Friday, October 30, 2009

The District Weekly: Teacher layoffs, parks and recreation and "PostKiller.com"

Ed. note: Apologies for the light posting the past few days, I've been under the weather. As of now, this is a one-man part-time operation, so "daily" might not always happen.

It's been a headline week for the D.C. Council, with a hearing about the D.C. Public Schools layoffs and more discussion of the parks and recreation contracts. Aside from that, the media world has been dominated with talks of the new local news site for D.C.

D.C. Council holds hearing on the controversial teacher layoffs. This was the big cannot-miss local news story for the week. There's a whole ton of analysis floating around the Internet, so I'm not going to spend too much time rehashing it right now. The main story here is the same story we're seeing with the Parks and Recreation hubub, a lack of communication, oversight and respect between the Council and the rest of the D.C. government. Yesterday's hearing stretched for several hours, and the tone of animosity between the Council and DCPS was hard to ignore. There's significant discontent between many on the Council and Rhee. Those who have a bone to pick with Fenty are going to continue pressing this. It looks likely that Rhee did go around the Council's directives in order to get her way. But, she's smart, and knows how to testify at a hearing. The same can't be said for her CFO, Noah Wepman. Wepman appeared unprepared and shaken by the questioning.

All of this, of course, revolves around the controversial firing of teachers. Hundreds of teachers were laid off just as the school year started, with Rhee citing budgetary reasons. The Council had previously slashed $20 million from the DCPS budget. Prior to the firings, DCPS had conducted massive hirings over the summer. Rhee is accused of using the budget excuse to fire tenured teachers and replace them with new, younger hires. Rhee claims she had no choice but to cut jobs. A matter of this much importance, and involving this much money should not come down to a he said/she said argument. Sadly, though, that is where we are. It looks like either Rhee knew exactly what she was doing (likely) or the books at DCPS are so poorly kept no one could have figured out there would be budgeting problems for FY2010.

Right now, Council meets to discuss Parks and Recreations contracts. Today the Council is meeting to discuss the questionable contracts sent through the D.C. Housing Authority. The City Paper has learned the total is now at $120 million. City Administrator Neil Albert is testifying at the moment, and CFO Natwar Gandhi is scheduled to appear as well. Albert is denying any sort of conflict of interest problems, and the Council is trying very hard not to use the "corruption" word. I'll have more on this once the meeting wraps up. Again, it is difficult to make the claim that either Albert or Gandhi didn't realize there was something fishy going on.

Can Allbritton revolutionize local news? Well, it seems they are going to try. The creators of Politico are looking to create a local D.C. news web site. Allbritton also owns local ABC affiliate WJLA-TV as well as the local cable news station NewsChannel8. I spent some time talking about the future of local journalism last week; this is a topic that is not going away anytime soon. Allbritton believes there is still money to be made with a local news web site, and wants to dedicate a staff of 50 to making this work.

Well, as other people have mentioned, it's hard to believe that Allbritton will be able to find some magical advertising market that no one else has been able to tap into. I'm very much in favor of seeing more local news coverage, and I think it would be wonderful if an organization with vast resources would dedicate some time to our city. As it stands now, WJLA and NC8 have resources (even news trucks!) but the only product they put out is a television newscast. Rather than hiring 50 people to start a new web site, it might make more sense to hire a team of a few writers and editors to put out quality web-based versions of the stories already being covered.

We'll see what happens, but I wouldn't hold your breath. The Next Big Thing in journalism will need to take bigger risks than just throwing some money at a new web site. We'll need to see a completely new model. We'll need to see something that stops everyone in their tracks and says "wow, that's gutsy." There's a difference between gutsy and foolish optimism. Unless there's some huge part of this that Allbritton is keeping a secret, this is will not be the future of local news.

by Dave Stroup, filed under District Weekly at 1:00PM   0 

---

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Parks and Recreation contracts bypassed Council, went to friends of Fenty

Last Friday, District Attorney General Peter Nickles made an unexpected statement. He said that the DC Housing Authority must send any contracts over $1 million to the D.C. Council for approval. This came on the heels of the news that Mayor Fenty had directed a dozen parks and recreation contracts, totaling $82 million, to DCHA. The Housing Authority then awarded these contracts to firms with connections to Fenty.

It was surprising to hear Nickles purposefully make a statement that was not in the best political interest of Fenty. Previously, Nickles had fallen into the role of de facto spokesman for the Fenty administration, though he often puts his foot in his own mouth. The initial speculation was that Nickles and Fenty were trying to pin the blame on DCHA, which is technically an independent agency. Recall that just last month, DCHA executive director Michael Kelly resigned his post. Rumor had it that Kelly felt the heat from Fenty, and that the DCHA board had been stacked with Fenty allies. A search is underway for Kelly's replacement, but odds are the spot will go to someone in the Fenty administration.

The contracts in question were for the construction of ball fields, parks, and recreation centers. Banneker Ventures, owned by Omar Karim was named the construction manager for all of the projects. Karim is a former fraternity brother of Mayor Fenty. RBK Landscaping and Construction was also among the firms awarded contracts. RBK is owned by Fenty's friend Keith Lomax. You might remember that name from earlier this year, Fenty was in hot water for allowing Lomax to drive his city-owned SUV.

The revelation that $82 million in parks and recreation contracts bypassed Council approval, along with the Ximena Hartsock saga proved to be a political tipping point. Since more than one Councilmember may be considering candidacy for mayor, it's no surprise the battle lines are being drawn. When Councilmember Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3) accused the Fenty administration of acting lawlessly, it's safe to assume she was talking about more than just the Harstock employment extension.

Coming back to his senses, or at least being reigned in by Fenty, Nickles began backpedaling. He changed his tune, and his legal opinion, stating that his comments on Friday were not meant to be applied retroactively. While it was technically against the law for these contracts to bypass the Council, his decision would only apply to future contracts.

The Council is now mulling their options, even contemplating a long-threatened lawsuit against the administration. A group of Councilmembers will be holding a meeting this Friday to discuss the matter, and have asked that the City Administrator Neil Albert and Chief Financial Officer Natwar Ghandi appear to discuss the procurement process, and how contracts were funneled through DCHA.

