Councilmember Grosso sent this letter to Director Zeilinger with questions about homeless services budget, homeless students and youth homelessness as a follow-up to the Committee of the Whole and Committee on Health and Human Services oversight hearing on January 30.
Viewing entries in
Blog Post
By Aaron C. Davis January 30, 2015, Washington Post
Dozens of attorneys, advocates and shelter operators on Friday cast the District’s $124 million homeless operation as a system in disarray, failing to help the city’s most vulnerable and wasting money — and the administration of new Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) largely agreed.
On Friday January 16, 2015, Councilmember Grosso joined The Kojo Show on WAMU 88.5 FM for its weekly Politics hour.
Now that hypothermia season is in full swing, Councilmember Grosso sent this letter to the D.C. Department of Human Services for an update on the plans and budgeting for supporting the homeless this winter. Keeping an eye on agency expenditures and performance--such as the $8.75 million the Council allocated for homeless services in fiscal year 2015--is critical to the Council's oversight of the D.C. government.
I read this poem last night to kick off the DC Scores poetry slam.
Democracy
by Langston Hughes
Democracy will not come
Today, this year
Nor ever
Through compromise and fear.
I have as much right
As the other fellow has
To stand
On my two feet
And own the land.
I tire so of hearing people say,
Let things take their course.
Tomorrow is another day.
I do not need my freedom when I'm dead.
I cannot live on tomorrow's bread.
Freedom
Is a strong seed
Planted
In a great need.
I live here, too.
I want freedom
Just as you.
The D.C. Council and Mayor Gray invite D.C. residents to visit the Wilson Building to sign a condolence book for former Mayor and Councilmember Marion Barry. The books will be available on the first floor of the John A. Wilson Building (1350 Pennsylvania Ave NW) on the following days:
Tuesday, November 25th, 9:00 am – 5:30 pm
Wednesday, November 26th, 9:00 am – 5:30 pm
Friday, November 28th, 9:00 am – 5:30 pm
Washington, DC -- Today, Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) issued the following statement on the results of the grand jury deliberation in Ferguson, MO:
I am saddened and deeply disappointed by the grand jury's decision not to indict Officer Darren Wilson for the murder of Michael Brown. The events in Ferguson have provoked national conversations about race, police-community relations, the militarization of law enforcement, and more.
Here in the District we have held hearings and town hall meetings to assess local police tactics and implemented a body camera pilot program, yet there is still more work to be done. I am committed to working with law enforcement, advocates and residents to discuss meaningful policy solutions to move our city forward on these critical issues.
The disappointing outcome of this case will certainly evoke a passionate response and it is my hope that any protests or demonstrations will be peaceful and that law enforcement in the District will respect the rights of residents to assemble. Our words must now become our actions and I welcome any and all residents to schedule time to meet with my office to discuss ways to bridge the gap between police officers and those they are sworn to protect and serve.
###
Washington, DC -- Today, Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) issued the following statement on the passing of Mayor Marion Barry:
I was saddened to learn of the passing of my D.C. Council colleague. Marion Barry was a strong advocate for Ward 8 and devoted his life to the residents of Washington, D.C. His strong passion for making our city a great city was only surpassed in effort by his incredible commitment to ensuring that the poorest of our residents were never forgotten. It has been an honor for me to sit next to Mayor-for-Life Marion Barry on the dais and serve with him on the education committee for the past two years. I learned a lot about my beloved city from him and a lot about him. I will forever respect what he has done for this city in spite of his many challenges over a 40-year career. As Dr. Maya Angelou stated, “Marion Barry changed America with his unmitigated gall to stand up in the ashes of where he had fallen and come back to win.” My thoughts go out to his family and loved ones as we all mourn the loss of a true D.C. hero.
At tonight's Transgender Day of Remembrance event at the Metropolitan Community Church, Councilmember Grosso will present the following D.C. Council resolution in recognition of the day:
A CEREMONIAL RESOLUTION
________
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
________
To recognize the 15th Annual Transgender Day of Remembrance, and to declare Thursday
November 20, 2014, as “Transgender Day of Remembrance” in the District of Columbia.
