But this feat was not accomplished by paying down the debt or negotiating more favorable interest rates. No, Gandhi merely extended the timeline so that the city will be paying interest only for the next five years, shifting the repayment burden to future taxpayers for money that the D.C. government has already spent and ensuring that any future borrowing will be at higher interest rates.
This fiscal year, D.C. taxpayers will pay $412.9 million to service $7 billion in long-term debt, including the city-built baseball stadium. Compare that figure to the $6 million the mayor wants to cut from the Department of Transportation's sidewalk, road and alley repaving fund. D.C.'s capital plan already contains hundreds of millions of dollars worth of major renovation projects, including a makeover of the central library and the Metropolitan Police Department headquarters that will keep city residents in hock for decades to come.
A city that has to resort to payment extensions to meet its basic debt obligations has no business spending additional money on a streetcar system, a city-financed hotel, a new soccer stadium or any of the myriad "economic development" ideas that depend on other people's money for their success.
Cutting grandparent subsidy is penny wise, pound foolish
When revenue declines, municipal spending must go down, too, but certain cuts can be penny wise and pound foolish. That's certainly the case with Mayor Adrian Fenty's proposal to reduce subsidies to D.C. grandparents raising their children's children.
To receive the subsidy, grandparents must be D.C. residents for more than six months, have a court order making them the primary caretaker of grandchildren under 18, and be eligible for welfare. Besides being old and poor, many caretaker grandparents are often in poor health, greatly increasing the burden of caring for youngsters.
A previous Fenty administration proposal to cut subsidies to foster parents was quickly abandoned, even though foster care subsidies in D.C. are among the highest in the nation.
"The paradox is that the worse the option is, the more it costs. There's plenty of room to cut by getting kids out of institutions and group homes and cutting stranger care rates," Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, told The Examiner.
"They can get away with targeting grandparents because it's much easier politically. But it's cruel to children and fiscally stupid," Wexler said.
Last year, 2,144 District children were living with strangers after being removed from their homes. More than half had been in foster care for more than two years, according to the Department of Child and Family Services' 2009 annual report.
That same report acknowledged that "children living in traditional foster care are four times more likely to experience a placement disruption than children living in kinship care."
Foster care should be the last resort, but is often the first. "If you must take a child away from birth parents, there are only bad options. The least bad is kinship care," Wexler pointed out. "Multiple studies have shown that kinship care is more stable and better for the well-being of children, but more importantly, it's safer than state care.
"One major study found that foster care churns out walking wounded four times out of five, due to the fact that the child is separated from everybody he knows and loves and is moved from foster home to foster home. Fenty's war against grandparents will make both of these things worse."
Since kinship care is by far the best option for abused and neglected children, why does Fenty's revised FY2011 budget target it for a 50 percent reduction? "Every other constituent in the foster care industrial complex has a big lobby," Wexler explained.
"Grandparents are almost always poor. But all of the studies show that they are vastly better in caring for children because they have one thing that is usually missing from stranger care: They love their grandchildren," he said.
If the subsidy is cut, many grandparents will eventually be forced to return their vulnerable grandkids to the foster care system, where 80 percent will be emotionally traumatized by the experience, even though top foster care expert Vivek Sankaran estimates that only 6 to 7 percent of children in the foster care system need to be there in the first place.
Cutting the grandparent subsidy in half will save District taxpayers a paltry $2.6 million out of a $6.2 billion budget. But they eventually will wind up paying far more than that when these alienated, damaged children enter public school and tangle with the criminal justice system. "By then, it won't be Fenty's problem," Wexler says.
It will be Mayor-elect Vincent Gray's problem. But it shouldn't be hard for Gray to do the best thing for at-risk children when it also happens to be the cheapest.
Barbara F. Hollingsworth is The Examiner's local opinion editor.
Proposed Gap-Closing Plan Relies Heavily On Cuts
All Areas of the Budget Would Be Affected, But Low-Income Residents Bear the Brunt
by Elissa Silverman | November 29th, 2010
DC Fiscal Policy Institute
Mayor Fenty’s proposal to address a $188 million budget shortfall for the current budget year continues a pattern of balancing the budget largely with cuts in services. The proposal would scale back a wide array of services — from street and alley paving to libraries to adult job training. Yet the largest share of the cuts — 39 percent— would fall on services for low-income residents, even though these programs represent just 26 percent of the locally funded budget and have been cut substantially over the past three years.
More than half of the gap-closing — $111 million — would come from cuts in a broad range of services, according to an analysis by the DC Fiscal Policy Institute. The proposal also reflects $32 million in reduced expenses for certain services, $19 million in greater use of federal funds, and $21 million from tapping unspent resources in special funds. Only $2.5 million would come from new fees – an increase in DC’s hospital tax from $1,500 per licensed bed to $2,000, and an increase in parking rates at Metro lots. (Other measures listed as “revenue initiatives” mainly reflect tapping resources from existing special accounts.) This means that the proposal includes more than $40 in spending cuts for every $1 in revenue increases.
The new proposal cuts even deeper into city agencies that have already seen budgets reduced over the past three years due to the Great Recession. The Fiscal Year 2011 budget approved last spring was already $600 million lower than the budget in Fiscal Year 2008, adjusting for inflation. The Mayor’s new proposal to close the FY 2011 budget gap would make further cuts in a wide array of services: adult job training, tree trimming and planting, police training, out-of-school-time programs, arts funding, affordable housing, child care, and small business assistance, among others. It would halt implementation of the new Healthy Schools Act, which is intended to increase the nutritional quality of school meals. And it would require DC government employees to pay a higher share of their health care costs.
Yet while the proposed cuts would affect all parts of the city’s budget, they would fall most heavily on services for DC’s lowest-income residents.
More than One-Third of the Cuts Would Affect Services for Low-Income Residents: Some $43 million of the cuts – 39 percent – would affect low-income programs, even though these programs make up just 26 percent of DC’s locally funded budget. The cuts to low-income services far exceed the proposed cuts to other program areas.
The low-income cuts would affect services that meet residents’ most basic needs. The proposal would cut cash assistance to poor families with children, to poor residents with disabilities, and to grandparents caring for grandchildren. It would also cut funding for housing assistance, child care, and energy assistance, among other programs.
Wearing Solutions on Your Sleeve, Plus: David Catania’s Greatest Hits
Housing Complex (Washington City Paper)
Today is gap-closing day at the Wilson Building, where Councilmembers are grappling with the question of how to find $188 million–the difference between revenues and expenses in the FY 2011 budget. The Fenty administration came up with a few suggestions for how that should happen, but since the Council can basically throw them out the window, the debate is just getting started.
