Instant Runoff Voting Amendment Act of 2014

Councilmember David Grosso

A BILL

IN THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Councilmember Grosso introduced the following bill, which was referred to the Committee on __________________________.

                                                            .

To provide for the election of the Mayor, Members of Council, and the Attorney General using instant runoff voting, to require that District voting systems be compatible with an instant runoff ballot system, and setting a date and conditions for implementation.

            BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, That this act may be cited as the “Instant Runoff Voting Amendment Act of 2014”.

Sec. 2. Definitions.

            For the purposes of this act, the term:

(1)   “Instant runoff voting,” also called “ranked choice voting,” means a method of

casting and tabulating votes whereby the voters rank candidates according to the order of their choice and counting proceeds in rounds in which candidates are eliminated. In every round, each ballot is counted as one vote for the highest ranked advancing candidate.

(2)   “Continuing candidate” means a candidate who has not been eliminated.

(3)   “Continuing ballot” means a ballot that is not deemed an exhausted ballot.

(4)   “Exhausted ballot” means a ballot that does not rank any continuing candidate,

contains an overvote at the highest continuing ranking or contains two or more sequential skipped rankings before its highest continuing ranking.

            Sec. 3. Instant Runoff Voting.

            Chapter 10 of Title 1 of the District of Columbia Official Code is amended by adding the new section 1-1001.08(b) to read as follows:

            “1-1001.08(b). Instant Runoff Elections.

            “(a) The Mayor, Attorney General, Chairman and members of the Council shall be elected using a ranked choice, or “instant runoff” ballot in both the primary and in the general election.

            “(b) In each primary and general election for the office of Mayor, Attorney General, Chairman and member of the Council:

                        “(1) The ballot shall allow voters to rank candidates in order of preference equal to the total number of candidates for each office; provided, however if the voting system, vote tabulation system or similar or related equipment used by the District cannot feasibly accommodate choices equal to the total number of candidates running for office, then the Board of Elections may limit the number of choices a voter may rank to no fewer than three. The ballot shall allow voters to rank a write-in candidate. A voter may include no more than one write-in candidate among that voter’s ranked choices for each office.

                        “(2) For election to a single office, tabulation proceeds in rounds and the following procedure is used. In each round, each continuing ballot must be counted as one vote for its highest ranked continuing candidate. If more than two continuing candidates receive votes in a round, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and a new round begins. If two or fewer continuing candidates receive votes in a round, the candidate with the most votes is elected.

                        “(3) For election to more than one office, the following procedure is used. Tabulation proceeds in rounds. In each round, each continuing ballot must be counted as one vote for its highest ranked continuing candidate. If the number of continuing candidates is greater than one more than the number of offices to be elected, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and a new round begins. If the number of continuing candidates is equal to or less than one more than the number of offices to be elected, the candidates with the most votes are elected.

                        “(4) Optionally where appropriate, during the Board’s tabulation of results, two or more candidates may be eliminated simultaneously by batch elimination.  Batch elimination may only occur if in any round there is a candidate who’s vote total plus the vote totals of all candidates with an equal number or fewer votes is less than the vote total of the candidate with the next higher vote total. Under those conditions, then that candidate and all candidates with an equal number or fewer votes in the current round may be simultaneously eliminated.

                        “(5) If all the choices indicated on a voter’s ballot have been eliminated, that ballot shall be deemed an exhausted ballot.

                        “(6) If a ranked-choice ballot gives equal rank to two or more candidates, the ballot shall be declared an exhausted ballot when such multiple rankings are reached.

                        “(7) If a voter cases a ranked-choice ballot but skips a rank, the voter’s vote shall be added to the totals of that voter’s next ranked choice.

                        “(8) A tie between two or more candidates shall be resolved pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 1-1001.10(c).

            “(c) The ballot must be simple and easy to understand and allow a voter to rank candidates for an office in order of choice. If feasible, ballots must be designed so that a voter may mark that voter’s first choices in the same manner as that for offices not elected by instant runoff voting. Instructions on the ballot must conform substantially to the following specifications, subject to usability testing and modification based on ballot design and voting machine: “Vote by indicating your first-choice candidate and ranking additional candidates in order of preference. Indicate your first choice by marking the number “1” beside a candidate’s name, your 2nd choice by marking the number “2” beside a candidate’s name, your 3rd choice by marking the number “3” beside a candidate’s name and so on. Rank as many choices as you wish. Indicating 2nd and later preferences will not count against your first choice. Do not skip numbers, and do not mark the same number beside more than one candidate.”

            “(d) The Board of Election shall conduct a voter education campaign to familiarize voters with instant runoff voting. Sample ballots illustrating “instant runoff” voting procedures shall be posted in or near the voting booth, and shall be included in the instruction packed for absentee ballots.

            “(e) Any voting system, vote tabulation system, or similar or related equipment acquired by the District shall be capable to administer instant runoff voting without further modifications.

“(f) Instant runoff voting shall be used for the primary municipal election in 2016 and all subsequent elections. If the Board of Elections certifies to the Mayor and the Council no later than November 1, 2015 that the Board will not be ready to implement ranked-choice balloting in 2016, then the District shall begin using ranked-choice or “instant runoff” balloting at the immediate next municipal election, including special elections.”

Sec. 5. Effect on Rights of Political Parties.

For all statutory and charter provisions in the District pertaining to the rights of political parties, the number of votes cast for a party’s candidate for an office elected by a ranked choice or instant runoff method is the number of votes credited to that candidate after the initial round of counting.

Sec. 6. Rules.

            Within 120 days of the effective date of this act the Mayor shall, pursuant to title I of the District of Columbia Administrative Procedure Act, approved October 21, 1968 (82 Stat. 1204; D.C. Official Code  §  2-501 et seq.), issue rules to implement the provisions of this act.