WHEREAS, transgender individuals face high rates and severity of violence, including 72% of homicides according to the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Projects in 2013;
WHEREAS, the District of Columbia has a particularly alarming history of violence against transgender individuals, especially transgender women of color, including the murders of Deoni Jones, Lashai Mclean, Tyli’a Mack, Elexius Woodland, Bella Evangelista, Emonie Spaulding, Stephanie Thomas, Ukea Davis and too many others;
WHEREAS, the District of Columbia strives to be a city that is welcoming and safe for all residents and visitors, including transgender people; and
WHEREAS, the Transgender Day of Remembrance is held on November 20th around the world to memorialize those who were killed due to anti-transgender hatred or prejudice.
RESOLVED, BY THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, that this resolution may be cited as the “Transgender Day of Remembrance Resolution of 2014”.
Sec. 2. The Council of the District of Columbia recognizes the contributions of the transgender community and its vulnerability to violence, and declares Thursday, November 20, 2014 as “Transgender Day of Remembrance”.
Sec. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon the first date of publication in the District of Columbia Register.
Sarah Anne Hughes, Nov 6, 2014, DCist
A bill to change a negligence standard that advocates say treats cyclists and pedestrians injured in crashes unfairly may fail in a D.C. Council committee tomorrow. It wouldn't be the first — or second — time.
But if that does happen, the Washington Area Bicyclist Association plans to let the public know which Councilmembers supported getting rid of contributory negligence — and which ones didn't — with a scorecard sent to members and published online.
A bill introduced by Councilmember David Grosso (At-Large) and Ward 6 Councilmember Tommy Wells would end the use of contributory negligence in crashes involving vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists. Currently, if a pedestrian or cyclist is found to be even one percent at fault in a crash, they cannot recover damages.
"We have a lot of people walking and biking, and they deserve to have the legal and economic protection that [if] they're in a crash that they're compensated for their injuries," WABA's Greg Billing said after a press conference Thursday. "[The insurance lobby doesn't] want to pay people who get hurt."
Shane Farthing, WABA's executive director, said the scorecard is the first of its kind for his group. He noted the disconnect between city leaders who support a transportation plan that puts an emphasis on walking and cycling, but then leave "vulnerable roadway users" without help when they are hurt. "It's unjust and inappropriate," he said. "Our Councilmembers need to be held accountable."
Wells noted at today's press conference that the bill has been introduced "three times on behalf of bicyclists and other vulnerable users of our roadways." He chairs the Council's Committee on the Judiciary, which will hold a hearing on the bill tomorrow.
"I think once again it will fail because of the outside interests of the insurance companies who do not want to pay for the injuries of folks who are in a conflict with a car," he said.
In addition to Wells, Councilmember and mayor-elect Muriel Bowser is on the committee, as are Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Jack Evans and Mary Cheh. In an election survey put out by advocacy group All Walks DC, Bowser said replacing contributory negligence is an "issue that deserves further consideration," while Bonds voiced support for the measure.
"Trial lawyers are concerned this could be the camel's nose under the tent," Wells said. "That it could impact the size of the awards."
Wells said trial lawyers hold "a lot of sway in the John Wilson building."
"We just went through an election cycle, they contribute a lot of money to campaigns," he said. "And that will have an impact."
Grosso noted that, between the first hearing and now, he worked with trial lawyers who expressed concern over the bill to make changes. "There's no reason why this shouldn't move forward, but there's obviously some hesitancy," he said.
When asked how the Council decides between one interest (trial lawyers, insurance companies) and another (cyclists, pedestrians), Grosso said it's partially about the strength of the advocacy. "WABA and others are stepping up," he said, adding that it's a "completely different world" in D.C. than when city's roads were originally designed.
"I don't think it's as much around what these groups can do to move us," Grosso said. "It's about how quickly Councilmembers can change their opinions on how we do things."
Grosso said some Councilmembers are more conservative in their approach than progressive, defined by Grosso as someone who sees the changes happening in the city and moves urgently. "They're willing to wait ... and go over it and go over it for years and years and years," he said. "In my world, we have too many people getting hurt."
While Grosso agrees that all road users need to follow the laws, this issue is about "making sure that people are covered when they're hurt and getting rid of this arcane system."
