If the District firmly believes it has to supply vehicles to anyone other than its first line public safety employees, why should they be supplied with anything other than a Chevrolet Cobalt or Ford Escort? Everyone does not need a full sized SUV.

by ksu499 on Feb 24, 2011 9:11 am • link • report

RE: Bag Tax

While I support the bag tax, for kicks I'll point out that this can easily be spun the other way: "Almost half of businesses report a change in business and 75% have not observed any positive effects."

by Bossi on Feb 24, 2011 9:33 am • link • report

Was the comment about "older faculty" in the article about the Georgetown ANC wording that meant to imply that faculty are older than students or do they want some kind of age test of faculty housing? Much of it is absurd to me, but if they want an age test in faculty housing that's really over the top.

by Kate on Feb 24, 2011 9:37 am • link • report

in an age of high gas prices and soaring deficits, SUVs for councilmen are a luxury the District can't afford...

by jkc on Feb 24, 2011 9:41 am • link • report

Check back through DC Council Acts (around 2002-03); I recall Carol Schwartz getting something passed that operating departments could not purchase/lease 4WD SUVs(may have been buried in a budget act...). Played havoc with the DDOT and DPW fleet, especially for snow work.

Then again the city can purchase/lease E85 and CNG vehicles easily under the clean fuels program for which hybrids don't qualify (they're gasoline fueled). So, it is dang near impossible to add hybrids to the fleet. There is also, I think, a buy America require too, which limits the vehicle choices to domestic production.

by Some Ideas on Feb 24, 2011 9:55 am • link • report

The things people are asking GU are ridiculous, I fail to see how GU can prevent a student from choosing to live off campus. Also, if you don't want students parking on Georgetown streets then you don't make sure that all the buses and ambulances go through one entrance.

by canaan on Feb 24, 2011 9:58 am • link • report

Gray backed the teacher firings??? Huh, Wha? But, now I can't equate him with Marion Barry! My simplistic world view, oh noes!

by mtp on Feb 24, 2011 10:12 am • link • report

Re: The bag tax - I'm shocked - shocked! - that a survey paid for by a pro-bag tax group finds that the bag tax is the bestest thing ever and has had no negative effect on anyone anywhere.

Re: The G'town housing plan - Seems like if some of these restrictions go into place - especially regarding where people can live - a libertarian law firm would be itching to go to court to challenge it.

Re: SUVs for DC gov't officials - This is why the Fiscal Policy Institute claim for more taxes is baloney. What we have is an irresponsible, unsustainable spending problem, not a revenue problem. The city's spending has skyrocketed in the past decade. Idiotic wastes of money, like ego-driven cars and office remodels, are the first place we should be looking at for cuts.

by Fritz on Feb 24, 2011 10:15 am • link • report

The ANC demands are all ridiculous, but this one really takes the cake:

•University and Hospital buses should not be allowed to go through the neighborhoods, but rather enter and exit the campus via Canal Road only.

It's not a gated freakin' community - they're public roads! These people need to be slapped down - hard. I hope GU doesn't cave to this.

by dcd on Feb 24, 2011 10:18 am • link • report

"It's not a gated freakin' community - they're public roads! These people need to be slapped down - hard. I hope GU doesn't cave to this."

They already did, unfortunately. The shuttle buses to Dupont follow a ridiculously circuitous route except during rush hour. They drive up to the National Cathedral, and head down Mass Ave.

by Phil on Feb 24, 2011 11:19 am • link • report

I'd be interested in Ken Archer writing another article on how these ANC demands reflect the urbanist vision he has for his Georgetown. I imagine Ken supports more buses, and more public transit, but maybe he can explain/defend the age-testing on Georgetown owned residences, etc.

by Jeff on Feb 24, 2011 12:16 pm • link • report

I think that an "oversized" SUV could be justified as both a means to get around, even when it snows, for security of senior public officials, and to have space to take along staffers etc. This does not mean that everyone needs one (they CAN share), and certainly does not mean that it has to be two fully loaded luxury SUVs for the council president. I think he should do his penance by having to drive a 10 year old one for the next 4 years.

by SJE on Feb 24, 2011 1:37 pm • link • report

@SJE - They certainly can play a role for some officials, but it certainly doesn't need to be new or with black instead of grey leather.

But the selection has little to do with needs and everything to do with rank--the Council Chairman has to have an SUV that's as good or better than the mayor's, and then all the top officials have to have one that's nearly as nice, and so on down the line.

It's not like the politicals in the Obama (and Bush) admins. don't all have big new SUVs hauling them around.

by ah on Feb 24, 2011 1:47 pm • link • report

@ Georgetown ANC: This is not reasonable, or enforcable under any terms.

Newsflash to Georgetown ANC: Students are free people protected by the full extend of the US Constitution and Law, and can choose to live wherever it pleases them. You have no authority to stop them. Although, you could stop renting out your places...

I also propose that The GU Hospital start requiring Georgetown residents to use the Canal entry only.