There aren't many good options on the table here, though the whole thing could prove to be a big mess for Fenty. It depends on how far the Council is willing to take this, and if the matter ends up in court. One possibility is that the contracts be rendered void, because they were drawn up in violation of the law. The other option is for the Council to approve the contracts retroactively. It seems unlikely that the Council would do so.

What will happen? Well, there are a lot of variables at play here. The Council is also pondering what to do about Ximena Hartsock. Council Chair Vincent Gray (D) held a closed-door meeting with other Councilmembers to discuss the matter. The outcome was a decision to send an "envoy" of sorts to Fenty to discuss the matter. Four Councilmembers, two in favor of Hartsock and two opposed, will meet with Fenty this week.

If Fenty and Nickles play hardball on the Hartsock matter, it's easy to see the contracts battle getting as drawn-out as humanly possible. In any event, the whole matter of Fenty cronies getting under-the-table contracts stinks. If Fenty is to face a serious opponent next year, this will be an issue. If that opponent currently serves on the Council, he will have to make a move soon.

It's completely possible that Fenty will compromise regarding Hartsock (perhaps naming a successor to take office very quickly), in exchange for the Council's retroactive approval of the the DCHA contracts. If this does happen, and there is no vocal protest, then I would not expect to see anyone on the Council run for mayor.

by Dave Stroup, filed under City Hall at 8:00AM   1 

---

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Six years later, the legacy of Walter E. Washington remains unmatched

Walter E. Washington, the first elected mayor of the District under home rule, died six years ago today. I wrote this piece following Washington's death in 2003, and given the perpetual political scandals that persist, I wanted to share it again. While the piece references then-Mayor Anthony Williams, in most cases the same can be said for Mayor Fenty.

Original column follows

J. Edgar Hoover was known as a man who did not take no for an answer. As a result, not many politicians had the courage to stand up to him. One D.C. politician did, however-Walter E. Washington. Washington, who died Monday, was the first elected mayor of the District and the first African-American to lead a major U.S. city. He leaves behind a legacy of integrity and respect and will be remembered as an example of what political leaders should be, although this city has not seen a leader of his caliber since.

In 1967, President Lyndon B. Johnson appointed Washington as mayor-commissioner of the District in 1974, making him the first African-American to lead a major U.S. city. When Congress approved home rule for the District, Washington became the city's first elected mayor.

Washington knew his politics. He was a man who could get things done for his city and he wasn't afraid to stand up for what he believed was right. During riots that followed the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., then-FBI chief Hoover wanted Washington to order the shooting of looters. Washington refused, and walked out on Hoover.

Washington's legacy has been unmatched in the 25 years since he left office. The three mayors who have followed have been unremarkable, and many of the problems that troubled the city at the end of Washington's term remain.

Marion Barry, who defeated Washington in 1978, became dubbed "mayor for life." But he was too slick. Employing racial politics whenever possible and becoming embroiled in scandals which made the District the laughingstock of the nation, Barry was quite a contrast from the man who talked tough with J. Edgar Hoover, and who demanded respect from Congress and the president.

Anthony Williams, the current mayor, also falls short of the bar set by Washington. Yet another mayor plagued by scandal, Williams has failed to address many key issues. Williams refuses to discuss race in a city that is 70 percent black. While Washington was a uniting figure on the issue of race, Williams simply stays silent--perhaps an improvement from Barry, who discussed racial issues on a daily basis--but it is not an appropriate compromise.

Many District politicos and columnists believe that the continued cause for expanded home rule in the District died with Washington. "The era of home rule ended today with the passing of Walter Washington," remarked Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, the city's non-voting member of Congress, on Monday. While this point is debatable, it is clear that Washington was one of the major forces behind the home rule movement. Even in the years following his tenure as mayor, he continued to work behind-the-scenes to support causes he felt were important to the District.

Walter E. Washington loved his city and worked hard to accomplish what he felt was needed. Perhaps most of all, he was a man who commanded respect. He knew how to play politics, but he didn't get his hands dirty. It is unfortunate that his legacy of esteem remains an exception in D.C. politics, and not the rule.

First published October 30, 2003

by Dave Stroup, filed under City Hall at 9:00AM   0 

---

The confusing controversies involving Parks and Recreation

If you don't follow District politics closely, you might not be aware of an unfolding feud between Mayor Fenty and the D.C. Council. Animosity between the two branches of city government has been growing for some time, but has recently erupted over issues involving parks and recreation. The first issue was the Council's rejection of Ximena Hartsock as Director of the District Department of Parks and Recreation. The second issue is $82 million in Parks and Recreation contracts that went unapproved by the Council. For those who have been out of the loop, here's a summary of the whole Hartsock controversy. Tomorrow I'll discuss the contracts question.

To understand what's happening, let us rewind back to April of this year when Ximena Hartsock took over as Acting Director of DPR. Hartsock replaced Clark Ray, who had worked for President Clinton and D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams. Ray was confirmed 13-0 by the Council to serve as DPR Director. Ray's firing was unexpected, but came amid a controversy surrounding Fenty and his children. In February, the DPR Athletics Director was fired 10 days after he informed Ray of complaints about Fenty's sons. Michael Williams expressed concern that Fenty's children were playing in the wrong youth basketball league. Fenty's twin sons were enrolled in the Pee Wee league, for children aged 6-8. The boys turned 9 in March, and as such were supposed to be in Pony league. Williams believed Fenty's sons received special treatment in being allowed to remain in Pee Wee. Williams was fired citing budget concerns. In April, Williams sued the District for $5 million citing wrongful termination. Fenty and Ray were named in the lawsuit. A few weeks later, Ray was fired. It's unclear the specific circumstances around Ray's departure, but presently Ray is running for a D.C. at-large Council seat.