To inform their deliberations, 144 people signed up to make the case for their respective line items. The smarter ones didn't just say why funding for environmental programs, small business assistance, job training, etc. must be kept, but also where else to cut to make up the difference. TheConsortium for Child Welfare put some math on a t-shirt: $5 million in dog parks plus $10 million in money for streetcars equals $15 million: The shortfall for the Child and Family Services Agency.
The point is well-taken: We shouldn't be spending on things we could get by without when the most vulnerable need help. But it's unfortunate that the most high-profile projects–which, long term, will create more value and drive investment–must be pitted against social services.
Almost Mayor Vince Gray has promised to scour the budget for efficiencies that will save the most money and cause the least pain. The alternative to cuts, of course, is coming up with "revenue enhancements"–i.e. taxes–which Fenty's proposal largely avoids. Councilmembers Michael Brown and Jim Grahamhave been particularly outspoken about the need to raise taxes on the wealthy. Several advocates at today's hearing were wearing a "1%" sticker on their lapels, signifying support for hiking income taxes on those who earn more than $200,000 per year from 8.5 percent to 9.5 percent. According to the Chief Financial Officer's Office of Revenue Analysis, that would raise $180.4 million over FY 2011, 2012, and 2013.
Councilmember David Catania was not having it. In fine form today, the former Republican launched into a series of diatribes against the new tax bracket idea, favoring instead a plan to raise taxes by a smaller amount across the board. Herewith, a few highlights:
Transition
D.C. Mayor-elect Gray to make 1st White House visit Wednesday, meet with Obama
By Tim Craig
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/30/AR2010113003962.html
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/30/AR2010113003962.html
Tuesday, November 30, 2010; 9:31 PM
D.C. Mayor-elect Vincent C. Gray is billing it as a "get-to-know-ya meeting."
On Wednesday, Gray (D) will make his first visit to the White House for a luncheon with the man who will soon be his most famous and powerful constituent, President Obama.
Gray's 45-minute visit with Obama will mark what many believe will be the incoming mayor's best opportunity to make his case about what he and the residents of the District expect from the president. Obama still holds considerable clout over how the mayor and D.C. Council spend tax dollars and use the powers granted to them under Home Rule.
Gray, who has had only two fleeting introductions to Obama, said he will use the lunch - in a small private dining room near the Oval Office - to try "to establish a relationship that will have substantiative, enduring, value for the city."
Although Gray is finalizing his talking points for the meeting, he said he would probably bring up voting rights, federal funding for early childhood education and the planned relocation of the Department of Homeland Security to the campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital in Southeast Washington.
The leaders of D.C. Vote have told Gray to ask Obama to publicly pledge to veto any bill that includes language that would undo local laws, such as the city's support for same-sex marriage, medical marijuana and needle exchange.
But Gray, the D.C. Council chairman who will be sworn in as mayor Jan. 2, said the meeting's goal is to make a new friend. "I want to have the kind of relationship where we can have a free exchange," Gray said. "I would want this to be episodic."
Julius W. Hobson Jr., a consultant who headed the city's intergovernmental affairs office in the late 1980s, said Gray should strive to continue what has been steady improvement over the years in relationships between presidents and D.C. mayors.
In the 1980s, then-President Ronald Reagan (R) took little interest in District affairs and had almost no interaction with then-Mayor Marion Barry (D), Hobson said.
Things improved under President George H.W. Bush (R). But Hobson said the real breakthrough in presidential-mayoral relationships occurred after Bill Clinton's election to the White House in 1992.
"Most people don't realize Clinton and Marion got along really well," said Hobson, noting Clinton's election marked the second time since Home Rule that a Democrat sat in the White House.
Even though George W. Bush's election as president in 2000 ushered the GOP back into dominance of the federal government, Hobson said Bush and Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) strengthened their ties following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. And after Obama's 2008 election set off a wave of excitement across the heavily Democratic District, he invited Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) to a well-publicized lunch at Ben's Chili Bowl a few days before the inauguration.
"We've had this trend going, and Gray will want to continue that," Hobson said. "One way you will know if Gray's meeting has gone well is if [Obama] refers to him as 'my mayor.' "
However, local elected officials and observers said Gray shouldn't be too confident in his ability to become instant buddies with the president. Instead, they said, Gray's lunch could be his one and only shot to press the District's case with Obama.
And with Obama weakened politically after the Republicans' success in gaining control of the House in the Nov. 2 elections, observers said Gray would have to be careful how he uses his brief seat at the table.
"It's an entirely different meeting than if it happened in 2009" when the Democrats controlled both the House and Senate, said Chuck Thies, a local political strategist. "It's important not to ask the president what he can't deliver."
With the District facing a budget shortfall that could top $500 million over Gray's four-year term, city leaders say his biggest need from the president is more federal funding. However, Obama and GOP leaders have signaled a renewed focus on deficit reduction, including the White House proposal to freeze the salaries of federal workers for two years.
A more traditional request would be to ask the president to help advance the city's push for statehood or voting rights in Congress. But elected officials and observers are at odds over how many of Gray's precious minutes with the president should be used talking about an issue unlikely to advance under a GOP-controlled House.
Ilir Zherka, executive director of D.C. Vote, said his organization understands the city's struggle for voting rights now faces a more complicated political environment on Capitol Hill. But he said he has spoken to Gray about asking Obama to publicly pledge to veto any bill "that comes to him and changes local D.C. law."
Thies said the key to a successful meeting will be for Gray not to "blindside the president" or ask him "for something he can't deliver."
"This is a rare opportunity. I believe this will be Vince Gray's only meaningful meeting with the president between now and the end of Obama's first term," Thies said. "You don't want to walk out of that meeting and say, 'Oh, man, why didn't I bring this up?' "
Gray, however, isn't so sure that Wednesday's meeting will be his only face time with the president. He said he plans to ask Obama to tour the city with him. Gray also wants to invite him to walk over someday - drive if it makes the Secret Service happier - to the John A. Wilson city building about two blocks from the White House gates.
"It is my understanding that no sitting president has ever been in this building in 102 years," Gray said.
Staff writer Ann E. Kornblut contributed to this report.
Are people missing Adrian Fenty already?
Examiner
Wait one minute.
Why are so many people decrying the slow pace of Mayor-elect Vincent Gray's transition? Weren't they the ones who claimed they wanted an executive with a more deliberative, inclusive, transparent style?
Mayor Adrian Fenty hasn't even left city hall and already people are missing his lightning-swift governing approach. Everyone seems to be remembering that around this time in 2006, he already had selected key personnel including his city administrator, chief of staff, chief of police, and deputy mayor for economic development. He also had begun an aggressive push of his first major legislative agenda: education reform.
