Latest Peacoholics Drama

Housing Complex has an interesting piece today about the latest in what seems to be a neverending drama about the Peacoholics.  It involves their building a 13-unit transitional living facility for at-risk youth, apparently with funds stemming from the D.C. Department of Housing and Community Development in Ward 8's Congress Heights. 

The story is the same we've heard again and again about Peacoholics.  It's not that people object to their mission - in fact, they'd find a lot of support from just about everyone.  It's not even NIMBYism.  Rather, the issues with Peacoholics come down to this every single time:

Confrontational approach.  Peacoholics and its leaders seem to take an adversarial, confrontational, and defensive approach to addresssing the community.  Although any other group involved in a development project would come before the Advisory Neighborhood Commission and explain the project to residents, and seek their support at the get-go (the project across the street from theirs indeed did so), Peacoholics addressed the community only after controversy erupted and was summoned by the ANC.  As described in the article, they sat in the back of the ANC meeting, didn't introduce themselves, then lashed out when questioned about their finances.  Ultimately, they accused an ANC Commissioner of seeking bribes from them and sued her for defamation.  I've witnessed a similar meeting in Shaw.

Lack of transparency and accountability.  Peacoholics seem to receive a lot of government funds (fire engine transfer to the DR aside) [UPDATE: Wow, Congress Heights on the Rise has posted documents residents received in response to a FOIA request.  They show that Peacoholics received $1.3 million from the Department of Youth Rehabilitative Services in FY 2008-2009, $4.5 million from the Housing Production Trust Fund in FY 2007-2009, $300k from the Public Safety and Justice budget in FY 2007-2008, and $50k from the Department of Human Services in FY 2008.]  Even after the Council cut off millions in earmarks, here it is again receiving public money.  But even that is not a problem in itself.  While the group declares matter of factly that they have stopped killings in [insert your neighborhood], it will not produce any reports, statistics, etc. that provide a description of precisely what it does, how many youth it serves and in what capacity, a budget/financial statement showing how it spends its money, its accomplishments... results.  The lack of accountability, particularly when public money is at issue, raises concern.

It's really a shame.  Providing support in the form of mentoring and job placement is important for at-risk youths, as is showing them there are alternatives to the cycle of gang violence and retaliation.  Nonprofit groups such as Peacoholics have a role to play that may not be adequately filled by MPD in enforcing the law and government agencies in providing social services.  But the approach, the management, the seeming contempt for anyone who asks questions undermines this organization's effectiveness.

No Evans for Chair

Councilmember Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) revealed on Friday's Kojo Nnamdi Show that he is "probably unlikely to run" for DC Council Chairman after all. Video above. Also DC Wire.

UDC to Open NOMA Campus

The Washington Business Journal reports that the University of the District of Columbia (UDC) has signed a 17-year lease for 88,000 square feet of space at 801 North Capitol Street NE.  The office building, which formerly housed the District's Department of Housing and Community Development, Office of Planning, and several other agencies, will serve as the new campus for UDC's community college.  UDC also plans to open additional campuses at the Bernie Backus Middle School at 5171 South Dakota Avenue as well as at Hayes Street and Kenilworth Avenue NE.

Until now, the District was the only major urban center in the country without a standalone community college.  This is an important step forward.  Here's a few interesting facts:

• Census estimates for 2005 suggest that more than 111,000 working-age adults in the city have no post-secondary education.
• Among DC's adult population, roughly 36% has no education beyond high school, and one in seven adults has less than a high school diploma.
• 20% of District adults are functioning at the lowest level of literacy.
• Brookings Greater Washington Program estimates there are between 51,000 – 61,000 low-income residents aged 16 to 64 in the District with less than a college degree who could benefit from education, training, and work-readiness services. The majority are less-skilled, with a high school degree or less. D.C. residents with a high school degree or less have higher poverty and unemployment rates than those with some postsecondary education and college degrees.
• In DC's highly-skilled labor market, 45% of all job openings from 2006-2016 will require a bachelor's degree or more, while another 30% of projected jobs will be "middle-skill" occupations—those that require a college credential, but not necessarily a bachelor's degree.
• "Middle-skill" jobs are projected to continue to account for one-third of DC's jobs in 2016. Projections estimate that DC employers will need to hire over 6,300 workers in middle-skill jobs annually.
• Six career clusters ranked at the top for the number of middle-skill jobs in 2006: (1) Business Management and Administration; (2) Law, Public Safety, and Security; (3) Health Science; (4) Marketing, Sales, and Service; (5) Hospitality and Tourism; and (6) Information Technology.
• There is steady demand for auto mechanics, skilled construction trades, and electronic equipment technicians.
• Many of the local high-demand middle-skill occupations are also projected to grow nationally. For example, registered nurses, computer support specialists, paralegals and legal assistants, legal secretaries, and dental hygienists represent occupations with the largest projected job growth nationally among occupations requiring an associate degree.
• Together, occupations in the top six clusters account for 64 percent of all middle-skill jobs (in 2006 and projected in 2016). These career clusters are projected to provide over 4,000 middle-skill job openings annually.
• Environmental technology and green building trades is a potential growth area: construction, architecture, engineering, and landscape design.
• Brookings estimates that a full-service DC community college is likely to enroll between 7,000 and 9,000 students, or approximately 5,000 full-time equivalent (FTE) students (not including enrollment in noncredit programs).

Personally, I would have preferred that UDC find a more prominent, inspiring location than an old office building for its flagship downtown location (the Franklin School, for instance).  Hopefully, UDC will do a bang up job on the build out of 801 N. Cap. to make it a worthy location for the District's students.  UDC plans to have the building ready for classes this fall.

Franklin, Betts, Shootings, and more...

What's the Status of the Franklin School RFP?  Based on a statement made at the April 7 Advisory Neighborhood Commission 2F meeting, which had supported Yu Ying Public Charter School's proposal for use of the Franklin School as a Chinese language immersion program, there is speculation the District has again rejected the idea.  At the meeting, ANC2F Chairman Charles Reed reported that the Deputy Mayor's office commented that there was "a glitch" in the Yu Ying proposal.  That would leave the boutique hotel option, which includes a restaurant and culinary school of some sort.  No award of the RFP yet.  The Coalition for Franklin School continues to push for an educational use for the building, as discussed in The Intowner.

Brian Betts. According to Friday's Washington Post, police believe that at least two people were involved in the beloved Shaw principal's shooting. Also read Petula Dvorak's column exploring the impact of Betts' death on the many young lives in which he played an important part. The DC Agenda also has a story on Betts - please refrain from the gay conspiracy theories, really. There will be a memorial service for the public at Strathmore Hall (5301 Tuckerman Lane, North Bethesda, Maryland) on Saturday, May 1 (time TBD). There will also be a school tribute for students, parents and staff at Shaw at Garnett-Patterson on Thursday, April 29.

Shootings are Back.  This past Monday (4/19), we had two shootings in Shaw around the area of 5th/6th and N NW at about 8:30pm and then again at about 9:30pm.  [UPDATE: The bullets keep flying. There was another shooting on Saturday, 4/24 at six in the afternoon around the same location.]  The warm weather is here.  I am told that MPD recovered a discarded gun after the first shooting and questioned some potential suspects.  Fortunately, no one was hit.  There's a crime camera right above the site.  Hopefully, MPD will be able to make an arrest.  Amazing how secure the neighborhood was during the Nuke summit.

DC Refund Comes in Last.  My wife and I filed our federal, District, and Maryland tax returns at the same time -- in late February or early March. We received our tax refunds from the federal government and Maryland about one month ago. The District's has yet to arrive.

Doesn't Pay to Keep Property Vacant

The Washington Business Journal reports today that Mayor Fenty is on board with a system of steep graduated registration fees for vacant houses and commercial properties in the District:

The existing vacant property registration fee is $20 per residential unit or $20 per 400 square feet of commercial space. Fenty proposes to charge $250 the first year, $500 for the first renewal year, $1,000 the second, $2,500 the third and $5,000 the fourth.

According to a District spokesperson, the revenue from the fees will provide more resources for the District’s nuisance abatement program, such as site visits for enforcement purposes.