Regarding the buses, I could see a benefit to making some blocks bus/resident only, combined with bus-lanes. For instance, Prospect St could be bus/resident-only from campus to 34th, with a separate bus lane on 34th from Prospect to M. Similarly for P or Q St all the way to Rock Creek. Separate bus lanes on Reservoir and WI Ave would help as well. This would not only help the GUTS shuttles, but also the G2, D6 and other Ds.

Georgetown could also decide to just give up their shuttles and let WMATA deal with getting their employees to work. Let's see what the ANC thinks of that.

by Jasper on Feb 24, 2011 1:48 pm • link • report

@Jasper

Newsflash to Georgetown ANC: Students are free people protected by the full extend of the US Constitution and Law, and can choose to live wherever it pleases them. You have no authority to stop them.

They know that. What they do have is leverage that they can exert over the university those students attend. They can hold any and all university campus plans hostage in exchange for concessions. Those concessions would include restrictions of the sort proposed here, to which students would have to agree as a condition of their enrollment.

The idea is: the neighbors can't take away students' rights, but they can try to force them to sign away those rights as a condition of their enrollment at the university by forcing the university to codify such conditions/restrictions.

Although, you could stop renting out your places...

Suffice it to say, the people renting out their places are not the ones spearheading this. It is not a coincidence, however, that Lenore Rubino (head of Burleith Citizens Association) is a real estate agent and having fewer student homes and more high-priced properties (like the condos that the Wormley School is being turned into, when it could have been the new home of Georgetown Public Policy Institute if not for the neighbors) would directly benefit her.

Regarding the buses, I could see a benefit to making some blocks bus/resident only, combined with bus-lanes. For instance, Prospect St could be bus/resident-only from campus to 34th, with a separate bus lane on 34th from Prospect to M. Similarly for P or Q St all the way to Rock Creek. Separate bus lanes on Reservoir and WI Ave would help as well. This would not only help the GUTS shuttles, but also the G2, D6 and other Ds.

Georgetown could also decide to just give up their shuttles and let WMATA deal with getting their employees to work. Let's see what the ANC thinks of that.

You understand, of course, that this wouldn't happen because the pitchfork brigade here does not like buses period. Not GUTS buses, not WMATA buses. They're fine with the Circulator as long as it stays on Wisconsin and M.

To whit:

"A lot of city buses use the same routes as GUTS buses do currently. Do you ever lobby for those routes to be moved? Why is there so much pressure to move GUTS bus routes?

It’s just the addition the toll [GUTS buses] take on traffic on Reservoir Road and small neighborhood streets. In the past we’ve asked WMATA to use smaller buses rather than the big giant ones [on those routes]. CAG has been very active on transportation with WMATA, but I’m not sure what the focus was before I came here."

That's right, what's causing traffic isn't the thousands of cars that traverse those streets daily, it's the buses. And this is after the routes were already modified so that, outside of rush hour, the shuttle to Dupont Circle utilized only larger streets on a much longer route up Wisconsin.

I should add that the demand that all buses use the Canal Road entrance/exit runs into the problem that buses presently have nowhere to turn around on campus. To do so, as the university plans, would require completing the presently unconnected West Road. The malcontents reflexively oppose this too, ostensibly on the grounds that such a road would not be a permitted "service road" because buses are not "service vehicles."

by Dizzy on Feb 24, 2011 2:30 pm • link • report

There's a big difference between POTUS having a big SUV driving him around and the DC Council. I'm sure everyone understands the difference.

There's no reason why anyone making $130k on a part time salary needs the city to pay for their transportation. If the mayor needs emergency transportation in the snow, then his police escort can provide it. The city council can request escorts as well in the event of an emergency. If they need to use cars for work, then they can instruct their overly large and overly compensated staff to submit their mileage reimbursement forms to the city comptroller.

The car thing is going to go much deeper. I think I've seen cars with DC tags labeled in the high hundreds.

by eb on Feb 24, 2011 2:32 pm • link • report

The complete inappropriateness of the city providing every city employee from the Mayor seemingly down to the mid administrator level with vehicles, what I really want to know is who is the brain surgeon who is leasing all of these vehicles on 12 month leases?

Gray is going to be mayor for 4 years. Why are you leasing a vehicle on a 12 month lease for ~$1,700 a month, rather than signing up for a 2 or 3 year lease for $$500 a month? Same for Brown. His chairmanship lasts 4 years, why would they lease him a vehicle for a year?

Allen Lew is getting a 2011 Tahoe, leased for 950 a month! The Tahoe costs 38K brand new and we are spending $11,500 a year to lease him one!