Sec. 7.  Fiscal impact statement.
The Council adopts the fiscal impact statement in the committee report as the

fiscal impact statement required by section 602(c)(3) of the District of Columbia Home Rule
Act, approved December 24, 1973 (87 Stat. 813; D.C. Official Code § 1-206.02(c)(3)).

Sec. 8.  Effective date.
            This act shall take effect following approval by the Mayor (or in the event of veto by the Mayor, action by the Council to override the veto), a 30-day period of Congressional review as provided in section 602(c)(1) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, approved December 24, 1973 (87 Stat. 813; D.C. Official Code § 1-206.02(c)(1)), and publication in the District of Columbia Register.

Open Primary Elections Amendment Act of 2014

Councilmember David Catania                                               Councilmember David Grosso

Councilmember Tommy Wells                                                Councilmember Mary M. Cheh

   Councilmember David Grosso  

A BILL

IN THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Councilmembers Grosso, Catania, Wells, Cheh, and Evans introduced the following bill, which

was referred to the Committee on _________________________________                                         .

To amend the District of Columbia Election Code of 1955 to provide that a qualified voter shall

have the right to change his or her party affiliation after the 30th day preceding an

election and on election day.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL FO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, That this act may be cited as the “Open Primary Elections Amendment Act of 2014”.

 Sec. 2. Section 7(g) of the District of Columbia Election Code of 1955, approved August 12, 1955 (69 Stat. 702; D.C. Official Code § 1-1001.07(g)), is amended as follows:

(a) Paragraph (4) is amended by striking the phrase "A qualified elector shall not change his or her party affiliation after the 30th day preceding an election." in its entirety.

(b) Paragraph (5) is amended by striking the phrase "A qualified elector shall not change his or her party affiliation on election day." in its entirety.

Sec. 3. Fiscal impact statement.
The Council adopts the fiscal impact statement in the committee report as the fiscal impact statement required by section 602(c)(3) of the District of Columbia Home Rule
Act, approved December 24, 1973 (87 Stat. 813; D.C. Official Code § 1-206.02(c)(3)).

Sec. 4.  Effective date.
            This act shall take effect following approval by the Mayor (or in the event of veto by the Mayor, action by the Council to override the veto), a 30-day period of Congressional review as provided in section 602(c)(1) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, approved December 24, 1973 (87 Stat. 813; D.C. Official Code § 1-206.02(c)(2)), and publication in the District of Columbia Register.

Grosso's Elections Reform Package to Boost Voter Turnout

For Immediate Release: 

March 4, 2014

Contact: Dionne Johnson Calhoun

(202) 724-8105

Today, Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) introduced an elections reform package in an effort to allow more residents to engage and participate in the democratic process. The legislation includes the "Instant Runoff Voting Amendment Act of 2014," the "Open Primary Elections Amendment Act of 2014," and the "Clean Hands Elections Reform Amendment Act of 2014."

The "Instant Runoff Voting Amendment Act of 2014" would provide a method of casting and tabulating votes whereby voters would be able to rank candidates in the order of their choice and the candidates with the least number of votes would be eliminated. 

"It is extremely troubling that candidates can be elected to public office with as little as 30 percent of the vote," said Grosso.  "This important legislation will increase voter turnout as voters will be free to mark their ballot for the candidate that they truly prefer without fear that their choice will help elect their least preferred candidate. More importantly, instant runoff voting ensures that the elected candidate has a true majority support."

Grosso introduced the "Open Primary Elections Amendment Act of 2014" highlighting that the District has a growing number of Independent voters that identify with neither the Republican nor the Democratic Party.  According to the D.C. Board of Elections, in 2003, there were a little over 50,000 Independent voters and today, almost 76,000 District voters identify as such, yet these voters do not have the opportunity to vet candidates for public office through the primary process.

This legislation would allow qualified registered voters the opportunity to change their party affiliation through Election Day. 

Finally, the "Clean Hands Elections Reform Amendment Act of 2014" would require candidates seeking elected office in D.C. to receive certification from the Office of Campaign Finance that neither the candidate nor any of the candidate's previous campaigns or political committees owe any outstanding taxes, fines or fees to the District prior to receiving ballot access.

"By requiring candidates to certify that they have 'clean hands' when it comes to their prior campaigns, we will encourage our candidates to be more attentive to the elections and campaign finance rules," said Grosso.

Grosso will continue to push for residents to become more engaged in the political process. During his first year in office, he introduced the "Public Financing of Political Campaigns Amendment Act of 2013" and more recently the "Local Resident Voting Rights Act of 2013."

       ###

Grosso Calls for New Approach to Improve Relationship between MPD and the Transgender Community

For Immediate Release: 

 February 27, 2014

Contact: Dionne Johnson Calhoun

(202) 724-8105

Washington, D.C. - Today, Councilmember David Grosso (At Large-I) issued the following statement regarding the recently released report by the Hate Crimes Assessment Task Force written by the Anti-Defamation League on the Metropolitan Police Department's (MPD) programs in support of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community:  

The report released yesterday on relations between MPD and the LGBT community is an important step toward improving public safety in our city. While I think the recommendations are sensible and Chief Lanier should act on them quickly, I was concerned in particular with one of the findings. It is upsetting that our transgender residents continue to have extremely negative interactions with MPD, despite MPD having some of the best LGBT policies in the country.

Another concern after reading the report was that the findings and recommendations on improving safety for transgender residents did not mention the policing of commercial sex. The report noted that transgender women (African-Americans and Latinas in particular), express that MPD regularly views and treats them as criminals. This might be as much a result of legal policies as it is a result of police bias.