The new registration fees would replace the prior vacant property tax, which the D.C. Council abandoned after it had doubled the tax from $5 to $10 of every $100 of assessed value.  The quick and substantial increase in the tax, elimination of frequently abused exemptions, and more consistent enforcement by the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs led to an outcry that led to its repeal.  The $10 tax now applies only to "blighted" properties, and very few properties meet the criteria.

“It’s really just to spur people to put their properties back into productive use,” said City Administrator Neil Albert. “It is a graduated schedule of fees that should provide the incentive not to have their properties sitting around gathering dust.”

It's not just dust.  Vacant properties are also a significant public safety issue, and particularly so when vacant they become concentrated in an area.  Even when properly maintained, when a property is vacant it means less eyes on the streets... more muggings, more shattered car windows, more loitering, more prostitution, and less people to call police and report when someone is in trouble.  It also tends to mean that the neighbors are left to pick up accumulating trash, deal with illegal dumping, and shovel the snow.

At this point, the proposed registration fees are not law -- rather, revenue estimates from the fees are included in Mayor Fenty's 2011 budget.  I testified in late January at a hearing on the legislation proposed by Councilmember Bowser that adopts this approach.
 
The old system was working -- and by that I mean the $5 tax with consistent DCRA enforcement. There was a need to eliminate frequently abused exceptions -- the ability to put up a "for sale" sign or take out a work permit to avoid the tax entirely.  The sudden doubling of the tax, and rare situations where it was mistakenly put on an occupied properly and the error not quickly and fairly addressed, led to its demise.
 
Whether the new approach will work will depend on DCRA's ability to enforce the registration requirement as well as any loopholes in the law.  For instance, if an owner can reset the graduated fees simply by showing a water or utility bill for a month or two on the property, the fee will not provide much of an incentive.  DCRA will need to be able to impose the fee if an owner does not voluntarily register the property.  Would there be a penalty for failure to register? 

It is also important to note that the current proposal does not include vacant lots -- only vacant "improved" properties, such as houses or commercial buildings. 

The law will need to recognize some legitimate situations in which it would be unfair to impose a registration fee, such as deployment in the military or long-term medical/nursing care.

Loss of Brian Betts

I was saddened to learn this morning of the tragic death of the principal of Shaw Middle School, Brian Betts. 

When I first met Brian, he had only been in his new position for a few weeks.  It was summer and he made time to meet with me to discuss the challenges he faced and the future of the school even as he interviewed a stream of candidates for teacher positions at the school. 

What impressed me most about Brian was his optimism.  It was different, refreshing, and real, not contrived.  He firmly believed that by placing confidence in his students, developing relationships with parents and the community, and through hard working teachers, even students facing the greatest challenges could and would succeed.  He set high goals for himself and his team.  His devotion was appreciated by all.

My thoughts go out to his family, colleagues at DCPS and Montgomery County, and to his students. 

I hope that the police and media will soon provide us with more information on the suspicious circumstances surrounding his death.  Detectives are asking anyone with information regarding the whereabouts of the victim's dark blue Nissan Xterra blue 2007 Nissan Xterra (MD plate 562M222) to call the police non-emergency number of (301) 279-8000. Anyone with other information pertaining to this death is asked to call homicide detectives at 240-773-5070. Callers may remain anonymous.

Chief Judge Speaks

Last night, the Mount Vernon Square Neighborhood Association, Convention Center Community Association, and Blagden Alley Association co-hosted a public forum with the Chief Judge of the D.C. Superior Court, Lee Satterfield, who was joined by his colleague, Judge Ronna Beck.  Here are five points and observations that I found particularly interesting.

1. While D.C. Superior Court judges are appointed by the President, there is a misconception that some (or most) are not from the District.  Comments from Councilmember Jack Evans earlier this week suggested that D.C. Superior Court Judges are from places like California.  According to Chief Judge Satterfield and Judge Beck, that just is not true.  There is a residency requirement for D.C. Superior Court judges -- all must live in D.C.  Most, including Chief Judge Satterfield, are from the District and have spent their entire careers practicing law here.  In addition, the selection process, which relies on the recommendations of a nominating committee whose members are appointed by the President, Mayor, DC Council Chair, and Bar (known as merit selection) is among the best systems for appointing judges (nonpartisan, qualifications oriented, not subject to campaign fundraising).  That does not change my opinion that, as a matter of principle and home rule, the District, not the President, should select its judges and have more control over its criminal justice system, but it does provide some degree of comfort.