Interim DPR Director Ximena Hartsock

Hartsock had previously served as principal of Ross Elementary, as well as deputy chief of Technology and Learning with the D.C. Schools. In that role. Hartsock oversaw summer school, afternoon and weekend programs. Fenty said he wanted someone in DPR with an emphasis on programming. The mayor did not interview any other candidates for the position.

The Council's vote on Hartsock is increasingly looking like a referendum on Fenty's administration. During the Council hearings prior to the vote, things turned a bit nasty. Councilmember Marion Barry (D-Ward 8) asserted that Hartsock could not be an effective DPR Director because she couldn't understand the needs of minorities in the District, and as a woman she couldn't understand sports. When the Council voted 7-5 to reject Hartsock, the official reasons ranged from flouting of the law to Hartsock's lack of qualifications. The main controversy surrounded Fenty's privatization of childcare services, which resulted in 160 layoffs. The Council had repeatedly passed legislation to block the layoffs, which they said Hartsock ignored. It came down to a matter of Fenty versus the Council, and Hartsock was caught in the middle. The Washington Post published an editorial rebuking the Council's treatment of Hartsock during the hearings, but it was not enough to sway the vote. It would later come out that D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee advocated on behalf of Hartsock to the Post's editorial board.

In the wake of Hartsock's rejection, District AG Peter Nickles rebuked the Council for an "outrageous" vote. He urged the Latino community to consider Hartsock's treatment. It should be noted that Hartsock is Chilean-born and not a U.S. citizen. The vote also marked the first time in memory that the Council rejected a mayoral appointment. It was clearly a rebuke of Fenty.

Presently, Hartsock is still in charge at DPR. Fenty has changed her official title from Acting Director to Interim Director. The title change gives Hartsock another 180 days in her position, though after that her tenure is finished. In response to this title change, yet another controversy has erupted. Councilmember Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3) remarked the whole affair resembled "a lawless administration." AG Peter Nickles remarked that Cheh had "no idea what she's talking about," characterizing her comments as "stupid" and referring to her as "an angry woman."

In response to this, Councilmember Kwame Brown (D-At Large) demanded an apology from Nickles for his remarks. Brown made no such demand from his colleague Marion Barry for the sexist and racist remarks directed at Hartsock.

This has devolved into quite a mess with no one holding any sort of moral high ground. Members of the Council treated Hartsock with a lack of respect, and now the Council is feeling a backlash. Cheh certainly didn't deserve the sexist comments from Nickles, but is anyone surprised? This is D.C. politics and people play dirty. It's not an excuse, but let's not be shocked about any of this.

The real question is what's driving all of this? Does the $82 million in improper Parks and Recreation contracts have anything to do with this? Why is the Council deciding to stand it's ground now, and about DPR? And finally, how will all of this play into the 2010 elections? It's going to be an exciting (and also likely, depressing) ride into next year.
by Dave Stroup, filed under City Hall at 9:00AM   0 

---

Monday, October 26, 2009

Gun violence continues in Petworth, weekend sees two fatalities

by Dave Stroup, filed under Crime, Petworth at 7:00AM   0 

---

Friday, October 23, 2009

The District Weekly: Shootings, corruption and Metro safety

What a surprise, the biggest stories this week revolved around shootings, corruption and safety within Metrorail and Metrobus. This is the first of a weekly round-up of sorts, where I present what dominated the news during the week in the District.

Many shootings across the District this week. Last night DC Alert sent out a notification of a shooting at 14th and Maryland Avenue, NE. No news reports on this incident, so it's likely injuries are minor. NewsChannel8 ran the story as "Man Goes to Checkers After Being Shot." I overlooked the headline, the humor downplayed the seriousness of the event. A man was shot in the chest and taken to the hospital. The alert gave the time of the shooting as 7:19 PM. 14th and Maryland Avenue NE is right near the nightlife destinations along H Street.

As noted here earlier, there was a shooting in Shaw near the Mt. Vernon Square Metro station. That incident left a woman injured. A teenager was shot at the Safeway on Georgia Avenue in Petworth. At last update the teen was in grave condition with a gunshot wound to the head. Earlier in the week, a man was injured and another killed in an apparent shootout in the 4800 block of G Street in Southeast.

Also noted, a man was killed by police in Northeast, near the National Arboretum. That incident was the 14th officer-involved shooting this year in the District.

The Washington City Paper takes a closer look at some of the taxicab bribery defendants. "Meet The Other Defendants" is a very well done story, and hats-off to the City Paper. This is absolutely an example of why continued, in-depth coverage of local stories is vital. For those following the ongoing taxicab investigation,this is a definite must read. Jason Cherkis sheds some light on just who was rounded a few weeks ago in a mass-arrest by investigators. In most cases, it appears, these were hardworking people hoping to have a shot at becoming cabbies. It looks like they had no idea they were playing a role in a large bribery scheme. It's a very sad read, and it also raises some questions about the investigation and the tactics involved.

Also from the City Paper, Councilmember Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) decides to make a public meeting "off the record." Graham recently attended a Kalorama Citizens Association meeting and had a few things to say about the federal investigation that nabbed his Chief of Staff, Ted Loza. Sources who attended the meeting claim Graham essentially accused the FBI of entrapping Loza, and noted how the entire investigation is making him paranoid. When the City Paper attempted to confirm the comments, Graham's press chief Brian DuBose said the meeting was "off the record." Further efforts to receive a comment from Graham were fruitless.

Sorry, Councilmember, but a public meeting is, by its very nature, on the record.

Metro gets blasted for bus problems, announces testing of rail safety technology. WTOP News did what can only be described as a hit-job on Metro this week. Adam Tuss and Mark Segraves obtained employee discipline statistics from Metro, and ran a very sensationalized piece entitled "Ride at Your Own Risk." While some of the numbers they present are startling, it's difficult to make sense of them. There is no context given, nor definitions. Generally figures are given in terms of incidents per 100,000 revenue miles, in order to normalize across transit systems and account for the amount of service an agency provides. WTOP essentially just wrote a story based on a first glance at a spreadsheet.