Just as we are reconsidering our drug laws, which have been found to be discriminatory, I think it is time that we open up the conversation regarding how we handle commercial sex.  We need to consider changing from a framework of criminalization to a framework that emphasizes the health and human rights of those involved. I look forward to having serious conversations about these topics with my constituents and my colleagues.

       ###

D.C. official faces questions about D.C. TAG audit

By Emma Brown, The Washington Post

D.C. Council members on Monday quizzed State Superintendent of Education Jesús Aguirre about an unreleased audit showing that city officials cannot account for nearly $10 million in federal taxpayer dollars meant for a tuition assistance program that helps D.C. students pay for college.

The audit, first reported by The Washington Post, also describes weak internal controls at Aguirre’s agency, the Office of the State Superintendent of Education, which manages the D.C. Tuition Assistance Grant program, known as D.C. TAG.

Aguirre described the audit, dated Sept. 30, 2013, as a draft with findings that are premature. But he acknowledged that he and other officials have not figured out how much money should be in TAG’s accounts.

“What I’m hearing is that you really aren’t going to be able to challenge some of these underlying assumptions, which are that you can’t account for these dollars,” said David A. Catania (I-At Large), chairman of the council’s Education Committee. “Whether it’s a final draft or not, you still won’t be able to account for these dollars.”

TAG provides District students with up to $10,000 apiece for out-of-state public schools and up to $2,500 per year for historically black colleges and private schools in the Washington area. Congress has appropriated $317 million for the subsidy since its inception in 2000, helping more than 20,000 students pay for college.

The auditors questioned two large expenditures — $5.5 million in fiscal 2004 and $4 million in 2008 — that they said could not be explained by officials at OSSE or the city’s Office of the Chief Financial Officer.

TAG funds left unspent at the end of each year can be carried over to the next, so uncertainty about expenditures in one year can cascade into the future. City officials have estimated the carry-over from 2012 to 2013 to have been between $2.6 million and $22 million, the audit says. The auditors urged the two agencies to agree on the correct amount as soon as possible, but that hasn’t happened.

Though the audit was completed in September, OSSE did not share it until late January or early February, said Deloras A. Shepherd, associate chief financial officer. Asked why OSSE waited so long to share the information, Aguirre apologized.

“I don’t have an answer for that,” he said.

Amid the uncertainty about how much money was available for students, OSSE officials last year requested and received more than $9 million in local tax dollars to supplement its congressional appropriation. TAG has never had to turn away eligible students for lack of funds.

Amid the uncertainty about how much money was available for students, OSSE officials last year requested and received more than $9 million in local tax dollars to supplement its congressional appropriation. TAG has never had to turn away eligible students for lack of funds.

Catania and fellow Education Committee member David Grosso (I-At Large) expressed exasperation that the agency had asked for extra funds without anyone from OSSE or the Office of the Chief Financial Officer knowing how much money should actually be in TAG accounts.

“Who’s running this operation?” Catania asked.

“It blows my mind,” Grosso said. “This is really a head-scratcher.”

TAG did not end up using much of the $9 million last year, and $7.9 million of it was rolled over to this year. That money will go toward filling the gap between this year’s congressional appropriation of $30 million and TAG’s estimated budget of about $33.7 million, officials said.

Catania is pushing for a locally funded scholarship program called D.C. Promise, which D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) has warned could discourage Congress from continuing to fund TAG.

Catania said Monday that the city cannot rely on TAG’s federal appropriations alone to meet the need for college aid.

Aguirre agreed. “There is a point in time in the next year or two that we will be short on funding,” he said. “As you stated, essentially the federal allocation hasn’t kept up with the cost of tuition.”

Catania said he expects OSSE to submit a final audit and an agreed-upon carry-over figure before its budget hearing in the spring.

Oversight Hearings Week in Review Feb 17-21

February, March and April are an especially busy time at the D.C. Council between performance oversight hearings for city agencies and hearings on the budget for Fiscal Year 2015. Since most residents don’t have time to watch hours upon hours of Council hearings—many happening simultaneously—we thought we’d be your eyes and ears into what’s happening here at the Wilson Building. We present our week in review!

The hearings last week for committees on which Councilemember Grosso sits all took place on Wednesday, February 19.

Perhaps predictably, the Transportation and the Environment Committee oversight hearing with the DC Taxicab Commission (DCTC) got the most attention in the press—including a mention of a recent experience of Councilmember Grosso’s wife with a cab that had no credit card machine. The Councilmember pressed DCTC chair Ron Linton on the topic, who said that perhaps 10-12% of cabs are “resisting” compliance with the credit card payment mandate. Accessibility was another key issue, particularly as the only public witnesses described the findings of the Disability Advisory Committee for DCTC. We look forward to receiving the Committee’s final report and working to ensure that its recommendations are implemented. Additionally, the Commission is set to issue new regulations for hired car services in the coming year and we will be keeping a close eye on that. The Councilmember asked about this and other items in a follow-up letter after the hearing.

Following the spirited dialogue that took place during the DC Taxicab Commission oversight hearing, the Department of Parks & Recreation (DPR) hearing was markedly lighter. You can read the follow-up letter that the Couniclmember sent to the Department after the hearing.

• DPR touted a 90% customer service satisfaction ranking based on special event and customer satisfaction surveys they received.
• Community advocates praised DPR for their commitment to building new playgrounds and hosting events like the Summer Hiring Fair set for February 22.  This effort is the result of a partnership between DOES and DPR.
• DPR is working closely with the community to bring the Friendship Park project to life.  This project will include a splash park, a performance stage and more.
• Questions arose regarding delayed facility openings, unexpected closures and how DPR communicates these issues to the public.
• And finally, we learned that DPR Park Rangers are in fact, not a police force.  All in a day’s work.