2. The District has little sense of what occurs in its own criminal justice system from a 30,000 foot perspective.  At a meeting that included Councilmembers Mendelson and Evans several months ago, there was frustration that the Council (and DC citizens) have no way of knowing what happens after the arrest.  How many of say gun cases were no papered, pleaded down, went to trial, resulted in acquittal or resulted in convictions?  How often are DC's strong mandatory minimums actually applied?  What is the average sentence for gun possession (i.e. is there actually a revolving door)?  I was disappointed to find that the judges also appeared to lack hard numbers.  The Chief Judges' law clerk may follow up with me with what statistical information is available, but this type of information should be readily available to the public, members of the judiciary, and legislators.  There is a substantial amount of such information available for the federal courts through the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics.  And, note to our Councilmembers, right now, BJS is giving out money to the states to develop their own statistics (applications are due March 19).

3.  If there is one area in which the judges felt the District's criminal justice system could improve, it is in juvenile justice.  Some interesting facts.  D.C. Superior Court judges have no role in sentencing JV offenders - it is up to the District government and JV's know it.  The District's JV facility is too small and overcrowded, which may result in early releases when filled past capacity.  While there is a JV facility for boys, there is no facility for girls.  Judge Satterfield suggested the need for a larger JV facility with more educational programming.

4. The District's criminal laws are quite strict.  With the exception of possession of an unlicensed firearm (pure possession, no crime associated), most gun and other violence crimes are subject to mandatory minimums of 5 years for the first offense, 10 for the second offense.  Some are significantly higher, such as15 years for armed carkjacking.  Judge Beck noted that the mandatory minimums are a useful tool for prosecutors in reaching plea agreements.  That said, there are also many cases in which defendants proceed to trial and the judges do in fact impose the full sentence as required by law.  Judge Beck also noted that the negative aspect of mandatory minimums is that it eliminates judicial discretion and there are some situations in which they can be viewed as too harsh.

5. The District has no control over those who it puts in prison.  The District closed Lorton Correctional Complex in November 2001, scattering its inmates among federal prisons across the country.  While the District saved money in making this move (tranferring the expense to the federal government), there is also a downside.  The District has no role in the rehabilitation, training, or education of DC residents who are sent to prison.  They may come back worse than they went in.  D.C. residents who are sent to prison are effectively sent to Siberia.  Being cut off from their families may cause further tears in the District's social fabric.

Back to basics at the Franklin School

An op-ed that I drafted on the future of the Franklin School will be included in the print edition of Sunday's Washington Post.  You can read it online here.  Please comment on the Post website and pass the article on to others.

Over the past few weeks, a number of organizations and individuals have expressed strong support for putting the Franklin School back into educational use.  Some include the Federation of Citizens Associations, the Committee of 100 on the Federal City, Advisory Neighborhood Commission 2C, Commissioner Keith Silver (ANC 6C02), and former Historic Preservation Review Board Chairman Charles I. Cassell.

Considering that the city received only a single submission from a private developer in response to its Request for Proposals (a boutique hotel and restaurant), clearly, the momentum is building toward returning the building to a use that advances the education system and workforce development in the District.

Vacant or Blighted - Part II

Near northeast resident Tom Madison displays before-and-after photos of a dozen vacant properties fixed after imposition of the higher tax.

In 2009, the D.C. Council eliminated the vacant property tax, which had provided an incentive to renovate, rent, or sell vacant properties and put them back into productive use. This was a result of the interaction of several factors: (1) backlash after the D.C. Council voted to double the tax from $5 to $10; (2) more consistent enforcement of the law by the DCRA; (3) the occasional innocent owner unfairly getting hit with the higher tax; and (4) the recession and its impact on developers with properties awaiting financing and smaller owners that lacked funds to undertake renovation plans.

On January 27, the DC Council's Committee on Public Services and Consumer Affairs and Committee on Finance and Revenue held a hearing to discuss how the government should address vacant and blighted properties in the future.