Kojo Nnamdi Show, WAMU 88.5, November 6, 2014
D.C. voters this week approved a ballot initiative making it legal to use small amounts of marijuana for fun — not just for medical purposes. If Congress doesn’t interfere, the measure could become law next year. We explore the growing momentum behind legal marijuana nationwide, and ask about second-hand smoke, pot tourism and the lessons D.C. can learn from marijuana pioneers Colorado and Washington.
By Luz Lazo November 6, 2014, Washington Post
Advocates for cyclists and pedestrians rallied Thursday morning in support of a D.C. bill that would make it easier for cyclists to collect damages when they’re injured in collisions with vehicles.
Current law recognizes contributory negligence, meaning that if the cyclist or pedestrian is found to be 1 percent at fault in a crash, he or she cannot recover damages.
The legislation, which is up for a vote in a D.C. Council committee on Friday, would end the contributory negligence standard in favor for a comparative negligence scheme. Although the change has great support from the cycling community and other transportation advocates, insurers’ groups say they are concerned about the impact it would have on insurance costs.
Council member Tommy Wells, chair of the Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety said the change is long overdue, but acknowledged the bill is unlikely to advance out of committee — this is the third time it has been introduced.
“This bill will likely meet the fate of all the others where the insurance lobby has been able to work the council members to get them to vote against it,” Wells said at a Thursday morning news conference. “It takes a more popular uprising to say that voters are more important than money.”
The bill’s sponsor, Council member David Grosso (D-At-Large), said he still hopes the five-member committee will vote in favor of the legislation, but he said he was already prepared to reintroduce the measure in January.
Supporters say the District and four other states are the only remaining jurisdictions in the nation with the “outdated and unjust negligence standard.” When introduced, the bill only covered cyclists, but since its September hearing, it has been expanded to also cover pedestrians and people with disabilities, including those who use wheelchairs.
“Fairness, safety and equity are the basic principles of this legislation,” Grosso said. “This amendment significantly enhances the bill, adding a needed layer of protection for those residents who rely on alternate means of transportation to get around the city.”
The Washington Area Bicyclist Association says the bill is “desperately needed,” especially as the number of bike commuters continues to grow in the District. Recent census data suggests that 4.5 percent of working D.C. residents commute by bicycle and 13.6 percent walk to work.
“It is well past time for D.C. to join the majority of states in bringing fairness to the legal system for vulnerable roadway users,” said Shane Farthing, WABA’s executive director.
Farthing said the current law does not work in today’s transportation environment and in a city that encourages people to bike, walk or use public transportation to get around.
“Our city, our leaders can’t support a program… where we get people out of the cars, on the bikes, on their feet, walking around and then when something goes wrong and they get hit they maintain this unjust, unfair legal system that intentionally blames the victim and denies claims, leaving them injured and uncompensated,” he said.
WABA is launching a voting record scorecard with this bill, he said. The group wiill be sending an e-mail tomorrow to thousands its members and supports reporting how each committee member voted.
(The Washington Post has contacted offices of the other four committee members to ask whether they support the bill, but as of this posting had heard back from them.)
Martha Dye, 47, a bike commuter who was injured last year while riding on Constitution Avenue and 17th Street NW, said she would be disappointed if the bill dies in committee. When she was hit in February of last year, the insurance company denied her compensation for the injuries she suffered.
“I had the green light, I was in the crosswalk and the car turned right anyway, and hit me and I was hurt,” she said. “I had some nice-looking bruises and my bike was messed up and it cost me several hundred dollars. I went through the process with the insurance company and they said no.”
In a letter, the insurance company told Dye, “Your actions, proceeding when it was not safe to do so, contributed to this loss. In the absence of legal liability, we would not be justified in making settlement. Therefore, we must deny payment of this claim.”
“It is absurd– here I am with the green light and hit by a car and they say there is no liability,” she said. “This needs to change. It is always the pedestrians and the cyclists that are losing out because we are the ones that get hurt in those situations.”
The American Insurance Association says the change is unnecessary and would result in significant cost increases to D.C. drivers.
“There is likely to be a significant cost impact to D.C. drivers, taxpayers, businesses, and the government itself,” said Eric M. Goldberg, vice president of the association.