I'm cleary not a Metro apologist, but I'd like to see some sense made of these numbers. Perhaps the number of bus collisons is high compared to other agencies. Perhaps Metrobus drivers are "less safe" by the numbers than say, MTA drivers in New York or MBTA drivers in Boston. While I don't expect a 5,000 word investigative piece from WTOP, I'd think they could do just a little bit better. The story would be much more compelling if it told a bit more of an actual story. A scare piece and a video of buses (and cars) rolling through stop signs isn't anything earth shattering.

Also this week, Metro announced that a prototype track circuit monitoring system is ready for testing. The software system, developed by Bethesda based firm ARNIC, will monitor track circuits in real time for any malfunctions. Metro currently scans for circuit malfunctions twice a day, as a response to the June 22 Red Line crash. The development of this real-time monitoring system was in response to an urgent NTSB recommendation. At this point it's unclear how long the testing will take, or what the cost of the software will be. Metro has refused to answer questions about pricing.

This is obviously a step forward, however one has to wonder why a real time monitoring system was not developed sooner. While it's helpful to have software checking for defects in the Automatic Train Control system, it would be even better to have an ATC system that could experience malfunctions and not result in trains crashing into one another. However much money Metro ends up spending on this software monitoring system could have been better spent decades ago developing an ATC system that fails safely.

by Dave Stroup, filed under District Weekly at 10:00AM   2 

---

Thursday, October 22, 2009

What will the future of journalism look like?

If you follow CityDesk, the blog over at the Washington City Paper, you've likely seen posts discussing revenue models for journalism. By revenue model, I really mean the City Paper wants to know how they can charge for content.

Like it or not, it's not a ridiculous question. The current recession aside, the future is grim for any news organization that depends on advertising revenue to survive. That model is falling apart and a whole lot of people, including those with impressive credentials, are struggling to develop a new one.

City Paper editor Erik Wemple asked yesterday, "what about alt-weekies?" Wemple was referring to a Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism report, "The Future of American Journalism." The report was written by Leonard Downie, Jr, former executive editor of thw Washington Post, and Michael Schudson, a Columbia journalism professor. The aim was to outline ways to "save" and promote journalism, especially local, community-oriented news.

Downie and Schudson look at a whole bunch of possible paths for the future, including small-scale independently organized news sites, and blogs. Most of these options, though, fall short in providing what is needed. Also, as Wemple notes, major city alternative weeklies are ignored.

In many cases, alternative weeklies provide excellent coverage of local news, especially politics. For as long as I've lived in DC, Loose Lips has been the go-to source for political news. I would say it's indispensable. I'd hate to see the City Paper disappear. It fills an important void. However, a paper that is distributed for free and has even a small staff, is going to struggle to stay afloat funded only on advertising.

What about blogs? They vary on how well and in-depth they report on neighborhood issues. Some bloggers love attending ANC meetings and getting out there asking people questions and sorting out complex neighborhood matters. However, blogs are going to be, nearly by definition, unreliable. In most cases bloggers generate little to no revenue for their writing, and it is not their full-time occupation. Since it is not a full-time gig, posting frequency and depth varies and is never guaranteed.

I've been writing about DC news and politics for a while now, both years ago when I was in college and now for various blogs. However, I have to balance the amount of time I spend writing and researching with a full-time job. I can't attend hearings, I can't generally go to DC Council meetings. I can't spend time tracking down sources and interviewing them. If I can't do it via email or a 5 minute phone call, it's going to be left undone. We have larger blogs, such as DCist, but even those can only manage to have, at best, one full-time employee.

Only one thing is certain, someone, or some group, will come up with a model for local news gathering that is successful. The demand is there. People want good writing and reporting. There's no question about that. The trick is figuring out how to make the whole thing sustainable. Will the future model revolve around tapping neighborhood bloggers to act as reporters, and packaging their information into quality, fact-checked pieces? Perhaps, but that would require an editorial staff, and financing.

Will the model revolve around newspapers retreating behind pay walls? This is a possibility. I would likely pay some amount of money to read the City Paper. I'd probably pay a subscription to read Loose Lips. How much? That's the question. What is it worth? Previous generations grew up buying the newspaper. Now, though, there's an expectation that news should be free. Any suggestion to the contrary is met with a "well, I'll just read the news somewhere else." I'd pay maybe $5 per month to read a web site. Where did I get that number? I just made it up.

What about tax deductible donations to create newsgathering non-profits? This seems to have some promise, perhaps. Create an organization that can obtain grants and receive donations, and still release content for free. No one would ever get rich creating an organization such as that, but perhaps they could provide a much needed service. To me, this seems to be an attractive idea. It would be a large undertaking, issues of liability would need to be worked out, and funding sources would need to be identified. But what-if? What if someone produced a non-profit organization that acted like an associated press of sorts for local news. By coordinating under one umbrella organization, it would be possible to develop the 'institutional clout' that provides a 'check' against opaque government activities. All content could be released free and open to be reused by anyone, bloggers, alternative weeklies, or even TV, radio and newspapers. As few strings attached as possible. What about that? Would you donate $50 or $100 a year to sponsor such an organization? Would you encourage foundations to offer grants for this sort of thing?

I've kicked this idea around a bit as a way to cover local stories that fall between the cracks. It hasn't been done before, at least here, because it's a lot of work. It would be a huge gamble to dedicate time and energy to create such an organization. However, it might just help shape the future of local news. Who knows. However, everyone, from Leonard Downie Jr. to Erik Wemple, and even part-time writers such as myself are grasping to make sense of the future. Instead of sitting around waiting for someone else to do it, it's about time we act.

by Dave Stroup, filed under Media at 7:00AM   0 

---

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Shootings continue in Shaw, but is it a war?

by Dave Stroup, filed under Crime, Shaw at 7:00AM   1 

---

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

A robbery, the blog echo chamber, and police indifference

Back in August, the owners of the soon to be open Capital City Diner were robbed (with threat of a gun) near the intersection of Bladensburg Road and K Street, Northeast. The victims wrote about the incident on the Diner's blog. In their entry, they talk about the robbery itself, but most notably the police response. The August 24 blog post describes a Metropolitan Police Department detective attempting to talk the victims out of filing a police report:

Unfortunately, the detective tried repeatedly to convice Matt out of making a report.  He stated that a robbery hadn't occurred since Matt "gave up the money" willingly and the suspect didn't actually reach into Matt's pockets to steal the money (Matt handed him the robber money when asked for it).  Matt recounted that DC code doesn't require that a robbery physically touch someone, and that someone using fear (even without a weapon displayed) to take something is considered robbery.  Furthermore, the detective reminded Matt that he sticks out because Matt's a white guy in Trinidad and asked repeatedly if he really really wanted to be remembered by the criminal's associates if/when he's prosecuted.