Two bills are currently pending before the Council. B18-546, introduced by Councilmember Muriel Bowser, would keep the vacant property registration system, eliminate exemptions (which now apply only to the need to pay a nominal registration fee), provide for an upward sliding scale for registration fee depending on amount of time property is vacant (likely beginning at about $500 and increasing to a maximum of $5,000 per year), simplify the citation issuance process, and require property insurance for vacant properties. The bill is helpful, but not ideal.

B18-448, introduced by Councilmember Jack Evans, would eliminate the remaining vacant property registration system altogether and focus only on blighted determination. It would discard all of the good work of the DCRA over the past few years to compile an accurate list of vacant properties, as well as residents and community associations that have worked hand-in-hand with DCRA. Even without a vacant property tax, this list allows DCRA to closely monitor these properties for violations (litter/dumping, overgrown grass, unsecured, illegal billboards, as well as criminal activity) and determine whether they are "blighted."

Rather than a consisting of a handful of neighborhood activists, development-types, and DCRA officials, the hearing was standing room only.  Testimony lasted over six hours with quite a few fireworks as passions were high on both sides.

Tom Madison, representing the Capitol Hill North Neighborhood Association, came prepared with a dozen before-and-after photos of properties in his near northeast neighborhood that had been renovated and are now occupied as a direct result of imposition of the higher tax.  Madison was immediately followed by David Shames, a lender, who began his testimony, "you can't tax a property into good condition, can you?" and challenged those who say vacant properties have an adverse impact on the surrounding community.  As Shames did so, his neighbor on the panel, Madison, waved his photographs in the air.  [Video of Hearing]

For those who wonder if there is a significant difference between what properties are included in the definition of "vacant" and the definition of "blighted," consider the statistics below, provided in DCRA Director Linda Argo's prepared testimony:

Ward		Vacant Properties	“Blighted” Properties	Percentage of Vacant Properties that are “Blighted”
1		327	25	7.6%
2		187	5	2.7%
3 4		67 282	1 9	1.5% 3.2%
5		362	25	6.9%
6		340	7	2.1%
7		561	13	2.3%
8		322	17	5.3%
TOTAL		2,448	102	4.2%

That's 2,346 absentee owners, many (or most) who do not even live in the District of Columbia, who received a massive tax break this year when their property tax went down from $10 per $100 value to just 85 cents.  [Note: These statistics likely include only vacant buildings, not vacant lots].  You can view a map of the vacant and blighted properties in your Ward, as identified by DCRA, below (click for full size maps).

The Council should adopt a vacant/blighted property system along these lines:

1. Retain the vacant property registration system;
2. Restore a higher tax applicable to vacant property (possibly at the prior $5 level);
3. Provide for graduated increases in the tax the longer the property remains vacant (i.e. increasing progressively as high as $10 if a property is vacant for 10 or more years);
4. Apply the vacant property tax to both vacant lots (unimproved land) and vacant houses and commercial buildings (improved land);
5. Provide for limited, objective exceptions, such as (a) when a property is in probate, (b) within one year of purchase (to not discourage buying and renovating properties subject to the tax), (c) when the owner is serving in the military, and (d) when the owner is in long-term care due to age or a medical condition. Frequently abused exceptions, such those that permitted owners to evade the tax by placing a “for sale” sign on the property (while demanding above-market prices and refusing / ignoring offers), or by obtaining permits for nominal work, should not be incorporated into the new law;
6. Continue to address “blighted” properties through DCRA’s aggressive use of currently available fines (i.e. for dumping, overgrown grass, or unsecured property) and the condemnation process (for unsafe and insanitary properties); and
7. Provide an expedited appeal and refund system for property owners who are inadvertently charged the higher rate.

If the Council deems a vacant property tax undesirable in the current recession, particularly with respect to substantial projects that await financing, then it might consider the measures above along with a one-year moratorium on the tax for 2010 applicable to specific development zones that could be extended by the Council if absolutely necessary.

Here are seven reasons why the vacant property tax should be restored.

Dual Roles

When President Obama was elected, he established a new ethics rule that barred new officials from working at an agency at which they lobbied over the past two years or from making policy on any matter involving their former employers or clients. 