It really is astounding. If Tommy Wells follows through with his investigation, and releases it I am sure we are going to see that we are providing ~40-50 city employees (not cops or firemen who are sometimes permitted the use of their official vehicle) with brand new cars to drive around.

by freely on Feb 24, 2011 2:55 pm • link • report

I think perhaps my favorite detail about the whole Kwame Brown Navigator scandal is that he demanded one with a black interior (in fact, had the gray one sent back) because cars with black interiors "have a better resale value." Which is so very critically important when dealing with a leased vehicle.

by oboe on Feb 24, 2011 3:00 pm • link • report

freely: 12 month leases do not require oversight.

If you were going to sneak something past people, this is the way to do it. They think DC residents are chumps.

by eb on Feb 24, 2011 3:29 pm • link • report

Thanks a lot, freely and oboe. I wasn't annoyed enough at Navi-gate, and you both have to being up additional points that make actions of Brown and the city even more aggravating and unsupportable.

I hope someone remembers to submit a FOIA request in a year or two to discover how much, precisely, Brown actually has paid the city re these leases. I'll be willing to bet that even the minimal amount he's said he would do goes unpaid.

by dcd on Feb 24, 2011 3:37 pm • link • report

Love the way this stuff goes viral nowadays, though. Kind of like Gray's streetcar debacle. I think eb gets it right when he says they probably thought no one would notice. After all, ten years ago, it would've merited a footnote in the LL column of the City Paper. I found out about it here, and immediately tweeted my CM about it, sent him a letter telling him to show some leadership on it, and sent it to both my street's and my neighborhood mailing list.

I think the days of zero-accountability are coming to an end.

by oboe on Feb 24, 2011 3:38 pm • link • report

I found out about it here, and immediately tweeted my CM about it, sent him a letter telling him to show some leadership on it, and sent it to both my street's and my neighborhood mailing list.

And, yes, to head off the inevitable responses: I *do* need to get a life.

by oboe on Feb 24, 2011 3:40 pm • link • report

ah and eb: it would depend how often such a vehicle is needed. If relatively frequent, I think that it would cheaper to have the official do it themselves rather than having a police drive them everywhere. The question I have is why 12 month leased vehicles, and why new. Make em' drive the same one for 10+ years, like everyone else does.

by SJE on Feb 24, 2011 3:53 pm • link • report

To answer your question, I had not noticed that block of very European-styled buildings at Dupont--thanks for pointing it out! The buildings are quite lovely. I will have to pay more attention next time I walk by. Thanks for sharing, Erik.

by Phil LaCombe on Feb 24, 2011 4:10 pm • link • report

@ Dizzy: Thanks for providing some background. However, I do hope they realize that GU does have a pretty decent law school. In that sense, I don't think you're gonna trick the university and its students easily. The university knows d@mn well that grad students wanna live off-campus. Rules against that would seriously hurt the appeal.

You are right about the buses. I knew that. I was just trying to show that these clowns are not up for real solutions.

However, this nice list of insane demands is a cold-hard proof that Georgetown residents are raving loons and not friendly people that are concerned about their multi-generational make up of their neighborhood as Ken A and Lance always argue. It does surprise me that the owner-renters don't push back harder against this. They have a stake in this as well. Renting out to Georgetown students is good business. They pay well, are relatively decent (as far as renters go), and you get a nice retirement fund from that real estate.

It also shows that local democracy does not work properly. It is ridiculous that ANCs can hold universities hostage over their narrow-minded whims. Someone should whack some sense into these bozos, and point out that without the universities are among the largest non-government, private employers in the District.

Unfortunately, DC elects cronies that are more worried about their wheels than employment. Are they aware that both GU and GW have out-of-district campuses? Are they aware that they're loosing out on high-paying high-education jobs? I guess they don't care cuz they can take care of their own family and friends by hiring them on the city pay-roll.

Oh, wait, perhaps not:
http://www.tbd.com/articles/2011/02/sulaimon-brown-escorted-out-of-office-by-police-54980.html

@ oboe: I think the days of zero-accountability are coming to an end.

[rant] What accountability is applied here? Some leases get broken. That's not accountability. That's shaming people into a slightly smaller car. I bet ye that they still end up with nice big, road destroying, gas-guzzling, pedestrian- and bike-unfriendly over-sized SUVs.

Public shaming is not accountability. Accountability is when these guys actually leave over incidents like this. But noooo, in DC you just keep getting elected in the city council..... [/end rant]

by Jasper on Feb 24, 2011 8:55 pm • link • report

@Jasper:

You'll note I did not write, "Hooray! The days of zero-accountability have ended!"

by oboe on Feb 24, 2011 10:51 pm • link • report

The enrollment caps in place for DC colleges are unfair and probably illegal - the schools should formally challenge the caps. The size and growth of colleges and universities in DC is already regulated by zoning standards - just like other land uses. To treat colleges and universities differently and to dictate how many students they can have on a campus is like dictating how many employees a company or office building can have in the business district. It isn't needed since these issues are already controlled by zoning. The enrollment caps unfairly limit the activity of DC colleges and hurt these institutions by limiting growth and viability.

by John Carroll on Mar 2, 2011 5:49 pm • link • report