The association says that auto insurers settle and pay bicyclist claims all the time and that changing the law will result higher premiums for drivers– and could potentially encourage some drivers to drop their insurance.
“In D.C., around one in five drivers is already uninsured,” the group said. “Economically disadvantaged people are most impacted by increases in auto insurance prices – they would be the most likely to drop coverage when it becomes unaffordable. Having more insured drivers benefits everyone.”
Some D.C. residents also oppose the legislation, saying the District should instead address the rising conflicts on the road by enforcing traffic laws fairly among drivers, cyclists and pedestrians.
“What I do feel needs to be addressed is for cyclists and pedestrians alike to learn to respect and obey the rules of the road,” said Jennifer White who lives in Ward 4. She said she often encounters pedestrians blocking cars and cyclists drifting through red lights, not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign, riding the center lanes to avoid sitting in traffic and failing to use hand signals to alert a vehicle that they are turning right.
“They act like they own the road,” she said. “If we are all expected to share the road, then we should all be expected to obey the rules or face the consequences.”
WASHINGTON, DC— On Friday, November 7, the Committee on the Judiciary & Public Safety will hold a mark-up and vote on B20-884, the “Bicycle and Motor Vehicle Collision Recovery Amendment Act of 2014,” which would remove the harsh and antiquated system of contributory negligence for pedestrians, cyclists, and other vulnerable roadway users who are injured in collisions with motor vehicles. The introduced bill is available here.
“Pedestrians and bicyclists injured in a crash with a motor vehicle are frequently barred from recovering damages to pay for associated medical bills and damaged property,” said Councilmember Tommy Wells. “The District of Columbia and four other states are the only remaining jurisdictions in the nation with this outdated and unjust negligence standard. I am proud that we are finally taking the steps to change this unfair law.”
“Fairness, safety and equity are the basic principles of this legislation,” said At-Large Councilmember David Grosso who co-introduced the bill with Councilmembers Wells and Cheh. “Based on the testimony we received during the September hearing, the Committee was able to expand the bill to include vulnerable users from pedestrians, cyclists, those in wheelchairs and others. This amendment significantly enhances the bill, adding a needed layer of protection for those residents who rely on alternate means of transportation to get around the city.”
The Committee worked with the Trial Lawyers Association of Metropolitan Washington, the Washington Area Bicyclist Association (WABA), the Pedestrian Advisory Council (PAC), and All Walks DC to help craft the bill. “It is well past time for DC to join the majority of states in bringing fairness to the legal system for vulnerable roadway users, including bicyclists and pedestrians,” says Shane Farthing, WABA executive director. “The victim-blaming contributory negligence doctrine prevents blocks access to justice for people hoping to recover from roadway crashes and injuries. As bicycling continues to grow in the city, we count on our elected officials to make the necessary legal changes to protect people who bike, and we look forward the passage of this bill.”
"All Walks DC calls upon our elected representatives to make a stand against the legal status quo that protects drivers and insurance companies at the expense of pedestrians,” said Tracy Loh of All Walks DC. “This bill is an opportunity to not only make DC safer, but improve access to real justice for pedestrians who suffer traffic conflicts in our great walking city."
"The Pedestrian Advisory Council advises the Mayor and Council, and in this role we voted to recommend that pedestrians be included in the bill and testified to this at the September hearing," said PAC Chair Jason Broehm. "We're pleased that the bill was amended to do this."
To rally support for the bill, Councilmembers Wells and David Grosso will hold a joint press conference on Thursday, November 6 at 10:00am in Room 123 of the John A. Wilson Building. Wells and Grosso will be joined by All Walks DC and the Washington Area Bicyclist Association which will unveil its official voting record scorecard for DC Councilmembers. B20-884 is the first bill on which Councilmembers’ votes will be graded.
PRESS CONFERENCE DETAILS
WHAT: Joint Press Conference
WHO: DC Councilmember Tommy Wells, DC Councilmember David Grosso, Washington Area Bicyclists Association (WABA), All Walks DC.