But, in fairness, Fenty had a lot of time to think about what he wanted to do. He had started his campaign, albeit unofficially, two years earlier. On the other hand, Gray was indecisive for several months. He announced his candidacy only six months before the September primary. And, he probably didn't believe he would really defeat Fenty's muscular green machine. Weeks after the general election, Gray still may be pinching himself.
More seriously, the reason for Gray's glacial transition could be that in conducting a full and fair assessment -- outside the hot, angry rhetoric of a political campaign -- of key personnel in the Fenty administration, he has come to realize the young pol constructed a fairly decent management team. That fact is underscored by responses from District residents in earlier citywide polls, which indicated they liked the direction Fenty was taking the city -- even if they didn't fancy his style.
So, why switch out Department of Motor Vehicles Director Lucinda Babers, who has made marked improvements, nearly silencing decades of complaints about long lines and poor service?
City Administrator Neil Albert, Health Department Director Dr. Pierre Vigilance, procurement chief David Gragan, Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs Director Linda Argo, public works' Bill Howland and Planning Director Harriet Tregoning have done great jobs. Why kick them to the curb?
District residents have made clear they like the job Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy Lanier is doing. While Gabe Klein may seem obsessed with bike lanes, his Department of Transportation has made the city more livable for everyone -- not just people in cars who can't wait to race back to Maryland or Virginia at the end of the workday. And, if you like the results of education reform, there is reason to retain Deputy Mayor for Education Victor Reinoso.
Sure, there are a few Fenty managers who should be shown the door immediately. For example, Valerie Santos, deputy mayor for economic development and planning, is high on my list. Department of Employment Services Director Joseph P. Walsh Jr. may be a good guy, but the agency hasn't improved much.
Still, the notion that a new mayor is somehow required to eject effective managers because political retreads and ambitious wannabes are salivating in queue for government jobs and contracts is so 20th century. Gray should resist following that worn tradition.
D.C. Government
D.C. board of elections wants to expand early voting
The D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics wants to expand access to early voting sites, the agency's director said Tuesday.
"Early voting was an unmitigated success," board director Rokey Suleman said during a D.C. Council hearing. "We're now getting demands for it in other wards."
This fall was the first time the city allowed early voting. It was available two weeks before election day during the primary election and at one site before the general election. Early voting spread to four other sites across the city one week before Nov. 2.
Suleman said he would like to expand early voting centers to each of the city's eight wards if money is available. It costs the city about $40,000 for one week with four sites open.
"It's something the District should be proud of and we'd like to move forward with expanding it," he said.
At-large Councilman Phil Mendelson has introduced a bill that would cut the early voting period from two weeks to one.
Suleman said he doesn't believe that's necessary, partly because there's only one voting site open two weeks in advance.
About 25 percent of voters cast their ballots early in the primary and in the general election. Suleman said he believes, based on what's happened in other jurisdictions, that as many as 50 percent of voters will choose to vote early as residents become more aware of the option.
Robin-Eve Jasper will leave D.C. Department of Real Estate Services
By Mike DeBonis
DeBonis (Washington Post)
November 30, 2010; 12:31 PM ET
A key agency head for Mayor Adrian M. Fenty has announced that she is leaving her job ahead of Vincent Gray's Jan. 2 ascent to the mayoralty.
Robin-Eve Jasper, director of the Department of Real Estate Services, will leave her post at the end of next month, vacating a little-publicized but powerful post in the city bureaucracy.
Washington City Paper's Lydia DePillis first reported rumors of Jasper's departure this morning. Jasper confirmed the news in a brief interview.
Jasper joins Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee, Attorney GeneralPeter Nickles, Fire Chief Dennis Rubin and District SecretaryStephanie Scott in announcing her departure.
When she started, Jasper's department was called the Office of Property Management; last year, its name was changed to reflect the rather broad responsibilities involved in managing more than 20 million square feet of office space.
Under her watch, the city moved to consolidate its leased space -- a politically tricky ordeal when much of that space is leased from politically connected developers. Jasper also began an effort to systematically review and enforce the city's long-term leases -- an effort that netted more than $1 million and won publicity this month after Nickles took aim at developer and Fenty foe R. Donahue Peebles. The department has also been ground zero in the Fenty administration's efforts to reduce the government's "fixed costs" of doing business, and Jasper inherited controversial and troubled ventures, including the rebuilding of Eastern Market, the construction of a forensics laboratory and a costly lease on the former Washington Star printing plant on Virginia Avenue SE.
Before joining the real-estate department, Jasper was a top aide to Deputy Mayor Neil Albert, who is now city administrator. Jasper came to city government after a career as a development attorney and executive; she declined to discuss what she'll be doing next.
Social services with nowhere else to go end up at D.C. General complex
By Nathan Rott
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/30/AR2010113005858.html
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/30/AR2010113005858.html
Tuesday, November 30, 2010; 10:59 PM
Michael Poindexter's first memory of D.C. General Hospital is the waiting. For hours, he and his family sat in the "crazy waiting room," holding out for a doctor to check on his little brother, who had swallowed a tooth. That was in the late 1970s, when Poindexter was in elementary school and the hospital saw thousands of patients a month.
Poindexter and his family relied on the much-maligned but affordable hospital in Southeast Washington for the benign, such as the swallowed tooth, and the traumatic, such as when Poindexter was stabbed and when he was shot.
He'd rather have gone to any other hospital, he said, but for many Washingtonians who lacked money or insurance, D.C. General was not merely the city's hospital of last resort, it was the hospital of only resort. "We had nowhere else to go," Poindexter said.
Nearly a decade after the hospital closed, people with nowhere else to go still end up on the 67-acre campus of what was once the city's only full-service public hospital. Today D.C. General - located near the Anacostia River between Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium and Congressional Cemetery - is "a dumping ground for services that other people don't want," said D.C. Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6).
Within the complex's rusted fences are the city's jail, its correctional treatment facility and a halfway house; the medical examiner's office and the morgue; a warehouse and a boiler plant; methadone, STD, detox and tuberculosis clinics; an emergency psychiatric treatment center; and a 100-bed women's shelter and the District's largest shelter for homeless families, which holds up to 135 families and 100 single men in the coldest months.
Last winter, the city's unwanted snow was hauled to the campus parking lots and dumped in massive mounds.
At D.C. General, Poindexter is still waiting, this time for a permanent home.