This story spread like wildfire throughout the DC blogosphere. Prince of Petworth and DCist picked it up. People were outraged, and shared their own stories of police ineptitude and laziness. Some went as far as saying this was a concerted effort on the part of MPD to make crime statistics look rosier.

My first reaction was one of skepticism. Some of the details of the incident did not seem to add up, and I found it hard to believe that MPD would show such indifference to a crime being reported. I was also a bit bothered by how fast the news was being spread around, without any sort of corroboration or verification. My take was rooted in pessimism, that two guys walking home in a 'rough neighborhood' shouldn't be surprised if this happened. I was wrong.

In truth, there was a story here. It wasn't about the mugging. In the end, it doesn't so much matter if someone was 'asking for it' or not, and in this case they certainly were not. They are two men familiar with the neighborhood who know how to be street smart. What matters is that a crime was committed. The officer in question failed the public and failed their fellow officers by discouraging the filing of a police report.

No one will question that crime is a serious problem facing DC. While violent crime has been down in 2009, property crime has been up and teenagers are still dying in the streets. MPD has been plagued by internal disputes between management and officers, and Chief Lanier is in the hot seat about the All Hands on Deck measures.

If we are ever to see any meaningful reduction in crime, we have to start with an accurate baseline. Crimes need to be reported, and crimes need to be investigated. Even if this results in a less than stellar closure rate on robberies. In some cases it is unlikely that the suspects will be apprehended. However, that's not a good enough reason to try to intimidate a victim into not reporting a crime.

At first I was hesitant to place all of the blame on MPD in this instance. I didn't want to jump to that conclusion before any sort of investigation had been done, or reports filed. Following the incident, the Capital City Diner's blog was updated to note that MPD had begun an investigation into the conduct of the detective in question.

As is the case with the blogs, and the news media in general, this was a story that dropped off people's radar. Many have likely forgotten about the incident.

After my initial post I noted that I would follow up on this, if I was able to receive further information. Matt Ashburn from the Capital City Diner reached out to me to reiterate that he was not interested in blaming MPD as a whole, but more that he was concerned about the conduct in this specific instance.

I've since learned that MPD has concluded their investigation regarding the officer in question's conduct. The citizen complaint was regarded as 'sustained' by MPD, which means the complaint had merit and the officer has been dealt with as per department policies.

Matt wrote in to express his appreciation to the officers of the Fifth District for taking this complaint seriously, and expressed optimism about the future. Matt did the right thing by standing up for his rights as a citizen and a victim.

In order for the police department to receive the funding they deserve, and the management they need, they must be honest with their reporting. We, as citizens, absolutely must feel like we can turn to MPD when we have been victims of crime. There's no hope for a better future if that is not the case.

by Dave Stroup, filed under Crime, Trinidad at 7:00AM   1 

---

Monday, October 19, 2009

The epidemic of ineffective government

On Sunday, the Washington Post published a heartbreaking piece looking at the District's HIV and AIDS support organizations. Debbie Cenziper's investigative reporting is damning to the District government, especially the city's HIV/AIDS Administration.

Make no mistake, this is a difficult article to get through. It tells a complex story that includes ghost payrolling, lack of oversight, inappropriate grant awards, and more. The 5,100+ word piece gets to the heart of why AIDS truly is DC's Katrina.

DC is a city with an AIDS infection rate greater than some West African nations. One out of every fifteen black males in the District of Columbia is HIV positive. We've heard these statistics before. We've also heard of government waste. The Post tells us about Renee Paige, who died on a bench just a mile from the HIV/AIDS Administration.

This tugs at the heartstrings. Again, we read about how the real DC lives. The story tries hard to leap off the page, to call us to action. Yet, I fear it will not. To those who can make a difference, to those who can influence elections, to those who vocally call for change--this story won't gain much traction.

We shake our head at out of control crime in the city, and we shake our head at poverty. We sit and wonder why teens turn to gangs, and to crime. We sit and wonder why the schools are failing as an epidemic of hopelessness and despair sweeps our city. Think about the image of Renee Paige dying on a bench. Think about the hundreds of thousands of dollars sent to ghost employees for non-profits that leave people out in the cold. Think of the government administrators who sent money to unlicensed, ineffective organizations.

This is but one more example of the District government failing it's population. How many more times will we read articles that include the terms "non-profit funding" and "FBI investigation." When will enough be enough? Or rather, will it ever be enough? How many more times will we hear of precious dollars being funneled away from people in need and into the pockets of those who cozy up to power.

2010 is an election year. Mayor Fenty and his iteration of the status quo are up for re-election. Will anyone challenge? Will that challenger offer anything new? Seems very unlikely. We've got an embattled Councilmember in Ward 1, Jim Graham, who will likely easily win re-election. In fact, it's likely he will face no challenger at all.

What kind of scandal do we need to get people to "vote the bums out?" Scores of talented and idealistic people have moved to DC in the past decade. These groups are still a minority in this city, but they could be much more vocal. Will they take up the cause? Will they organize?

It seems doubtful.

by Dave Stroup, filed under City Hall at 7:00AM   1 

---

Sunday, October 18, 2009

A New Road: District Daily

I wanted to take a few moments to welcome you to a new DC oriented web site. I wish I could immediately greet you with a wonderful and inspiring "mission statement," but that will have to wait. by Dave Stroup, filed under Site News at 8:02PM   0 

---

Saturday, October 17, 2009

The Price of Safety: Part II, Recent derailments expose problems

This is the second portion of a series about safety within Metrorail. The Price of Safety is an ongoing feature at Greater Greater Washington.