DATE: Thursday, November 6, 2014
TIME: 10:00am
WHERE: Room 123
John A. Wilson Building
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20004
Both Councilmembers will be available for questions immediately following the presentation
###
Please join me and the Washington Performing Arts on Wednesday, November 19 from 6 p.m. - 9 p.m. as we host "Politics and Arts: A Jam Session in the Wilson Building." The event will showcase local musicians and also provide musicians from different genres and backgrounds with an opportunity to network and share their own passion for the arts. Special performances of the night will include SynchroniCity, Roof Beams, and for an added bonus a dance selection by SerendibDance.
This spectacular event will be the third in a series of arts events that I have hosted. The events are used as an opportunity to showcase the thriving arts community and also serve as a continuing effort to provide community engagement opportunities at the John A. Wilson Building. Prior events have been held in my office but I wanted to expand the event to welcome the arts community and members and staff of the D.C. Council. The event will be held on the first floor of the John A. Wilson Building (foyer) and will consist of a "mix and mingle" with light refreshments followed by a program with local musicians.
My last event, an "Evening of Poetry" showcased D.C.'s artistic youth with selections from the D.C. Scores, Free Minds and the D.C. Youth Slam Team who won first place at the Brave New Voices youth poetry slam contest. To see a recap of the event, click here.
For more information, please contact my office at (202) 724-8105.
By Mike DeBonis October 30, 2014, Washington Post
If D.C. residents vote to legalize marijuana possession next week, it wouldn’t just mean a sea change in drug policy in the nation’s capital. It could also mean big business.
A study by District financial officials shared Thursday with lawmakers estimates a legal D.C. cannabis market worth $130 million a year.
The ballot initiative voters will see Tuesday does not allow for the legal sale of marijuana — only the possession and home cultivation of small amounts — but D.C. Council members gathered Thursday to hear testimony about what a legal sales regime might look like.
The issues pondered included how marijuana might be grown, tracked, sold and taxed, but more than a few witnesses showed up simply to cheer on or warn against the general notion of legalization.
Council member Vincent B. Orange (D-At Large) repeatedly reminded them that the legalization question lies in the hands of voters — who, according to several polls taken in recent months, are expected to endorse the measure.
View GraphicThe status of marijuana laws across the nation.
The passage of Initiative 71 would “still . . . not give us the justification for sales and commercialization of marijuana,” said Will Jones III, a D.C. resident who leads a group opposing the initiative.
But Orange and his colleagues were determined to start working out the logistics of creating a legitimate cannabis industry in Washington — even as they remain wary of potential congressional intervention, which could stamp out the legalization effort before it takes effect.
Testimony prepared by city financial officials pegged the potential size of the market at $130 million a year, based on an estimate of 122,000 users, including residents, commuters and tourists, each consuming three ounces of marijuana costing an average of $350 per ounce.
An initial version of a marijuana regulation bill before the council sets a sales tax of 15 percent, suggesting potential government revenue of nearly $20 million a year. A system of legal marijuana sales would also come with considerable costs to the District government, the testimony indicated, requiring the hiring of up to a dozen additional employees and the purchase of new systems and equipment.
The financial official who testified, Yesim Sayin Taylor, said it is difficult at this point to estimate the city’s exact revenue or costs, citing the unfinished nature of the regulatory legislation and the difficulty of determining how many current marijuana users will migrate from the black market to legal, taxed purchases.
One expert, Joseph Henchman of the Tax Foundation, warned council members against setting tax rates so high that marijuana users would stick with lower-priced black-market cannabis.
“Colorado and Washington picked tax rates that are still too high,” he said. “The black market still exists . . . and the black market prices are lower.”
Two Brookings Institution fellows who had studied the legalization programs in Colorado and Washington urged D.C. officials to learn from the experiences in those states. One, John Hudak, urged members to have “listening tours” in the community — hearing from, among others, those engaged in the underground marijuana economy.
“They are efficient. They are innovative. They are effective businessmen and women,” he said.
The regulatory bill currently under consideration, drafted by David Grosso (I-At Large), would tax recreational sales at 15 percent and send those proceeds, along with fees paid by cultivators and retailers, to a variety of agencies and programs, including police training, youth programs and efforts to combat substance abuse. The District’s alcohol regulators would oversee marijuana sales.