Thirty-nine years after he was born in the hospital's obstetrics unit, 21 years after watching his mother die in its intensive-care unit, Poindexter and his three children last summer moved into the Family Emergency Shelter in the decaying old hospital building.
Their bedroom, inpatient Room 509, is packed with four dorm-style beds and three wooden dressers. Their dining room is the old cafeteria. Their entryway is a long, dimly lit tiled hall lined with locked doors labeled "Fracture Room," "Cast Change Room," and "X-Ray."
Every time he walks in, he gets depressed, Poindexter said. "They closed this place down for a reason," he said, waving his hand at the sprawling parking lots, run-down brick buildings and the grassy tracts that have become his front yard. "If they wasn't going to tear it down, leave it closed. Turning it into a shelter is like going backwards."
Bleak history
It's hard to describe the decay of D.C. General as a fall from grace because that would indicate that it once possessed some.
The Washington Infirmary, the first incarnation of D.C. General, was established with a congressional appropriation of $2,000 in 1806. It offered free health care to the city's poor at a downtown location near today's convention center. In 1843, it was renamed Washington Asylum Hospital and moved to its current location, then an isolated section of farmland on the western shore of the Anacostia.
A quarantine station, disinfection plant, crematorium and smallpox hospital - the unwanted social services of the 19th century - soon followed.
For the next 150 years, the complex would suffer from a lousy reputation. The Washington Post in 1920 described the hospital as "totally inadequate facilities for the relief of suffering and proper care of the sick."
Two name changes and 81 years later, in 2001, D.C. General (the name since 1953) was described in the same way. But this time inpatient services were ending, effectively closing the hospital.
"It was definitely in terrible shape," said Robert Malson, president of the D.C. Hospital Association since 1997. Renovations had been delayed and repairs stalled. Entire sections of the hospital were closed off.
Even then, its emergency room saw more than 51,000 people in 1999, making it the city's second-busiest trauma center.
D.C. General, Malson said, was the physical embodiment of a "philosophical belief that we as a society have the moral obligation to give health care to citizens who can't provide it for themselves."
But the hospital gobbled up tens of millions in taxpayer dollars every year. In 2000, with the District facing a projected $250 million budget shortfall, then-Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) pulled the plug, despite unanimous council disapproval and public outrage.
People asked: What would happen to the city's poor? What would happen to the surrounding land, known as Reservation 13?
They are still waiting for answers.
Unrealized visions
Frank Zampatori, 66, remembers the hospital's closing as the time he started hearing sirens again. Before that, "we had gotten so accustomed to them that we didn't even hear them," he said.
For 23 years, he has lived less than a block from Reservation 13, a parcel of land - now entirely city-owned - that includes the hospital and jail and stretches to the stadium and the riverbank.
As Zampatori saw it, the hospital's closing presented an opportunity. In 2002, as a member of the Stadium Armory Neighborhood Association, he helped develop a master plan that would "reenvision the site, not as a reservation but as a beautiful public place."
The plan, approved by the D.C. Council a year later, called for extending Massachusetts Avenue SE to the river and adding 800 residential units, a 1.2 million-square-foot health-care center, millions of square feet of office space and retail, and a 16-acre waterfront park.
"It was a wonderful and beautiful plan," said Colleen Garibaldi, a Hill East resident.
But the plan only "gathered considerable dust," said council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large).
Instead of a new hospital, a mixed-use development or a new stadium for the Washington Redskins (something council member Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) has long sought), residents of Hill East have seen temporary shelters become permanent and clinics expand.
In recent months, the methadone clinic, a squat brick building adjacent to one of the family shelters, more than doubled its clientele.
"We now have 500 methadone clients," Zampatori said, frustration in his voice. "When this started in 2001, the Nationals baseball stadium was not on anybody's radar, the development in Ward 1 wasn't on anybody's radar. We've seen things getting shuffled and moved into Ward 6."
As neighbors like to say: If you don't want it in your back yard, it ends up here.
'But we're helping'
In the early '90s, when Darlene Lawrence was a medical student at Georgetown University, she did her clinical rotations at D.C. General, which she remembers as a tough, bustling place, outdated and in disrepair. Jail inmates were treated while chained to gurneys. Victims of drive-by-shootings were dropped at the emergency room door.
Today, Lawrence is medical director of the Unity Health Care clinic, which offers free care to the uninsured and underinsured at the northern end of the old hospital. One floor below, old X-ray machines and radiology equipment collect dust.
When the hospital closed, Lawrence expected the city to raze the buildings and develop the area, to do "what D.C. loves to do," she said. So she was shocked to come back last January and see "a ghost town - all those windows boarded up."
The open windows were even scarier, she said. They meant people were living behind them.
In its first three months, the Unity clinic saw more than 3,600 patients - a reflection of the former hospital's clientele: nearly all African American and overwhelmingly poor.
"We're not filling the gap, but we're helping," said Meri Kolbrener, a doctor at the clinic. "People were waiting for something like this."
At 11 a.m. on a Tuesday, the waiting room is full. Two kids chase each other through the crowd of patients, most of them old and slumped in their seats, watching a cooking show on the overhead television.
Save for the occasional muffled cough, the buzz of the TV, and the muttering of people checking in, the cramped room remains quiet.
The people are patient. They are used to waiting.
How can DC fix the liquor license process?
Greater Greater Washington
A number of businesses' recent tangles with DC's liquor license process has clearly shown the need for reform. The long saga of Hank's Oyster Bar in Dupont Circle clearly demonstrates the flaws as well as some strengths of the current system.
Back in 2005, Jamie Leeds wanted to open a restaurant on Q Street NW just east of 17th Street. However, a number of residents oppose new liquor licenses on 17th. They fear, rightly or wrongly, that 17th could become entirely filled with bars, making it much noisier and pushing out other types of retailers.
Leeds negotiated a Voluntary Agreement with ANC 2B, specifying some limits. However, other residents weren't satisfied and wanted even stricter limits, and the ANC pulled out of the process. Leeds reached an agreement with a second group, and then yet a third pushed for even more, effectively "moving the goalposts" and stopping the restaurant from opening.
The Alcoholic Beverage Commission (ABC) Board, which adjudicates liquor license decisions, kept telling Leeds to continue negotiating with residents, as she explained at the ABC Board hearing (page 164-165). Her savings running out, she felt she had no choice but to agree to all of the demands, and finally opened the restaurant.
Today, Hank's is a very popular establishment that is almost always bustling and fills its patio in good weather with a mix of people having a good time and not causing trouble. Leeds secured the rights to expand into the vacant adjacent townhouse, but again faced the obstacles of the liquor license process.