Previously, we looked at a rash of accidents involving Metro track workers. A common theme across many of those incidents was a problem with the implementation of safety rules within Metro.

In some cases, had rules been followed, the accidents would not have occurred. In other instances, implementation of NTSB recommendations might have averted tragedy. A similar theme emerges upon a close examination of Metro's recent history of derailments. For the purposes of this post, we will focus on the past 6 years of derailments. The fatal 1982 Orange Line derailment will be addressed in a later installment.

Since 2003, Metro has experienced a significant number of derailments. Many of these incidents involved out-of-service trains in rail yards, or on segments of pocket tracks. There are several notable incidents in recent history that have involved in-service trains, including one that resulted in passenger injuries. The causes of these derailments vary, though one factor remains the same--a failure to implement safety improvements throughout the system.

On January 20, 2003 the last car of a Blue Line train derailed along the elevated track outside of the National Airport station. Forty-six passengers were safety evacuated on that frigid night, though the damage totaled over $100,000. Over the next five years, there would be at least nine more derailments. In June of 2005, amid the rash of derailments, the Washington Post published an investigative piece entitled "Safety Warnings Often Ignored at Metro." The feature piece pours over internal Metro documents, as well as accident reports, and comes to some startling conclusions. Many of these were eerily prescient. After the National Airport crash, an internal investigation determined that employees were aware of the potential for problems. Documents showed that track managers expressed concerns relating to the type and condition of the track being used at the location. According to interviews, those concerns were passed up the chain to upper management, though no action was taken.

Warnings about other causes of derailments, such as a lack of track lubrication were also ignored. Investigators determined a lack of lubrication caused a derailment at the Alexandria rail yard. There was a brief push towards getting track properly lubricated, but over time the efforts began to falter. Don Painter, former manager of the track department, told the Post that he blamed a lack of institutional memory. "The superintendent retired, the assistant superintendent went to a different location, the maintenance manager went somewhere else, and the guys, when no one told them they needed to keep lubricating, the ball got dropped."

It took a year and several derailments later for Metro to implement directives regarding track lubrication.

Metro's track department was rife with systemic problems, especially concerning track inspections. The Post's investigation turned up a 2004 audit that showed some track workers did not know how to report problems to their superiors, and that inspectors often overlooked problems because they were required to cover an unrealistic amount of track each day. Additionally, prior to 1999 there was no official training program for track walkers, and audits showed that even after programs were implemented there was a lack of proper training.

In 2005, Susan Coughlin, a former NTSB member, noted that these incidents were "indicative of systematic oversight problems which, if left unaddressed, could produce a catastrophic accident."

Nearly four years after the Blue Line derailment, and 18 months after the Post article, a Green Line train derailed outside of the Mt. Vernon Square station. At 3:45 pm on January 7, 2007, the fifth car of the six-car train derailed, injuring 23 people. The NTSB determined that a problem with wheel maintenance caused the derailment. In the Railroad Accident Report, the NTSB also identified systemic problems within Metrorail. From the the report, RAR-07-03,

WMATA was aware of the wheel climb derailment problem with the 5000-series cars before this accident. Transit industry research and discussions with WMATA management indicate WMATA was aware of work done by the Transportation Research Board for the National Academy of Science and National Academy of Engineering on flange climb derailments in transit operations. Additionally, WMATA commissioned, participated in, and received the final Wheel-Rail Interface Study from the TTCI. Extensive testing to determine the cause of these relatively similar derailments in the 5000-series cars failed to produce a solid answer. Also, the APTA panel concluded that there was no single cause in the seven derailments it examined; however, the panel did identify several specific factors and made recommendations for WMATA to consider to prevent future derailments. Nonetheless, after requesting reviews by industry experts and funding related research work, WMATA failed to effectively address the proposed safety recommendations before this accident. The Safety Board therefore believes that WMATA should establish a process, including a single point of responsibility, to prompt timely evaluation and action on proposed safety improvements that are identified as a result of accident and derailment investigations and related research projects.

In June 2008, an Orange Line train derailed outside of the Courthouse Metro station. There were no injuries, but over 400 passengers needed to be rescued from the tunnel. Significant damage was done to the track in the area. Interestingly, the train operator did not immediately realize the derailment had occurred. A Metro supervisor happened to be riding on the train, felt a jolt, and alerted the train operator. The train had traveled more than 2,300 feet with the front wheels of the third car off the track.

An internal Metro investigation determined that a track walker had failed to report a significant problem with the track in the area. From a WMATA statement:

"Our inspector failed to recognize the out-of-tolerance rail conditions," according to Metro's Chief Safety Officer Ronald Keele. "The track conditions compounded with the forces of the moving train caused one wheel to climb atop one track and the other wheel to drop to the ground. We are very fortunate that there were no injuries."

The findings of Metro's internal investigation determined that the track inspector failed to detect "defects in the track's geometry" in the area of the derailment and "violated several inspection procedures," according to Keele.

The inspector did not inform the Operations Control Center of dangerous track conditions, did not report any dangerous or defective conditions to his supervisor, and failed to properly measure the space between the two tracks.

The inspector was suspended for five days as it was his first offense. Again, Metro stated they would work to revamp their training for track inspectors.

Metro's safety record regarding derailments highlights significant organizational deficiencies. Time and again, there was prior warning that problems could develop. Time and again, these warnings went unheeded. The same pattern emerges when looking at prior collisions and "near-misses" on Metro. Again, we see warnings from both within Metro and the NTSB that were ignored. It was no secret that trouble was brewing.

by Dave Stroup, filed under Features at 11:25PM   0 

---

Sunday, October 11, 2009

The Price of Safety: Part I, Track Workers Face Dangers

This is the first portion of a series about safety within Metrorail. The Price of Safety is an ongoing feature at Greater Greater Washington.