The State Board of Education, the Deputy Mayor for Education and DC Public Library were up in the Committee on Education oversight hearing. From school discipline and early childhood education to facility modernization and maintenance, a lot of issues were covered. Here are a couple highlights from witness testimony and questioning.

• The Deputy Mayor for Education and the Office of the State Superintendent of Education have partnered with the Department of Employment Services to launch a Reengagement Center for disconnected youth this fall.
• There are a great number of schools that have critical modernization needs, such as Powell and Garrison, but Councilmember Grosso pressed the Deputy Mayor to encourage the Mayor, D.C. Public Schools, and Department of General Services to revisit the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and at a minimum move up the modernization plans for several schools that are not in compliance with the Americans With Disability Act such as Banneker and Bruce Monroe at Parkview.
• The State Board of Education will be hiring the new Ombudsman by the end of February. Be on the lookout for that announcement!
• Advocates for public libraries are expanding their focus beyond the existing DC Public Library branches, and are pushing for a general interest library at the DC Jail. Hard to believe they don’t already have one.

Meanwhile, the Committee on Business, Consumer and Regulatory Affairs was conducting its oversight hearing with agencies big and small—the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA), the Department of Insurance, Securities and Banking (DISB), the Office of the Tenant Advocate (OTA) and the Alcohol and Beverage Regulatory Administration (ABRA).

Advocates voiced concerns about noise levels from Dupont Circle clubs—exceeding the highest allowable sound level of 50 decibels.   Regulation is a problem because MPD can write a citation with direct evidence, ABRA can enforce noise violations if they come when called, but DCRA is responsible for measuring the sounds waves with one of the TWO meter readers the city owns.  ABRA agreed to work with MPD and DCRA to publish reports about noise violation enforcement and look into getting another meter.

A loophole in the Foreclosure Mediation Program allows mortgage lenders to file lawsuits against homeowners in D.C. Superior Court—and avoid the statutory requirement for a Mediation Certificate.  The Mediation Certificate is intended to protect the lendee from costly litigation and robo-signing fraud.   The certificate is supposed to be required for foreclosures that are non-judicial procedures or lawsuit. 

DCRA spent the last year working to modernize their information technology system.  “Project Dox” was launched in 2013 and 300 business licenses were issued online (about 10% of licenses issued).  DCRA intends to issue at least a quarter of their overall licenses in 2014 online.   They are also implementing a web-portal that will allow cross-agency information sharing. 

Councilmember Grosso adjourned his first hearing—the Chairman had to jet and we just had too many questions to ask. 

Throughout all four oversight hearings, Councilmember Grosso pressed agency heads on transparency and accessibility. He asked each agency about its compliance with federal “508” standards for ensuring that websites are accessible to persons with disabilities including vision impairment. Continuing his effort to ensure information about District boards and commissions is available, the Councilmember also asked each agency about those bodies under its purview. While some agencies are doing better than others in this area, it is clear that our bill to create a centralized list of boards and commissions with all the relevant information is still necessary.

Quote of the Week:

"I won't bore you with the stories of sex on windshields while men enjoy the show from inside their cars, the urination all over our front entrance or the make-shift bar that popped up in the adjoining vacant building’s parking lot for “pre-bar parties” out of a van." –A Dupont Circle resident describing scenes in the neighborhood

Stat of the Week:

In DCPS, less than 50% of African-American boys graduate from high school in four years.

DC cabby 'kidnaps' Councilmember's daughter over cash

WASHINGTON (WUSA9) - DC Councilmember Mary Cheh says her own daughter was technically kidnapped in a taxicab dispute over cash or credit.

"It was really egregious," Cheh said during the District Council's Transportation Committee annual review of the DC Taxicab Commission. "Said that she had to pay cash."

All DC cabs are required to either accept credit cards, or go out of service if their credit card machines are not working, Taxicab Commission Chair Ron Linton told Cheh during the hearing.

Cheh said when the driver demanded cash, she told him that she would get it from inside her home.

"Whereupon this driver locked all the doors," Cheh said during the hearing. "Drove many blocks away. And called the police saying he had a fare that was refusing to pay."

The hearing comes in the wake of a December WUSA9 investigation showing 20% of DC taxis tested refused to accept credit cards.

Linton told Cheh the driver could lose his license over locking her daughter inside.

Cheh said, technically, it could be a felony.

"If you transport somebody against his or her will under those circumstances, that actually meets the definition of kidnapping," Cheh, who is a professor of law at George Washington University said.

The taxi commission chair agreed and said the driver could lose his license over the act.

During our December investigation, Linton downplayed the problem, suggesting our sample size was too small.

In the hearing he acknowledged it is a significant problem and taxi violations have even plagued his own family.

Linton My daughter came down from Boston to visit and in four cab rides, generated four complaints. It's unbelievable.

Early in the hearing, Councilmember David Grosso spoke of his own family's experience.

Linton says he'll investigate Cheh's and Grosso's experiences, as he says his office does all complaints.

He also testified he is increasing enforcement and wants to add a mystery shopper to ensure drivers are doing their jobs.

A year-long WUSA9 investigation has also found taxis ignoring black passengers at rates ranging from 25% to 33%.

Under questioning from Cheh, Linton acknowledged during the hearing, that during his own testing of 100 cabs, 24 refused hailing passengers, in violation of District law.

Matters of the Heart

By Katrina Forrest

February is National Heart Month and with heart disease still serving as the leading cause of death for both men and women nationally, it is important to know the factors associated with the disease and take the necessary precautions to get screened, eat healthy and live an active lifestyle. 