The VA limited Hank's seating capacity, and some of the residents involved in the original VA weren't interested in allowing expansion. The ANC, on the other hand, didn't object to the expansion, and had previously endorsed the idea of some lateral expansions on 17th. The ABC Board had even extended 17th Street's liquor license moratorium only on the condition that up to 3 existing businesses be allowed to expand.
But in the VA process, any group of residents can force a hearing. After a months-long process, Leeds secured permission from the ABC Board to terminate the VA. All she had left to do was go through one more ABC Board hearing to actually modify the liquor license for an expanded business, and all would be well as far as most neighborhood residents were concerned.
However, another wrinkle suddenly appeared. In Dupont, the ANC habitually negotiates a VA with businesses in residential areas to end outdoor seating at 11 pm weeknights and midnight weekends, though they can stay open later indoors. This is a reasonable balance between the needs of residents and businesses; establishments can keep selling food and alcohol, but need to move inside to cut down on noise. This had been part of Leeds' VA.
The placards Hank's posted for its license renewal included the previous 11 pm and midnight hours. But when the ABC Board terminated the VA, they said Hank's hours could automatically revert to the maximum legal hours of 2 am weekdays, 3 am weekends as in their original 2005 application, and Hank's attorney Andrew Kline started suggesting the restaurant might stay open later. This threatened to undermine the neighborhood consensus in favor of Hank's expansion and the support of all those who had defended Leeds.
To preserve this neighborhood policy, the ANC suddenly had to reverse course and"protest" the license. Now the ANC, formerly an ally, suddenly looked to be an opponent. Fortunately, Hank's agreed to keep its hours at the neighborhood standard, and the ANC expects to support that at a special meeting Wednesday.
What's wrong with this process? Fundamentally, it hasn't effectively handled this situation where most residents support the license or the change with some limited restrictions, while others want no change or no establishment in the first place.
Some think VAs should be abolished altogether. However, DC can help businesses secure their liquor licenses more smoothly without throwing out this tool which is often very useful. Here are some steps the DC Council and/or the ABC Board can take.
Combine hearings and speed them up. If it concludes soon, the entire Hank's process will have consumed an entire year and many, many hours of legal bills. Yet the current proposal is identical to the original one. It shouldn't take so long to make a change.
This process included a number of separate hearings on different segments of the process, such as first removing the VA and then making the change to the license itself. All of these steps could be condensed into a single step. The establishment can put up its required placards to notify neighbors of the proposal, give a reasonable amount of time for people to weigh in, and then have one hearing to listen to testimony and make a decision.
Don't wait for agreement before holding the hearing. The ABC Board back in 2005 hurt Leeds by delaying action on her application until all protesting residents could agree. The fact is that in many cases, there are a few people who won't go along with even an overwhelming consensus.
The board should schedule its hearing and encourage the applicant to work out agreements with others, but if they can't satisfy everyone, the hearing should happen and the board can judge protestants' arguments for themselves. To its credit, the ABC Board has been moving much faster in recent years.
Clearly limit the parameters of VAs. Hank's VA not only regulated hours of operation and seating, but also prohibited any lettering on umbrellas besides the restaurant's name, and demanded certain kinds of materials in tree boxes. These issues should be covered by historic preservation, if at all, not enforced by ABRA (the agency that enforces liquor licenses) and negotiated in the VA.
Elsewhere, some neighborhoods groups of residents or ANCs have asked for requirements that the owner attend certain meetings, join certain organizations, donate to certain local nonprofits, or not play certain kinds of music. ABRA should define a clear set of restrictions that VAs may or may not contain.
VAs are often very long. ABRA could create a very simple one-page form that has checkboxes and spaces to fill in specific parameters: hours inside and out, amount of sitting and standing capacity, whether amplified music can be played, etc. A fairly small write-in space can accommodate any other items, but the vast majority of VAs should be able to simply use this basic form.
Require more residents closer to an establishment to protest. Today, as few as 5 residents can file a protest, and they can live as far away as 600 feet (1.6 football fields). With Hank's, the lead protestants lived 280 feet away and others lived even farther, while two directly across the street spoke in support. Protests other than ones filed by the ANC should require a greater number of protestants from a more immediate radius.
Encourage ANCs to define neighborhood-wide principles for VAs. Today, an ANC has to formally "protest" every liquor license application if it wants to get a VA. This makes the process unnecessarily adversarial. It also has to make this decision on a case by case basis. New business owners often don't know ahead of time what the ANC will or won't protest.
Instead of having every decision made case by case, ABRA could work with ANCs to define a reasonable and general policy about which VA parameters they'd protest and which they wouldn't. This could become a sort of default VA. For example, in Dupont, the general principle could be that outdoor hours are limited to 11 and 12 north of N Street or New Hampshire Avenue, but not limited in the Golden Triangle.
Applicants would get this information when first contacting ABRA. They wouldn't have to follow it, but could know that if the application fits within these parameters, the ANC wouldn't protest and ABRA could move a license application more quickly. The ABC Board could make a point to be more deferential to applications that do comply with this general policy.
On the flip side, if an application doesn't conform to them, ABRA would automatically assume there needs to be a hearing and the Board could give that more scrutiny. Prospective restaurateurs would know what the ANC is probably going to support and what they probably would not, and could write a business plan with more confidence about what would get approval.
Of course, ANCs shouldn't be able to set up a guideline saying that there should be no establishments at all, and applicants could apply for anything they wanted just as they can now. But if an ANC sets up reasonable parameters and is willing to apply them broadly, the ABC Board should give that "great weight."
Require the board to consider residents' needs when terminating a VA. The current law is vague about how the ABC Board should weigh the impact on residents when canceling a VA, as in the case of Hank's and the late night hours. They are required to consider it when granting a license, but that language lies in a different section of the law than the part about removing VAs. The Council should clarify this.
In theory, the process DC has makes sense. An applicant must notify neighbors. Neighbors can then ask for a hearing. Before the hearing, they can come to an agreement, which ABRA will enforce. If they don't, the ABC Board decides what to do at the hearing. The local ANC gets a louder say than others, but still doesn't decide on its own.
The problems come not from this process but when it doesn't work properly. If the ABC Board doesn't listen to reasonable ANCs pushing for sensible compromises, or refuses to overrule unreasonable neighbors, or allows outrageous provisions in VAs, or if the process takes too long, it can hurt businesses and neighborhoods.
DCPS / Politics / Metro / Other
Washington Teachers' Union president George Parker loses run-off election
By Bill Turque
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/30/AR2010113006044.html
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/30/AR2010113006044.html
Tuesday, November 30, 2010; 10:42 PM
Washington Teachers' Union President George Parker, who negotiated a lucrative contract for his members earlier this year but was unable to prevent the launch of a controversial new evaluation system introduced by former chancellor Michelle A. Rhee, lost his job Tuesday.