Fred Moosally, director of the Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration, called the bill “ a good start” but suggested tightening several measures to conform with guidance issued last year by the Justice Department on local marijuana programs — particularly adding measures to keep drugs out of the hands of those younger than 21 and to prevent the import or export of marijuana across state lines.
Grosso said Thursday he has already rewritten his bill in response to public input, including dropping plans to end the city’s medical marijuana program and focusing the revenue more squarely on youth programs and prevention efforts.
“It is time for the District of Columbia to step up and address this issue in a thoughtful and measured way,” he said.
Given the complexity of writing and implementing regulations, Taylor said, no city revenue is expected before late 2016. Moosally declined to estimate when the first retail sales could take place. “We recognize this is a time-sensitive issue,” he said. “But at the same time, we have to get this right.”
Councilmember David Grosso’s opening remarks from the Committee on Business and Consumer Affairs hearing on three bills that will amend the Small Business Enterprise and Certified Business Expenditure Acts:
Thank you, Chairman Orange for holding this hearing.
Today, we are here to discuss bills that would amend the Small Business Enterprise (SBE) and Certified Business Expenditure Acts. I do not believe that the current set-up is working well for our city businesses or agencies. I am not suggesting we disband the SBE program, I am suggesting that we reform how it is being implemented. I believe we can address helping small businesses in more creative ways that will help them thrive as opposed to forcing agency’s to do business with them.
Last December when the Committee held a roundtable on these issues we analyzed the Auditor’s September 2013 report that provided a substantial amount of basic data regarding each agency’s budget, the required SBE amount to be spent, and how much the agency actually did spend during the first three quarters of fiscal year 2013. We are able to capture which agencies are in compliance and which ones are not. And as I stated last year, from what I can tell, there is a pattern of inconsistency from agency to agency, quarter to quarter, year to year.
I believe our system is too inflexible. Rather than spurring growth, it pushes businesses out of the District because they do not want to deal with the maze of requirements for certification. I do not believe that we can demand that each agency meet an often intangible goal without looking at a more holistic approach that supports small businesses without over burdening government agencies.
Creating more SBEs by expanding the scope of RFP requirements, broadening the exceptions in the Code for who qualifies as a CBE or SBE, or making blanket percentage requirements on agencies is not the answer.
As we know, the SBE program is not unique to D.C. Across the country, hundreds of cities and counties have small business enterprise programs in place. Each program is different, but common themes of success include established city-wide participation and individual contracting goals. This year, the Small Business Policy Project studied the concerns of over 200 stakeholders. In February, the project published their findings in a report that includes over 50 recommendations for improving the environment for small businesses in the District of Columbia. Many of their recommendations are relatively simple and can be done soon. For example we can do three things:
First we need to improve the environment for small businesses who want to operate in the city. We can expand their resources and technical assistance funding that helps to provide support at each stage in a business’s “lifecycle.” If there is better technical assistance then we can measure outcomes and track a business’s long term success.
Second, we need to give the small business community a voice and listen to that voice. Let small businesses express their needs and have a platform where they are heard. For example, a small business advocate or ombudsman would help the business community to advocate for their needs and concerns.
And lastly, we can work to improve the access to information and communication with small businesses. If DCRA and DSLBD can streamline their processes and share more data than small businesses can thrive here. Also, if we allow for the delay in licensing fees or other major hurdles like retail space and other economic hardships that emerging small businesses must face than we are truly helping them survive.
I would like to hear today if DSLBD would be able to implement these bills, if they truly address SBE and CBE compliance, and if there aren’t better ways to assist each agency to meet SBE goals and how they engage with stakeholders to raise participation.
I would like to work together with you, Chairman Orange and the Committee to find ways that government can better assist small businesses so that they can thrive in D.C. and so that SBE’s can be involved in all of our contracts.
The Office of Congresswoman Norton is still looking for D.C. residents who can tell their story of long term unemployment and the struggle of looking for a job, at a community roundtable entitled “An Unemployment Speak Out” on Wednesday, October 29th from 6:30PM to 8:30PM. We are looking for long-term unemployed residents, particularly those hurt by the cut-off of long-term unemployment benefits, as well as recent college graduates looking for employment.