Each year about 600,000 Americans (1 in 4) die from heart disease.  High blood pressure, high LDL cholesterol and smoking are the key risk factors and surprisingly, about half (49%), of Americans have at least one of the three risk factors. Other factors that lead to an increased risk for heart disease include diabetes, obesity, poor diet, physical inactivity and excessive alcohol use.

Here in the District, we face a startling reality when it comes to heart health related deaths and emergency response.  In a report published by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in 2013, D.C. residents died at a higher rate from preventable heart attacks than any other jurisdiction in the country.  The CDC report found that, in the District, the rate of avoidable deaths from heart disease, stroke and hypertensive disease was 99.6% per 100,000 population.  The most affected demographic was African-American males ranging in age from 65-74.

Given the severity of this problem in the District, it would seem that emergency responders would have the requisite training to identify and understand the importance of swift action in exigent circumstances.   Unfortunately, this has not been the case. 

The District has a history of unresponsiveness from emergency service professionals entrusted with upholding the highest standards of care and response. In 1999, a 21-year old woman, Julia Rusinek collapsed on a busy street corner. A bystander saw her on the ground and ran to the firehouse less than a block from where she fell. Firefighters said another engine was on the way and that their ambulance crew was going off duty. She was declared dead at a hospital less than a mile from where she fell.  Last year on New Year’s Day, a 71-year old resident died of a heart attack when he had to wait 40 minutes for emergency responders on a day when one-third of D.C.’s firefighters called out sick.  D.C.’s Fire and EMS Department is in the news once again as yet another elderly man, age 77, collapsed and later died from a heart attack suffered on January 25, 2014. This latest incident elicited public outrage as the collapsed man lay dying in front of a N.E. fire station, while a firefighter stood idle, refusing to provide assistance until someone called 911.  

District residents are experiencing heart related deaths at a higher rate than anywhere else in the country and this problem should not be exacerbated by institutional policies that have led to a failure to act.   These deaths are preventable if residents have access to information on risk factors, quality health centers and free screenings, but when it comes to matters of the heart, we must also ensure that our emergency medical service providers are acting out of compassion and not a callous adherence to questionable policies.  Addressing these deficiencies is paramount to correcting this troubling problem in the District.

*This post is part of an ongoing series of posts by Councilmember Grosso’s staff to support professional development. All posts are approved and endorsed by Councilmember Grosso.

Grosso To Host Poetry Evening at Wilson Building

By Sarah Anne Hughes in Arts & Entertainment dcist on Feb 11, 2014 1:30 PM

Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) will host a poetry evening at his Wilson Building office this Wednesday. D.C. Poet Laureate Dolores Kendrick and the D.C. Youth Slam Team are scheduled to perform.

"As a strong proponent for the arts, I am delighted to welcome the arts community to my office for yet another opportunity to showcase their artistic talent," Grosso said of his third open house in an email. "These events serve as an enriching opportunity to engage with the public and highlight D.C.'s thriving arts community. The talent in the District is enormous, as evidenced by the D.C. Youth Slam Team's second-place finish during the Brave New Voices International Youth Poetry Slam Festival."

Members of Free Minds and D.C. Scores Youth Poets will also preform. The event runs from 6 to 8 p.m.

Despite The Streetcar, D.C. Plans To Replace H Street Bridge

By: Martin Austermuhle, WAMU, February 11, 2014

The Hopscotch Bridge connects H Street NE to North Capitol Street while crossing over Amtrak tracks behind Union Station. D.C. officials say it will have to replaced within five years. Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/44144211@N07/5147592328/

It was two years ago that D.C. officials decided to route a planned streetcar line over the H Street Bridge, allowing for a connection to Union Station. But now they say that the bridge will have to be fully replaced within five years, likely forcing the city to reroute the H Street streetcar line it hopes to start running this year.

The 2.4-mile streetcar route runs up and down H Street and Benning Road NE, and in 2011 city officials decided to run streetcars up and over the bridge — colloquially known as the Hopscotch Bridge — in order to connect to Union Station. But officials with the D.C. Department of Transportation say those tracks will be temporary, and will come down when the city starts replacing the bridge within the next three to five years.

"We always knew that this would be a temporary entrance into Union Station," said Nic Nicholson, DDOT's chief engineer, at a D.C. Council hearing on Friday. "At such time as we could coordinate and replace the bridge, we would have a temporary measure for streetcar as we replace the Hopscotch Bridge."

"We're doing the minimal in that track placement to get service going with the full intention of coming back within the next three to five years and replacing the bridge," he added.

During the hearing, Council member David Grosso (I-At Large) worried that the eventual replacement would only lead to more frustration among H Street residents, who have dealt with streetcar-related construction since 2008.

"My feeling and my fear with this project is that if we don't do it in a systemic, laid-out and planned way, I'm afraid that we're going to lose the faith of the people in getting this done right. This is not a great start," he said.

Nicholson said Amtrak's changing plans for an expanded Union Station and a new high-speed rail line complicated DDOT's original expectation that it could punch a hole through the base of the bridge and avoid running the streetcar over it.

"Once Amtrak started planning and revising its master plan to accommodate that, what came into conflict was our initial plans for our connection of streetcars to Union Station," he said.

The DDOT officials said that the Benning Road Bridge over Kingman Lake and the Anacostia River will also have to replaced, but no streetcar tracks have been placed on that portion of the road for a planned connection to neighborhoods east of the river.

The D.C. Council unwisely revises ethics rules

By Editorial Board, Washington Post, February 9, 2014

THE D.C. COUNCIL has come up with an inventive way to handle nettlesome advice from ethics officials: Change the rules. That’s so much easier than changing behavior that people of lesser understanding might find inappropriate.