Parker's run-off loss to General Vice President Nathan Saunders, his most vociferous union critic, could trigger a new period of labor unrest in the D.C. public school system.
It was just eight months ago that the District and the union reached agreement on a game-changing contract that took two-and-a-half years and the services of a mediator to finalize. The pact gave teachers a 21 percent raise over five years - with additional money available through a performance pay system - but also weakened seniority and other traditional job protections.
With his defeat by a margin of 556 to 480, Parker joins Rhee and Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) as the third major figure to effectively be forced from office by political fallout from the 2007-2010 school-reform movement.
"Clearly the votes speak for themselves. That's a reality I accept," said Parker, 60, who has served as union president since early 2005. He said his campaign fell victim to apathy - turnout was about 25 percent of union membership - and anger from a segment of teachers over his support for some of the changes under Rhee.
"I think any union president that is pushing and getting in front of reform, you take a risk, and I took a risk," Parker said. "I don't feel bad about any of the decisions because I think ultimately to improve education in this country, union presidents are going to have to get in front of reform."
Saunders, 45, who will become president effective Wednesday for a three-year term, charged in his campaign that Parker gave up too much to Rhee at the bargaining table, with contract provisions that include more latitude for principals in hiring decisions. He also said Parker did too little to prevent Rhee's launch of IMPACT, the assessment system that dramatically shifted the way teachers are evaluated.
Saunders, who narrowly defeated Parker in a first round of balloting last month but failed to win a 51 percent majority, said D.C. teachers sent a firm message.
"The teachers are very clear about what they want," Saunders said. "Clearly this is a race about job security and about IMPACT."
The new system holds some teachers accountable for growth in student test scores and can lead to dismissal for teachers who don't meet a detailed series of criteria for classroom performance. Last summer, 126 educators were fired because of poor IMPACT ratings, a rarity in a school system where teachers were seldom dismissed for performance. Another estimated 700 instructors were judged "minimally effective" and face dismissal next summer unless they improve
Saunders has pledged to use "judicial, legislative and lobbying efforts" to overturn aspects of IMPACT that he regards as unfair, although the union is barred by law from negotiating the system with the District.
In addition to Saunders, the new slate of union officers taking over Wednesday includes Candi Peterson, general vice president; and Mignon Uzzel, recording secretary. In the original election on Oct. 27, Sallie Littlejohn won a clear majority of the votes and was elected WTU treasurer.
Tuesday's election result culminates months of bitter internal scuffling. Balloting was originally scheduled for May, with the winners taking office July 1. But a series of internal disputes over the composition of a union committee to oversee the election landed the matter in D.C. Superior Court.
In a lawsuit, Saunders accused the union executive board - which is friendly to Parker - of trying to subvert his candidacy by improperly eliminating his $131,000-a-year union salary and refusing to endorse renewal of his leave of absence from teaching duties. Parker and other union officials said Saunders had been delinquent in his duties as general vice president.
The American Federation of Teachersl the local union's national parent organization, ultimately intervened twice, taking over balloting to form a new internal elections committee and then administering the election itself. It also directed the Washington Teachers' Union to restore Saunders' pay and leave status. The union executive board has offered to reinstate Saunders, but without back pay. A federal court last month dismissed Saunders' challenge to the matter.
The contest is also the defining battle in a long series of skirmishes between Parker and Saunders. They were elected to union office as a reform ticket in 2005, after a financial scandal sent former president Barbara Bullock to federal prison and left the local in disarray. But differences between the two leaders over how to approach school reform - and how to deal with Rhee - ultimately drove them apart.
Saunders called the raises awarded to teacher in the new contract "blood money," financed through the improper layoffs of teachers in October 2009.
AFT president Randi Weingarten said the road to Tuesday's election was "long and difficult," but added: "It was worth going through an arduous process to assure that WTU members fully exercised their right to select their leaders."
Henderson: "data craziness" is taking a toll
By Bill Turque
D.C. Wire (Washington Post blog)
November 30, 2010; 12:59 PM ET
One month into the job, interim Chancellor Kaya Henderson is starting to take slow, careful steps out of Michelle Rhee's shadow. In an interview with WAMU that was aired this morning, Henderson said that an unhealthy emphasis on standardized test scores had evolved in the No Child Left Behind era. She told reporter Kavitha Cardoza that DCPS will continue to work toward steady growth in scores. Then she added:
"But I think we've gotten something wrong. Previously there was no measure of student achievement. We just sent kids to school and hoped for the best. And then the standards and accountability movement came along and said what doesn't get measured doesn't get done, so we have to test. And I think testing is incredibly important. But I also think that we have to help people understand that tests are a benchmark, not the goal. The goal is to educate children. And I think the swing of the pendulum from absolutely no accountability to what I might call data craziness is starting to hurt."
Henderson said test scores remain the most objective available indicator of academic growth across the school system. "But I feel like we have to make people understand that test scores are not the only thing happening in our classrooms," she said.
Asked if she wanted the chancellor's post on a permanent basis, Henderson said it was too early to tell--too early for Mayor-elect Vincent C. Gray to decide whether he wanted her and equally early for her to determine whether she was interested in the job.
"I think it's very important for Chairman Gray to feel like his pick is somebody that he has a good working relationship with. I've been on this job for 28 days. I don't think you can figure that out in that short a time. Likewise I have the same challenge....I have always said that I am a great number two and have not been interested in a number one position primarily because I like to keep my head down and do the work and don't have to deal with the politics, the media, the externalities. And I have to really think about what that change of role means for me."
Listen to the full interview here
Why the Statehood Green Party is 'withering into near-oblivion'
By Mike DeBonis
DeBonis (Washington Post)
November 30, 2010; 4:16 PM ET
My Friday not-a-column considered what value, if any, partisan races add to city politics, and it included a shot at the District's stalwart, perpetually third party: "The Statehood Green Party," I wrote, "has withered into near-oblivion."
The swipe earned a lengthy retort in the comments and in themail newsletter from David Schwartzman, the Howard University biology professor who has run twice now for an at-large council seat and who has been by far the most prominent face for the Statehood Greens of late.
Schwartzman criticized me and the Post for our "continued marginalization" of the Statehood Greens, aka the only party to take on the "urban structural adjustment program put in place by the Control Board regime, so essential needs like affordable housing and child care continue to be woefully underfunded in our budget."