Submit stories and commentary to Tristan.Breaux@mail.house.gov
Councilmember Grosso's opening statement from the Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety Field Hearing on MPD stop and contact policies, at Howard University on October 8, 2014. You can also watch the entire hearing, which lasted for over three hours. The hearing reconvenes on October 27 at 11:30 in room 412 of the John A. Wilson building.
Mike DeBonis, the Washington Post, October 9, 2014
First things first: D.C. Council member David Grosso would like to assure you he has no plans to introduce a bill banning police officers in the District from carrying guns.
But Grosso’s offhand comments, aired at a Wednesday night D.C. Council hearing on policing practices, have certainly stirred up the conversation he says he wanted to start.
“My staff won’t let me tell you that I think we ought to get rid of guns in this city, and that police shouldn’t have guns, so I’m not going to tell you that,” he said at Howard University to a smattering of applause. “I think we have to reimagine the way that we relate to one another, across the board, and that includes [the D.C. police department].”
Grosso’s comments went from his mouth to tweets to the Associated Press wire and on to the realm of conservative media, where his offhand remark has summarized thusly: “DC Councilman Wants To Take Cops’ Guns.”
“I’m not introducing any legislation,” Grosso (I-At Large) said in a Thursday phone interview. “I’m just trying to have a conversation beyond the knee jerk of what people say all the time.”
That means, he said, challenging the orthodoxy of assuming that all cops need to carry firearms at all times: “When you have a gun, it changes the dynamic completely. If we had a police force that could be trained to de-escalate situations without a gun like in other countries, I think we’d be in a better place. … Call me a radical, but I’m trying to change things in our city.”
Grosso said he is struck by the lack of trust that exists between D.C. police and the city’s residents, as evidenced by testimony at Wednesday’s hearing and his own conversations with some of his neighbors, who he says have “no relationship to speak of” with police.
“We’re not going to increase that level of trust unless we change things dramatically,” he said. “What I’m saying is, here’s a dramatic suggestion. It’s been tossed around historically, but let’s have an honest conversation about guns. … Violence begets violence, I believe that. I bought into that a long time ago.”
Gwendolyn Crump, a police spokeswoman, declined to comment on Grosso’s suggestion.
Grosso suggested that, for instance, among officers assigned to a particular patrol area, only some might carry weapons. “I’m not naive here. I don’t believe there will be a time when there will be no guns,” he said. “But let’s try and find a way to reduce the number of incidents when you have a police officer who is trying to relate to the community in a positive way but has a gun on their belt. … Maybe no guns isn’t the answer, but we have to come up with something, and I think we’re smart enough to do this.”
The applause that Grosso’s comments generated Wednesday would suggest he might find a sympathetic audience among the liberal District populace. But perhaps not, given that the city is barely a year removed from a devastating mass shooting, where D.C. beat cops were among the first to respond.
Presented with the classic bad-guy-with-a-gun, active shooter scenario, Gross was unfazed. “We ought to legislate and create policies based on the overwhelming examples of what happens every day, not on extreme cases,” he said.
Matt Cohen, DCist, Oct 7, 2014
With marijuana possession decriminalized to nothing more than a simple fine if you're caught with an ounce or less, the lingering questions is: what becomes of those with marijuana charges on their record before the law came into effect?
Under a bill that Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) introduced last fall, the criminal records for District residents convicted of non-violent marijuana-related crimes would be sealed. During today's legislative meeting, Grosso's bill unanimously passed the first vote on the bill.
"Our criminal justice system has relied on vengeance and punishment," Gross said during a brief reading of the bill before it came to vote. He explained how this bill is a step in the right direction for expunging the records of those whose lives have been made harder because of a non-violent marijuana-related drug charge. Thus, all those with minor, non-violent marijuana charges on their record can have their court records sealed for good.
Additionally, the Council also voted to approve a bill to permanently change the District's medical marijuana laws. In August, Mayor Vince Gray quietly signed temporary legislation into law that allows doctors to prescribe medical marijuana to patients as they see fit, rather than limiting it to a short list of qualifying conditions. The Council voted to make the temporary bill permanent.
Of course, D.C.'s marijuana laws could be radically changed come November, as residents will be able to vote on a ballot initiative—Initiative 71—that would legalize the possession, consumption, and cultivation of small amounts of marijuana.