Metro employees who inspect and maintain the system's infrastructure are vital to safe and reliable operations. The training, morale, and by extension safety of these workers must be an top priority. Sadly, Metro has suffered the loss of several track workers in recent years.

In 2006, Metro lost three track workers in two separate accidents. On May 14, 2006 senior mechanic John Lee Wong, 49, was struck and killed by a Red Line train near the Dupont Circle station. Six months later, on November 30, 2006, Leslie Cherry, 52, and Matthew Brooks, 36, were struck near the Eisenhower Avenue station. Both would die from their injuries. The National Transportation Safety Board investigated the incidents, and at the time had some strong words for Metro. Then NTSB Chairman Mark Rosenker called Metro's worker safety record "unacceptable" and oversaw a detailed reconstruction of the incidents. For comparison, during the five year period (2003-2008), there were 10 track workers killed nationwide. Three of them were Metro workers. That figure encompasses all forms of heavy rail.

In January 2008, the NTSB completed their accident reports. The two Railroad Accident Briefs, RAB-08-01 and RAB-08-02, show the NTSB's findings and probable causes for the accidents. For the Dupont Circle incident, the NTSB concluded that Wong was either unaware of the presence of the train, or was unable to identify and reach a safe area away from the train's path. Furthermore, the NTSB identified weaknesses in Metro's right-of-way rules. The NTSB found that both track workers and train operators lacked vital information about each other's presence. This resulted in a train operator that was unaware of the presence of wayside workers and a lack of properly reduced train speed through the work area. The report also noted a lack of rule compliance, testing, and enforcement within Metrorail. Similar institutional causes were cited for the Eisenhower Avenue accident, and in that case the train operator also failed to slow or stop the train until after she had struck the workers.

The NTSB issued multiple recommendations to Metro to ensure enhanced track worker safety. These included:

• Establishing procedures to be used for members of a work crew to acknowledge a lookout's warning that a train is approaching on a particular track from a particular direction before a lookout gives an all clear signal to a train. (R-08-01)
• Establish a systematic program for frequent unannounced checks of employee compliance with Metrorail operating and safety rules and procedures. (R-08-02)
• Perform periodic hazard analyses on the deficiencies identified by unannounced checks of employee compliance in response to Safety Recommendation R-08-02, and use the results to revise Metrorail training curricula or enforcement activities, as necessary, to improve employee compliance with operating and safety rules and procedures. (R-08-03)
• Promptly implement appropriate technology that will automatically alert wayside workers of approaching trains and will automatically alert train operators when approaching areas with workers on or near the tracks. (R-08-04)

At the time of these recommendations, NTSB member (and now Chairwoman) Deborah Hersman felt that Metro did not have a strong culture of safety. Hersman was quoted, "a strong safety culture doesn't take dollars; it takes a will. They had rules. Those rules weren't observed."

In the wake of the NTSB findings, Metro general manager John Catoe vowed to make the transit system the safest in the country. Catoe said Metro would look at adding new technology to improve the safety of track workers. Polly Hanson, the Metro safety and security "czar" at the time, said she hoped to implement the NTSB's recommendations for alert equipment. Anonymous sources told the Washington Post that staff within the rail department were not in favor of this due to the extra work it would require.

Around this time, Metro hired a new Chief Safety Officer. Ronald Keele was brought on as part of Catoe's safety reform efforts. Keele had previously served in a similar role at Metro, and then at MTA in Maryland. He was also chief safety officer for NASA's space shuttle program, in the time period prior to the Columbia accident. Keele said one of his top priorities would be improving safety for track workers.

In July 2008, Catoe attended a Federal Transit Administration Safety Summit. From a U.S. Department of Transportation newsletter:

Mr. Catoe raised the following issues such as recognizing gradual changes to operating conditions, getting "out in front" of safety problems publicly, and leadership acceptance of responsibility and commitment to solving and tracking problems. Mr. Catoe emphasized the importance of top-down leadership and accountability, and direct communication with employees. He also shared the importance of rules enforcement programs and agency-wide participation.

In the nearly two years since the new safety chief was hired and the NTSB reports were issued, it's unclear how much progress has been made. According to WMATA's web site, Alexa Dupigny-Samuels now holds the position of Chief Safety Officer. Dupigny-Samuels was appointed in February 2009. The press release announcing Dupigny-Samuel's appointment offers no information about Keele's future. Metro has not answered inquiries about Keele's departure or reassignment. The latest update regarding the track worker protection technology was that Metro was still considering the options.

Tragedy would again strike Metro track workers this year. On August 9, Mike Nash, 63, was struck and killed by a gravel-spreading machine on the Orange Line. Nash had been working on the rails for 19 years. The NTSB declined to investigate that incident, as it did not involve a train, but rather maintenance equipment. On September 10, John Moore, 44, was struck by a train between the Braddock Road and National Airport stations. He died four days later. The NTSB was notified of the incident. At this time, Metro has offered little information about the incident. Moore worked with communications equipment, but it is unclear what work he was doing at the time of the accident.

It remains to be seen the cause of Moore's death, and whether it is directly related to any of the problems identified by the NTSB in 2006. With regard to the 2009 deaths, Catoe says that Metro has "got to get back to the basics of safety." Operating a railroad is dangerous, and there will be accidents, this much is for sure. However, given the seriousness of the NTSB recommendations issued not even two years ago, it is important to evaluate whether Metro has improved. Has Metro been able to develop the culture of safety Hersman deemed so important? Has the turnover in the safety department hampered these efforts? Has John Catoe lived up to his words of getting "out in front" of problems? The answer to these questions become clearer after looking at all of the areas of Metro safety.

by Dave Stroup, filed under Features at 3:07PM   0 

---

The Story Behind Alice Swanson's Ghost Bike

In August 2009, a strangely compelling story unfolded in the District. On August 28, the District Department of Public Works removed a "ghost bike" memorial from the intersection of Connecticut and R Streets, NW. The bike had been placed in the memory of Alice Swanson, a bicyclist who was struck and killed by a trash truck in July 2008. The bicycle, a silent reminder of the dangers cyclists face, had remained in place and maintained by Swanson's family and the Washington Area Bicyclist Association. The removal of the bike sparked an outrage in the cycling community, and eventually garnered coverage by local television networks and local web sites. Many questions remained about how and why the bicycle was removed. On September 28, I published the following report.