"The Washington Post might try earning its reputation as the newspaper of record and fulfilling its social responsibility by making even the political playing field with meaningful coverage of issues, including voices of dissent from its own big corporate-driven discourse," he wrote.
Well. The Post, so far as I understand it, doesn't consider its "social responsibility" to be "making even the playing field" so much as it is to report on our world as it happens to exist. But Schwartzman is right to think that the Statehood Greens deserve more than a one-sentence dismissal.
By my reportorial standard -- that is, empirical reality -- there are several ways to describe the Statehood Green party's descent into "near-oblivion."
Some newer District resident might be prompted to ask -- when were the Statehood Greens not on the brink of oblivion? The party has a distinguished history of activism in this city that deserves respect, but I will only recount this fact: From Home Rule until 1999, the Statehood Party (it affiliated with the national Green Party in 1999) earned its relevance by holding one of the two minority-party at-large seats on the D.C. Council, held first by its founder, firebrand activist Julius Hobson Sr., and then for 22 years by Hilda Mason.
By virtually any standard since then, the Statehood Greens have withered.
First off, there's party registration. According to readily available statistics from the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics, which go back to 2003, Statehood Green registration peaked in 2004 with 5,215 registrees -- about 1.4 percent of the total. Since then, even as total voter registration has risen, the Statehood Greens have continued to shed followers. The current total stands at 4,333 registered voters, or 0.97 percent of the total.
Then there's actually holding public office. The Statehood Greens haven't held a seat since Mason was ousted from the council in 1998. A few party members hold nonpartisan advisory neighborhood commission seats, though two of them, Chris Otten and Nancy Shia, are leaving their seats this year. Schwartzman and others note that Statehood Green candidates have gotten more aggregate votes than Republican candidates in 2006 and 2010. True, but Republicans have not entered every city race in those years, while the Statehood Greens have been pretty good about finding people to run for office. (It helps that their ballot access is among the easiest in the city, currently needing only 44 registrant signatures for primary races.)
If you isolate the at-large council race -- in which the non-Democratic parties have a structural advantage due to the non-majority-party set-aside -- the Statehood Greens have shown no signs of being anything more than a receptacle for the ballots of voters who simply won't cast their second at-large vote for a Republican. In 2000, the year of Ralph Nader and the height of Green Party strength, the SG at-large candidate mustered 11 percent of the vote. That fell to 7.2 percent in 2002; 7.7 percent in 2004; 6.9 percent in 2006; 5.1 percent in 2008; and 6.8 percent this year (when there was no Republican in the race).
There's money. In the current election cycle, the Statehood Green party and its four local candidates who filed with campaign finance authorities raised about $18,000. Meanwhile, the D.C. Republican Committee and its candidates spent more than $115,000. Schwartzman bristles at politicians who take "corporate money" but fact of the matter is that, corporations or no corporations, Statehood Green candidates have been not able to get much fundraising traction outside of the party faithful. And when the party faithful amounts to less than 1 percent of the voting base, you've got a problem.
Finally, there's the conversation. The Statehood Greens simply aren't in it. Not so many years back, Statehood Green-affiliated activists managed to get attention to their message in creative ways -- crashing a ballpark press conference comes to mind. These days, you don't hear much of anything but whining like Schwartzman's about how the media doesn't want to cover them.
Political pros call newspaper and broadcast coverage "earned media" for a reason. The instructive example here is the city Republicans, who, post-Carol Schwartz, find themselves in a similar predicament as the post-Hilda Mason Statehooders. But the Republicans actually seem to have a strategy and the wherewithal to execute it. They have a message attuned to the city it inhabits -- libertarian on social issues, conservative on fiscal policy and bulldog-ish on honest government. It helps that the local GOP raises enough money to hire a full-time executive director whose job it is to keep pressure on the Democratic establishment -- and, through news releases, opposition research, publicity stunts and more, earns Republicans media coverage.
There is a place in the city political universe for a left flank to the Democratic establishment, but the Statehood Greens aren't providing it. Is it on environmental issues? If so, they've been pretty well co-opted by the Democrats, with council members Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3) andTommy Wells (D-Ward 6) leading the council's progressive wing. Is it budget equity for the poor? The leadership tends to come from ad hoc alliances such as the Fair Budget Coalition and Save Our Safety Net, with the D.C. Fiscal Policy Institute providing analytical backbone. Is it on statehood? Maybe, but the Statehood Greens simply haven't been able to organize a coherent alternative to the establishment voting-rights effort embodied by D.C. Vote and Eleanor Holmes Norton.
An even better indication that the Statehood Greens need to get their act together: Since the column ran Friday, only Schwartzman has bothered to dispute my assessment. None of the remaining 4,332 registered Statehood Green voters bothered to write or call.
D.C.-area home prices lead nation in September
Washington Business Journal - by Tucker Echols
Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 11:20am EST
Washington-area home prices posted the best advance in the nation in September, demonstrating strength at a time of general weakness.
The average price of a home in the Washington area rose 0.3 percent compared to Aug., according to the latest unadjusted data from the Standard & Poor's/Case Shiller 20-City Home Price Index. Nationally, prices fell 0.7 percent. Only one other market managed a gain during Sept. Las Vegas prices rose 0.2 percent.
Compared to a year ago, Washington-area prices advanced 4.5 percent, much more than the national gain of 0.6 percent, and third best among the top 20 markets. D.C. prices year-over-year trailed only San Francisco with an advance of 5.5 percent, and San Diego with a 5 percent gain.
The Washington area is also showing resilience over the longer haul as well. Prices held up the best nationwide over a two year period, down just 0.6 percent compared with Sept 2008. The national decline was 8.75 percent.
Compared to three years ago, D.C.-area prices fell 17.7 percent. That was the fifth smallest drop among the major markets and not nearly as bad as the national decline of 24.6 percent.
The S&P/Case-Shiller survey of 20 major U.S. cities uses the “repeat sales pricing technique” to measure housing markets. This method collects data on individual single-family home resales and uses those prices to calculate price declines or gains.
D.C. hotels poised for growth in 2011
Washington Business Journal - by Sarah Krouse
Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 11:03am EST - Last Modified: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 11:47am EST
The District’s hotels will benefit from a rise in conventions in 2011 that will mean more rooms booked by visitors to the city and higher rates per night, according to a report on the hotel market by Jones Lang LaSalle Inc.
The number of nights with more than 5,000 convention center room nights booked will rise by almost 50 percent in 2011 to nearly 180 nights out of the year.
Upscale and luxury hotels are poised for revenue per available room, or RevPAR, growth of 5 to 7 percent in the coming year.