The District of Columbia has a very different approach.  Here, an individual can be appointed (or elected) to an important public position and continue employment with a law firm that represents those who are regulated by the government entity.

In the early 2000s, residents were frustrated with the course of the District's Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board.  They fought tooth and nail for the ABC Board to impose restrictions and penalties on problem businesses that were the center of public drinking, loitering, litter, public urination, and underage drinking.  Hearings went on forever with no result.  Even when Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) and community organizations reached agreements with the owners to curb the abusive practices, the ABC Board rejected the agreed-upon solutions in favor of more lenient approaches.  Just before I joined the Logan Circle ANC in 2002, it had discontinued all activity related to ABC licenses out of sense of frustration.  

Part of the ABC Board's lack of responsiveness may have stemmed from the fact that the Chairman of the ABC Board at the time was Roderic Woodson.  While serving as Chairman of the ABC Board, Woodson also worked at Holland & Knight, a law firm that represents the alcoholic beverage and hospitality industries.  Real or imagined, there was at least an understandable perception of a conflict of interest.

The Administration may have changed, but the practice of appointing an individual to represent the public while that individual is also holds another job that represents the regulated parties has not. 

In the article reprinted below, an outraged Peter Tucker draws attention to the latest controversial appointment that appears to be moving forward.  What is your view?

Bogged Down by Patton Boggs:
Betty Noel vs. Vicky Beasley
Peter Tucker


If the DC city council approves the mayor’s nomination of Vicky Beasley to head of the Office of the People’s Counsel, another Patton Boggs employee will fill a top DC government position. Since 1975, the Office of the People’s Counsel (OPC) has been “the advocate for consumers of natural gas, electric and telephone services in the District." Utility companies like Pepco, Verizon, and Washington Gas are given near-monopoly status by the District government. When a consumer has a problem with a utility, there is likely to be no government agency to turn to for help, aside from OPC. At the head of OPC is the consumer oriented Betty Noel, who is completing her unprecedented sixth three-year term as People’s Counsel.

At a Saturday hearing on the District’s utilities, witness after witness, from all over the city, criticized the performance of the utility companies (especially Pepco). They praised Ms. Noel’s experience, professionalism, and willingness to stand up to — and, if need be, sue — the utility companies on behalf of consumers. There was an overwhelming consensus that Betty Noel should be renominated for a seventh term, and that Vicky Beasley wasn’t qualified for the position.

While Vicky Beasley possesses minimalexperience with utility regulation or consumer issues, she has experience of another kind: according to Patton Boggs’website, “Ms. Beasley’s clients include telecommunications entities [and] quasi-governmental agencies.”  Unlike Betty Noel, who has made a career of fighting against greedy utility companies, Vicky Beasley apparently fights for them. I called Ms. Beasley and asked her to specify which clients she serves, but she declined to say and asked that I direct any questions for her to the Office of Boards and Commissions (which then referred me to the Mayor’s spokeswoman, Mafara Hobson, who has yet to respond to my questions).

District residents have experience with Patton Boggs employees in top government posts. Aside from the mayor and the chair of the city council, DC’s third most powerful elected official may be the chair of the committee on finance and revenue. This position is currently held by Councilman Jack Evans, an employee of Patton Boggs.  As chair of the finance committee, Mr. Evans has been instrumental in placing huge amounts of precious taxpayer dollars and public land into private hands, with little public benefit to show for it: Examples include the baseball stadium (more than $725 million), the Convention Center ($850 million), and now the Convention Center Hotel ($272 million), to name a few publicly funded, Evans-inspired projects.

There is a great deal at stake in who fills the position of People’s Counsel. The OPC is the only thing standing in the way of the utility companies getting the ever-higher rates they covet. If the council votes to confirm Vicky Beasley, a Patton Boggs employee whose clients include “telecommunications entities” and “quasi-governmental agencies,” OPC may head in a radically different direction; a move that utility companies will surely cheer.