The council voted this week to change its rules of conduct as they relate to constituent service. The unusual move to change the council code in the middle of a term was, The Post’s Mike DeBonis reported, in reaction to an advisory opinion issued in August by the Board of Ethics and Government Accountability.

Having had to admonish council member Vincent B. Orange (D-At Large) for improperly intervening with inspectors seeking to close a business for health-code violations, the ethics board thought it would be helpful to offer guidance in an area in which it admitted there were no “bright lines.” Mr. Orange had defended his actions as “clearly acceptable constituent service.” The thoughtful 18-page opinion by Government Ethics Director Darrin P. Sobin drew on best practices in good government and included useful examples of how officials should and should not conduct themselves.

We would have thought council members who claimed to want to improve the image of a body where there has been serial wrongdoing (including the forced resignations of three members) would have welcomed the opportunity to up their game. Instead, they crafted language to give themselves wiggle room in their ability to throw their weight around and practice retail politics. It’s unclear, for example, if Mr. Orange’s intervention on behalf of a campaign contributor would have constituted a violation under the amended rules.

Only two council members, David Grosso (I-At Large) and Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6), opposed the change initiated by Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D). “[The board] is doing what they were asked to do . . . and now we cut their legs out from them,” Mr. Grosso told us. Mr. Wells, a candidate for mayor, said the move sets a “bad precedent.” We agree and urge the council to undo this wrongheaded decision.

Not only was the move a slap in the face to the city’s independent ethics board, but it also sends a troubling message about the commitment of the council chairman and his colleagues to good government.

The D.C. Workforce Investment Council's Role in Employment Services

By Anne Robinson

Last fall, Councilmember Grosso was appointed by the Chairman of the Council to serve on the D.C. Workforce Investment Council (WIC). As the staff member assigned to this issue, I began to research and understand the history of the D.C. WIC and I found it to be fascinating.  It has a tangled history, both on the national level and here at home.   The important theme throughout is how integral a role it plays in steering our residents down the employment path.  I hope you will join me on my journey down the path to better understanding how employment services operate in the District. 

The functions of the D.C. WIC are largely defined by requirements in the federal Workforce Investment Act (WIA). The mission of WIC is to oversee the creation and improvement of services and programs that address the workforce development needs of the region's employers and the District's residents.  Members are authorized to advise the Mayor and District government on all functions designated to the WIC.   The Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) has administrative oversight of the WIC on behalf of the Mayor.  So, where did WIA come from? 

In the 1930s, unemployment insurance programs were created to combat the impacts the Great Depression had on employment.  Throughout the proceeding decades, the federal government developed new plans and policies that expanded unemployment insurance benefits to also address displaced workers and job training.  As time went on, responsibility for the unemployment insurance programs slowly shifted from federal control to being administered more on the state and local level.  In 1998, the Workforce Investment Act was implemented with the goal of further authorizing states to provide employment and training services through federally-funded workforce development programs and One-Stop Job Centers (now referred to as American Jobs Centers).   The Job Centers provide career counseling and planning, resume and interview assistance, direct job placement, classroom and on-the-job training, access to a jobs bank, information about labor markets, and unemployment compensation.

WIA mandated that all states create Workforce Investment Boards (WIB) to implement policies at the state and local levels for the workforce programs.  The D.C. Workforce Investment Council (WIC) was created in accordance to WIA that same year. 

By statute, the Board must be comprised of members of the business community, directors from agencies receiving federal workforce dollars, and two members of the D.C. Council.  The legislative intent of WIA is for the WIB/WICs to approve the spending and business plans for One-Stop operators and report compliance metrics to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL).   Unfortunately, the intent was not fully realized under both the Williams and Fenty Administrations.  Since their inception, the D.C. One-Stops have been solely operated and managed by the Department of Employment Services (DOES).   DOES was supposed to report to the WIC who is the responsible body reporting to DOL under federal law.  This did not happen. DOES has not been in full compliance with DOL standards for operating the One-Stops since 1998 and the authority granted to the WIC was largely ignored.   

In 2012, Mayor Gray began to implement the WIA required DC Workforce Development Strategic Plan 2012-2016.  To date, the strategic plan has been a necessary cornerstone to move workforce development in the right direction.  The plan includes reinvigorating the WIC, getting DOES in compliance with DOL, and getting more residents back to work.  Over the past 2 years, the WIC Board has worked diligently to bring DOES management of the D.C. American Jobs Center to a higher compliance standard. This is being done through a newly adopted business plan and strong oversight of DOES by the WIC.  

As we continue to learn and track the employment system we intend to continue sharing with you what we discover.    DOES will have their annual oversight hearing before the Committee on Business, Consumer, and Regulatory Affairs on Wednesday, February 26 at 10:00 am in Room 500 of the John A. Wilson Building.  We urge you to engage by watching, testifying, or sending us your questions so we can ask them for you. 

*This post is part of an ongoing series of posts by Councilmember Grosso’s staff to support professional development. All posts are approved and endorsed by Councilmember Grosso.

Now is the Time to Take a Stand for D.C. Workers and Home Rule

For Immediate Release

September 25, 2013

Today, Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) called on Mayor Gray and Chairman Mendelson to refuse to shut down the D.C. government in the face of the impending federal shutdown.   A D.C. government shutdown will have a seriously difficult impact on D.C. workers and the local economy.

“A shutdown, imposed by the federal government, with no pay for D.C. workers, will make it impossible for many D.C. employees to pay their bills and feed their families. It is offensive that the federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is telling the D.C. government how to spend the money we raised through taxing D.C. residents and businesses.  D.C. is the only local jurisdiction impacted in this manner and one thing is true, if D.C. were San Antonio, there would be a battle at the Alamo over this,” said Grosso.