On Wednesday August 19, Ed Grandis, the Executive Director of the Dupont Circle Merchants and Professionals Association (DC MAP) sent an email to Mark Bjorge at the District Department of Transportation. In this email, Grandis characterized the ghost bike as being in "significant disrepair" an "eye sore" that was "not a memorial." Grandis requested the removal of the bike on behalf of "several commercial property owners." Also copied on this email was DC MAP's board, including Susan Taylor (Church of Scientology), David Perruzza (JR's Bar and Grill), Jonathan J. ten Hoopen (Black Fox Lounge) and James McGlade (The Leather Rack). When asked via email, Grandis declined to comment for this story. Perruzza responded writing "I work on 17th street but from what I understand they removed it because it is in the way of pedestrian traffic."

On Thursday August 27, Andrew Huff, Mayor Fenty's Ward 2 Outreach Specialist sent an urgent request to DPW asking that the lock on the ghost bike be cut immediately. The email was sent at 7:33 PM and asked that the lock be cut before close of business on Friday. Huff said that it was "a Mayoral request and your assistance is greatly appreciated." The request did contain a note saying "DO NOT REMOVE OR THROW BICYCLE AWAY - JUST CUT THE LOCK AND LEAVE AT LOCATION. FAMILY MEMBERS WILL RETRIEVE BICYCLE TOMORROW."

At 8:20 PM, Jim Sebastian, who works on bicycle matters at DDOT, replied to Huff and DPW saying that Eric Gilliland at the Washington Area Bicyclist Association had located the key to the lock, and asked if the bike's removal could wait until Monday. Huff replied saying "[w]e can wait until Monday but not later." Huff the notified DPW that their services would not be needed.

On Friday, August 28, Earl Simpson at DPW reported that they had cut the lock on the bike. He told Anthony Duckett, Associate Administrator in DPW's Solid Waste Management Administration that the bicycle had been left at Cosi, "because we didn't want anyone to take it while its unlock (sic)."

On Monday, when the media began asking questions about the ghost bike's removal, there was much discussion within DPW, the Executive Office of the Mayor (EOM), and DDOT on how to respond. According to Nancee Lyons at DPW, the bicycle was removed via the abandoned bicycle policy, and not the sidewalk memorial policy. Had it been removed under the memorial policy, a 30-day notice would have been left. The public affairs campaign regarding the incident began to get muddled, as it was unclear whether the Mayor's Office or DPW would take the lead in responding.

I had asked DPW for an official comment on Monday, and internal communication between DPW and EOM revealed a bit of conflict. Mafara Hobson, Fenty's Director of Communications was unwilling to take the lead wanting "to leave the Mayor's name out of the matter." DPW tossed around the idea of sending me a comment explaining the bike's lock had been cut and it had been left in a secure location to prevent theft. I didn't receive an official comment until Tuesday, September 1. This email referenced only the 30-day policy, and extended condolences to Swanson's family. It was unsigned and provided no further information.

The most interesting part of the internal discussion was the consideration of an official memorial being placed for Alice Swanson. Sarah Latterner at the Mayor's Office arranged to call a meeting with all of the involved agencies, as well as WABA and Swanson's family. Francisco Fimbres at the Mayor's Office asked DDOT to "come prepared to suggest a memorial on the sidewalk. Be it a tree box structure with a bike and flowers + a little placard. WABA or family can pay, DDOT and EOM could support and help them make it happen."

Lyons, in an email to DPW Director Bill Howland, said "so now that the Mayor's office apparently asked for this to be removed, folks are apparently freaking out at the reaction. I don't think affixing a permanent memorial is the right way to go to appease just one family, do you?"

Monday afternoon Howland sent an email to City Administrator Neil Albert, Fenty's Chief of Staff Carrie Kohns, Hobson and DDOT Director Gabe Klein saying he was opposed to any permanent memorial to Alice Swanson. Albert and Hobson would agree, and the official public relations response would be to say that the official policy was that memorials are removed after 30 days and that the city is sorry for the family's loss. That would be the end of discussion on the matter.

What remains unknown is why this issue became such an urgent priority to the Mayor's office. DC MAP's request did not indicate there was an urgent need to remove the bicycle. These emails were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, however it does appear that Mayor Fenty's office withheld many documents. I sent separate FOIA requests to both DPW and EOM. DPW's response includes over 80 pages of emails, many that were sent from staff in Fenty's office. Many of those emails were NOT also included in the FOIA documents supplied by the Mayor's Office. I was provided with no documents that show how the matter moved from DDOT to EOM and why it became a priority. Also, there is still no information on what businesses approached DC MAP with the original request. This would not have been covered by the FOIA request.

If anything, this whole incident has revealed some tension and blame-passing between DPW and Fenty's office. Fenty's office demanded the prompt removal of the bike, and then essentially hung DPW out to dry. It's no surprise I received 80 pages of documentation from DPW and roughly 4 pages from Fenty's office. They fall back on the "30 day policy," however the memorial clearly remained for more than 30 days. DPW's communications indicate the bike wasn't removed under the 30 day policy, but rather under the abandoned bicycle policy.

Personally, I believe that the replacement memorial idea should not have been shot down so quickly. Had the city offered to help dedicate a treebox near the site, I don't believe the 22 ghost bike art project would have happened. Rather we would have had a small, unobtrusive memorial. From a political standpoint that would have been much better than the mess that unfolded. It would not have necessarily resulted in a "Pandora's Box" as the DPW chief called it. Clearly this memorial was allowed to remain beyond 30 days, so this was done on a case-by-case basis. Permanent memorials for tragedies in the future could also have been handled on a case-by-case basis. Having some plaques on some treeboxes is not unheard of, and would not clutter up the city. by Dave Stroup, filed under Features at 3:48PM   1 

---