Common Cents for Metro

Aside from accidents and suicides, our Metro system seems to be in a perpetual state of insufficient funds.  Proposals continually resurface to deal with deficits by reducing service.  Such proposals include closing metro stations earlier and opening them later, increasing the length of time between metro or bus arrivals, and cutting bus lines.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

Metro will continue on a downward spiral if it leads area residents to decide that it's just not worth it to take public transportation.  Loss of ridership will further plummet revenues, even while needs for safety improvements and expansion of the system continues to grow.  More people will simply drive -- adding to traffic congestion and parking issues.

And our quality of life will suffer.  There are many individuals who depend on metro to get to work early in the morning or late at night -- whether it's service employees or lawyers.

If the Metro system is ever going to expand to meet the region's increasing population, then its revenue structure needs to be placed on solid footing.

Metro should conduct a comprehensive review of its fare rates. At $1.35, our Metro is still considerably less than the base fare in New York City ($2.25), Chicago ($2.25), San Francisco ($2.00), and Boston ($1.70 with card). It's also far less than London (2.20 GBP for zones 1-2 = $3.50 USD). Perhaps metro needs to increase its base fare and, based on ridership statistics, consider fares to other stations or whether it is to the systems benefit to have a single, higher fare. Given the steep rise in gas prices, cab fares, and parking fees in recent years, even at a bumped up rate, taking Metro will still be a good deal. Complaints about Metro revolve around packed trains, delays, and safety - not a buck thirty-five.

Nor should Metro cut bus routes. While many routes remain underutilized, this is a result of a failure of Metro to make bus route maps available for many years and to get the "next bus" system up and running until recently. With more public education as to the available bus options, ridership may increase. The DC Circulator's success proves that buses are indeed viable.

If seeking to reduce costs and improve service, WMATA should consider whether it actually needs a bus stop on nearly every block in many areas. Can it keep the same service with less buses by spreading stops about three blocks apart? Not only would this save money, but it would actually get people where they are going more quickly.

This is not a tough choice.

At least the public seems to get it, as reported in the Washington Post today.  Members of the public who testified before WMATA on Wednesday overwhelmingly supported a fare increase of about 10 cents, and strongly opposing reductions in service or deeper cuts in the capital budget to address the deficit. Will Metro listen?

[See also GGW, We Love DC, and Unsuck DC Metro's coverage of the hearing.  A Washington Post's editorial gets it partially right by taking the position that WMATA should not take money from the capital budget rather than adopt a modest fare increase, while leaving the door open to some service cuts.]

Gales School / Central Union Mission Fell Through

The Gales School, 65 Massachusetts Ave NW.  Photo by M.V. Jantzen on Flickr.

A press advisory posted on the city's website last week seems to indicate that the planned move of the Central Union Mission into the Gales School, located between Union Station and Mount Vernon Triangle, has officially fallen through.

The historic Gales School was initially scheduled to reopen as a homeless shelter in 2009, but deal was caught up in legal problems with the ACLU.  It charged that the city was violating the separation of church and state by entering a deal in which the city would pay several million dollars to renovate the building, then transfer it to Central Union Mission, which requires those who stay with them to take part in prayer, as part of a land swap.  Even as late as September 2009, however, Central Union Mission remained optimistic that they would move into the building from their 14th and R Street location in late 2011.  DCMud indicates that Central Union Mission will again seek use of the Gales School through the latest RFO, but it does not sound optimistic.

The Request for Offers is being handled by the District's Office of Real Estate Services (ORES), which will host a pre-submission meeting and site visit on January 29.  Offers are due on February 16.  According to the RFO:

The District’s overarching goal in issuing this RFP is to obtain Proposals for the Use Site for the sole permitted use as a homeless shelter. Responses proposing any other use for the Use Site will be deemed nonresponsive and will not be considered. . . . [T]he District seeks Responses from interested qualified respondents who can demonstrate:
• Viable approach for the delivery of homeless shelter services at the Use Site;
• Organizational capacity and experience to redevelop the Use Site for use as a homeless shelter;
• Successful track record of operating a high quality homeless shelter and service program;
• Financial capacity to provide requisite program financing including the costs and expenses associated with the rehabilitation of the Use Site; and
• Commitment to the District’s goal of creating the contracting and investment opportunities for local, small and disadvantaged businesses, and jobs for District residents.