“Chairman Mendelson and the Mayor should not send a plan to OMB, but instead should declare that all D.C. employees are essential,” stated Grosso.  “The citizens of the District of Columbia passed a budget autonomy referendum last year and it goes into effect on Jan. 1.  That referendum frees D.C.’s budget from the burdensome annual Congressional approval.  We should immediately take our budget into our own hands and refuse OMB’s requests for shutdown plans.”

###

The Ones Who Put Their Shoulders to the Wheel

By Jonetta Rose Barras, Washington Post, February 5, 2014

Copyright Washington Post

Asked to speak last week at a luncheon sponsored by the D.C. Federation of Citizens Associations, I was supposed to offer insight about the city government and the current political landscape. But the lesson that day was all mine. I was reminded, sotto voce, of the critical role played by seemingly ordinary citizens in creating an ethical government, growing a vibrant city and refurbishing our democracy.

A couple of decades ago, the District barely had two nickels to rub together. Wall Street rated its bonds as junk, exacerbating the city’s downward trajectory. Unsurprisingly, some residents escaped to the suburbs and parts unknown. Others — Anne Renshaw, Marie Drissel, the Rev. Lionel Edmonds, Robert Brannum, Dorothy Brizill, Gary Imhoff, Terry Lynch, Greg Rhett, Sam Bost, David Mallof, Ellie Anderson, Ron Drake, Helen Haggerty, Paul and Barbara Savage, for example — never gave up on the city.

They demanded better management of D.C. finances, construction of more downtown housing, enhanced neighborhood commercial corridors and improved delivery of government services for the poor and working class. They helped fire residents’ imaginations, inspire new leadership and create an exciting vision of the city’s future. The District blossoming before our eyes today owes much to the work of ordinary citizens, some of whom sat last week in the ornate and elegant upper room of the DACOR Bacon House in Northwest.

It’s easy, sometimes, to be swirled by the pontificating and gesticulating of politicians in an election season. Sometimes it’s difficult not to be caught in their self-aggrandizing delusions, assertions of being once and future architects of all things good in the District, which get amplified by their insistence that people spend their days counting construction cranes in the sky.

An element of municipal growth, undoubtedly, can be tracked by brick and mortar. But a city’s true greatness is its people: their diversity; their shared values; their spirit; their willingness to work on behalf of the collective, setting aside superficial differences often manufactured by ambitious, sometimes corrupt, politicians; their determination to shape their destinies.

Chatting with attendees at the federation’s luncheon and other residents around the city, I was struck by their keen awareness of the moment in which the District finds itself. They were anxious about the mayoral race, understanding that a wrong choice could have devastating consequences, but not necessarily on those cranes or other physical components of the city. Rather they were worried about possible injury to the people: their psyches, their belief in government and politics.

Leadership matters.

It was refreshing last week to realize that at least one of the District’s elected officials understands that. Council member David Grosso (I-At Large) endorsed Brianne Nadeau, who is vying for the Ward 1 seat held by Jim Graham. Graham was lambasted last year by the city’s ethics board and reprimanded by the council for behavior in 2008 connecting the city lottery contract with a Metro land development deal.

Grosso went against a tradition: D.C. Council members do not publicly endorse a colleague’s opponent. I have not always supported his public policies. I am against his push to legalize marijuana in the District. I am not convinced of the need for public financing of local political campaigns. But I have admired his determination to help create a new politics in the city.

Integrity is not a sometime thing, practiced in one venue but not another. The common aphorism warns that “the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” In other words, we are, indeed, our brother’s and sister’s keeper.

The gray hairs have multiplied on more than a few of the heads I saw at last week’s affair. The strides of some — once energetic — have begun to slow. No worries. A new generation of citizen-leaders has been forming across the city; people like Eboni-Rose Thompson, Josh Lopez and Daniel del Pielago, for example, have moved in, advocating around various critical issues. Equally important, federation members also have reached out to some of those young professionals who have been arriving in droves, claiming the District as home. They hope to persuade them that seeing something and tweeting something is simply not enough.

Citizenship has never been a spectator sport. Engagement and sweat equity are demanded.

Gender Disparities on Board and Commissions

While preparing for a December hearing to consider nominations to various Boards and Commissions, Councilmember Grosso noticed something— there were far more men than women under consideration for appointment. We found ourselves wondering if this was a coincidence specific to that day and those specific Boards, or if there was a broader trend of gender imbalance. We reviewed the memberships of all the Boards before the Committee on Business, Consumer, and Regulatory Affairs (BCRA) and then the 150 plus Boards and Commissions citywide. Our question was answered—there are significant and often egregious gender disparities. 

During our research, another problem presented itself.   Much of the information we were searching for, we could not find.   If information is not publicly available then how can residents know who is on Boards and Commissions and what they are doing?

Gender Disparities

Looking at the broader list of the Boards and Commissions with information available online (more on that below), almost a third of the memberships are dominated by men, including several powerful entities:

•         Alcohol and Beverage Control Board– 6 men, 1 woman
•         Business Regulatory Reform Task Force – 11 men, 6 women
•         Commission on African American Affairs – 11 men, 4 women
•         Housing Production Trust Fund, Board of Directors – 6 men, 3 woman
•         Interfaith Council – 23 men,2 women
•         Streetcar Financing Task Force – 13 men, 1 woman

Disappointingly, Boards and Commissions covering topics that are historically associated with gender stereotypes are especially prone to such imbalances: 

•          Advisory Panel on Special Education – 4 men, 15 women
•          Board of Industrial Trades – 7 men, 1 woman
•          Board of Nursing – 0 men, 7 women
•          Board of Social Work – 0 men, 5 women
•          Constructing Codes Coordinating Board – 11 men, 0 women

There are, of course, male nurses and female construction workers, but according to these numbers, their perspectives are marginalized.  D.C. prides itself on being forward thinking, but the reflection of sexism in these leadership positions contrasts starkly with our vision of a city that stands for equality.  And this discussion does not begin to consider other measures of diversity. 