With more convention events booked for the new year than in 2010 and no new rooms slated for delivery in 2011, that RevPAR growth will be driven more by an increase in average daily rates because of price compression than by marked occupancy growth, the report said.
The government per-diem rate for D.C. will likely decline by about 10 percent, compared with 2010 as a result of the public sector tightening its belt.
But with average daily rates rising citywide, the impact of those federal cutbacks will likely be minimal, and higher-end hotels will be in a better position to block out lower-paying government business. Pushing that government business to the suburban areas and select service hotels will buoy those property types.
Although there are no grand openings for D.C. hotels planned for 2011, about five hotels totaling 770 rooms will deliver in 2012.
Those deliveries include Castleton Holdings Inc.’s Capella Hotel Georgetown, a 48-room independent hotel at 1050 31st St. NW; OTO Development’s 204-room Hilton Garden Inn Washington NoMa at 100 M St. NW; and Monument Realty’s 196-unit Half Street Hotel at Half and M streets SE.
Future hotel growth in the city will be centered on the Capital Riverfront, NoMa and Capitol Hill neighborhoods because the core downtown areas are so constrained, the report said.
On the investment side in 2010, D.C. had the third-highest deal volume with $327 million in transactions to date. New York and Boston had the highest investment volume nationally.
The two largest deals to date were LaSalle Hotel Properties’ acquisition of the Sofitel Lafayette Square for $95 million and Pebblebrook Hotel Trust's purchase of the Hotel Monaco for $74 million. Each sold for just over $400,000 per room.
Since 2000 there have only been five other local hotel properties that sold at that rate.
Restaurant business back on track
Washington Business Journal - by Jeff Clabaugh
Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 10:35am EST
October was the most optimistic month in the restaurant industry in years, according to the industry's biggest trade group.
The Washington-based National Restaurant Association's monthly Restaurant Performance Index rose to its highest level in more than three years, as the group's members reported more customers and rising sales.
"Most notably, a majority of restaurant operators reported higher same-store sales in October, the first such occurrence since August 2007," said the association's Hudson Riehle. "As a result, the Restaurant Performance Index's Current Situation Index reached the 100 plateau for the first time in more than three years."
A reading of 100 or more on the group's performance index indicates expansion.
Restaurant operators were also more optimistic about sales growth in the coming months, reported a positive outlook for staffing levels for the first time in six months.
Its survey found 51 percent of its members reported an increase in customer traffic levels in October, and 42 percent invested in equipment, expansion or remodeling during the last three months.
In addition, 43 percent expect sales to increase in the next six months, while only 12 percent expect sales to fall.
Only 11 percent of restaurant operators expect to cut staff in the next six months, with 16 percent expecting to hire more workers.
Veterans Affairs signs fourth NoMa lease
Washington Business Journal - by Sarah Krouse
Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 4:51pm EST - Last Modified: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 5:47pm EST
The Department of Veterans Affairs has signed yet another lease in NoMa, this time for 52,886 square feet at Trammel Crow Co.’s Sentinel Square I project.
The 10-year lease, signed on behalf of the department by the General Services Administration, is the VA’s fourth in NoMa.
The department previously signed two leases totaling 122,756 square feet at Tishman Speyer LP’s 1100 First St. NE. It will begin to fill all three offices in the second quarter of 2011.
The VA started its NoMa leasing streak in spring 2009 when it signed for 35,000 square feet at One NoMa Station at 131 M St. NE.
This latest deal at Sentinel Square I is also the third lease signed at the 90 K St. NE building, which is being developed by a joint venture between Dallas-based Trammel Crow affiliate Crow Holdings and Salt Lake City, Utah-based Cottonwood Partners Management Ltd.
The VA joins the Customs and Border Protection, as well as the Parole Commission, at the 412,661-square-foot building.
Sentinel Square I is the first of four phases in the 1.3 million-square-foot development.
Tim Finan represented Trammel Crow in the deal. Michelle Parrish, Jim Phelan and Mary Morrison of the GSA and Bill Craig and Reva Squire of Jones Lang LaSalle Inc. represented the tenant.
Missed
Can free-spending D.C. Council stick to budgeting basics?
By: Harry Jaffe 11/29/10 11:05 PM
Examiner
The D.C. Council does a great job of spending money -- as long as it's your money. A majority of the 13 members have rarely met an agency or a government job or a city service they didn't want to fund with OPM, as in other people's money.
Just so we start the budgeting season with a measure of honesty, let's agree that most of the tax money that will fund D.C.'s $5.3 billion spending plan for 2011 comes from residents west of Rock Creek Park. I'm just putting that out there, as they say. And I'm asking: What do they get for their hard-earned taxes?
Starting Tuesday, the city council will begin forming the budget for the next fiscal year. Revenues are down; costs are up. Two obvious choices: Cut government or raise taxes. That's it. Federal bucks will preserve the school budget, but everything else is in play.
The council likes to play with our tax dollars. How else are we to explain the fact that our local government has grown 65 percent since 2003, according to the council's finance and revenue committee.
Outgoing Mayor Adrian Fenty has proposed a budget that will trim $188 million from the budget without raising taxes. Seems to me the city council's job is to adhere to that bottom line: If any council member wants to put money back in to preserve a pet program, she or he must find another program to cut. Make it a zero sum game: Do not raise taxes. Period.
To survive, every line item should pass a test based on whether and how much it delivers a service directly to residents. Hint: Any agency that has the word "liaison" in it has to go.
Getting down to basics, the council should preserve and even enhance public safety, public education and public works. Keep the streets safe and well-organized; educate the children.
When it comes to cops, first do no harm -- in fact, it might be time to add. Fenty cut and the council accepted $30.7 million in cuts to the police department last fiscal year. We should have a sworn force of 4,250. We have accepted a diminished force of fewer than 4,000. Perhaps that explains why the FBI recently declared D.C. the fourth-most dangerous big city in the country.
Fenty proposes nearly $8 million more in cuts to cops. Training and recruitment are out.
"I am very concerned," says Phil Mendelson, chair of the council's judiciary committee. "The police department is working pretty well. "It's a core function. We don't want to put the department on the defensive."
Props to Phil, who's showing a new appreciation for the men and women in blue.
I would go one step further: Find funds to put more cops on the street. Investments in safe streets and strong schools will pay off by making D.C. an attractive place to live for all of those taxpayers we will need to fund the council members' pet projects.
From yesterday:
Mike DeBonis: http://wapo.st/h6cfEs
Loose Lips (daily column): http://bit.ly/enPMuk
DMV Daily (P.J. Orvetti): http://bit.ly/dSJsLw
No comments:
Post a Comment