Public Access and Information Sharing

What was equally disturbing and frustrating was the amount of information that we simply could not find online.  We were looking for details about the membership of these entities.  We hoped to find a list of names.  Maybe some biographical information.   Figure out when the next Board meeting would be and when the last one was held.  Who attended?  Did anyone take notes?  Did anything happen? 

The District’s Office of Boards and Commissions (DOBC) has a list of the Boards and Commissions, but it does not provide enough information about what they do and who sits on them.   Sometimes, the Board or Commission is housed under a local agency and that agency is responsible for listing the information.  However, it did not matter if we were looking for information at DOBC or the agency’s website because the information often was not there. 

While most of the Boards and Commissions could be found online, at least 30 percent are unavailable. Those that are online provide inconsistent levels of information, some of it woefully outdated.   Some examples of entities that have little or no information online include the following:

•          Advisory Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect
•          Board of Behavioral Health
•          Board of Consumer Claims Arbitration
•          Board of Dentistry
•          Commission on HIV/AIDS
•          Commission on Latino Community Development
•          District of Columbia Statehood Commission
•          Domestic Violence Fatality Review Board
•          Washington Convention Center Advisory Committee

As Councilmember Grosso noted in comments before the BCRA Committee, this represents a failure of government transparency and accountability.   Additionally, the lack of information can be construed as a violation of D.C.’s Open Meetings Act (OMA).  OMA mandates that these government affiliated bodies publicly advertise their meeting times and locations, as well as provide meeting minutes.   

So…now what?

These public bodies in D.C. have an important role to play—they are making decisions about the granting of licenses to local business, setting policies and procedures, or giving a voice to our city’s diverse community.  This is why it is vital that their information is open to the public.  Unfortunately, some of the city’s current set of Boards and Commissions do not serve any good purpose or have remained dormant for years.  Mayor Gray called in December 2012 to reform the problem by abolishing 30 of the least functioning of them.   A bill is currently before the Council, but has not yet been brought up for a vote.  Passing such legislation would be a step in the right direction, but it will not solve problems of transparency or gender imbalance.

Reviewing other jurisdictions around the country shows that publicizing information about these public bodies is not hard to do.   Baltimore, San Francisco, Nashville, and Denver—cities of similar size to D.C. but diverse in location and reputation—all have easy to find, centralized lists of Boards and Commissions accompanied by basic information such as membership and meeting times.  What’s more, they include information about how to apply to join these public bodies—encouraging residents to engage with local government is critical to a vibrant and functioning city.  Greater community engagement improves government accountability, and vice versa.  So, what should D.C. do?

In December, Councilmember Grosso called on the Mayor’s Office to make the membership and other key information about Boards and Commissions available and published online by the end of January.  This would require that the DOBC collect this information with the help from individual agencies and then have the Office of the Chief Technology Officer aggregate the information in one centralized location on the DOBC website.  If the Executive branch cannot accomplish this task, Councilmember Grosso is prepared to introduce legislation to make the government operate in a more open and accessible manner.  It would be similar to San Francisco’s law that requires the government to make this information easily accessible online.   These bodies make vital decisions and recommendations, and residents of D.C. should know how to voice their support or air their grievances.   The Boards that grant professional licenses or have a direct say in how government works should be balanced, open, and available to the public. 

Making this information public and easily accessible will also, we hope, encourage more District residents to apply for openings on Boards or Commissions that fit their skill sets, areas of expertise, or interests.  Asking residents to participate in government is how we make the city function through heightened participation.   We want all residents to know what any given Board or Commission does, when it meets, and, most critically, what impact it has on the District.    

*This post is part of an ongoing series of posts by Councilmember Grosso’s staff to support professional development. All posts are approved and endorsed by Councilmember Grosso.

“What’s clear is that under the current system, the wealthy and connected are almost entirely shielded from the consequences of marijuana being illegal, while the poor and non-white face catastrophe for engaging in the same behavior.”

— http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/marijuana-legalization-elites

D.C. Legislator Wants To Expand Access To Medical Marijuana

In his letter, Grosso asks Garcia to expand the list of qualifying conditions to include post-traumatic stress disorder, epilepsy, Crohn’s disease, dystonia, and endometriosis, as some states with medical marijuana programs do. By doing so, he wrote, the department could “prevent further needless pain and suffering for District residents.”

Winter Weather Alert

The weather forecast calls for a dusting of up to two inches, with the accumulation chances greater as you head towards Baltimore. But the real threat here is the temperature drop. The National Weather Service says “unseasonably cold weather will settle into the region Friday and Friday night. Wind chill values may approach zero friday morning.”

So bundle up D.C. and remember: If you see a person in need of shelter, call either 1-800-535-7252 or 202-399-7093 to connect with D.C.’s shelter hotline.

D.C. Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) sends Season’s Greetings and well wishes for the New Year and provides a snapshot of his year-end legislative victories in the areas of health, criminal justice, education and ethics reform. Grosso also informs residents of some of his legislative priorities for the upcoming year and encourages them to reach out to his office on issues of importance to them.  Be on the lookout for Grosso’s year-end newsletter also.

Lawmakers Debate Whether To Seal Records For Marijauna Possession

"Often people don’t realize that even something as minor as a marijuana possession charge can keep residents from obtaining employment, housing or even scholarship money for higher education," Councilmember Grosso said.